The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. -- BDD ( talk) 14:04, 10 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Coffin w/Metal Handles → Medal of Honor  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

This redirect was created as a result of the merger of an unsourced one-sentence stub with the target article 8 years ago. Unless sourced information about this interpretation is added to the article, this has to be deleted. The Theosophist ( talk) 23:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Comment this is a useless redirect location, as many coffins have metal handles, so to satisfy attribution history, WP:MAD, this should be moved to a talk subpage, leaving a redlink behind at the current location, and the edit history located into talk:Medal of Honor/edithistory/Coffin w/Metal Handles -- 67.70.32.20 ( talk) 05:43, 4 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• I'm not seeing any evidence that a merge actually took place. Pascal.Tesson redirected it on 22 March 2007, but I'm not seeing a corresponding edit to Medal of Honor. To confirm, I opened up the 24 March 2007 version of Medal of Honor and didn't get a hit for "coffin". -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 19:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Then a simple delete will suffice -- 67.70.32.20 ( talk) 03:13, 7 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete as confusing because it's not mentioned at the targeted article. It's likely a WP:NEOLOGISM. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 19:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. However, no clear consensus on restoring the redirects deleted earlier, but I can't imagine anyone would object if someone choose to do so. [Non-admin closure.] Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 06:49, 10 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Template:DecadesAndYears/addepoch → Template:Decades and years/addepoch  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/box → Template:Decades and years/box  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/colourcode → Template:Decades and years/colourcode  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/decade → Template:Decades and years/decade  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/decaswitch → Template:Decades and years/decaswitch  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/row → Template:Decades and years/row  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/table → Template:Decades and years/table  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/year → Template:Decades and years/year  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/yearbox → Template:Decades and years/yearbox  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ]

• Template:DecadesAndYears/yearlink → Template:Decades and years/yearlink  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

These are subpages of Template:DecadesAndYears, which has been deleted 21 months ago. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk) 15:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC) reply

They are redirects. I believe they can all be deleted but it is important to check that they are orphans first. The reason is that sometimes sub-templates are called by name, and the move does not break this, Deleting the sub-templates will, however. All the best: Rich  Farmbrough, 16:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC). reply

Checked. BTW, if you had left me a note I would probably have {{ G7}}'d these myself. All the best: Rich  Farmbrough, 16:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC). reply

• Comment I don't think it was appropriate to delete {{ DecadesAndYears}} as housekeeping, since redirects of this nature are frequently kept at RfD. So instead Keep all of them, and restore {{ DecadesAndYears}} , since templates frequently have camelcased names, and should be accessible via camelcased names -- 67.70.32.20 ( talk) 05:46, 4 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep all Don't see anything wrong with these titles. Redirects of this nature tend to be kept. -- Mr. Guye ( talk) 02:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. [Non-admin closure] Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 06:45, 10 July 2015 (UTC) reply

• Richest man in the world → The World's Billionaires  ( links · history · stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ retarget/ delete ] 

Each time the title-holder changes, retarget to new title-holder (currently Bill Gates). The Theosophist ( talk) 02:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC) reply

This should retarget to User:Rich Farmbrough. He his the most richy. (Waits for slap...) Si Trew ( talk) 05:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC) reply

. All the best: Rich  Farmbrough, 12:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC). reply

• Wikipedia is not a news service. This Wealthiest person in the world, Richest person in history etc. should go to an article about the subject. I am pretty certain we have or had one. All the best: Rich  Farmbrough, 12:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC). reply
  
  • List of wealthiest historical figures is one such target, but it stops in the early twentieth century. All the best: Rich  Farmbrough, 12:30, 3 July 2015 (UTC). reply
    

• Delete as WP:RFD#D2 confusing. There doesn't seem to be any clear topic about this. You'd expect for example Fortune 100 → Fortune 500 list of wealthiest men and bints, but WP:NOTNEWS. Si Trew ( talk) 12:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC) reply

  We have some of those lists. Some have been deleted. Sunday Times Rich List, Forbes 400 and The World's Billionaires 2015. All the best: Rich  Farmbrough, 16:08, 3 July 2015 (UTC). reply
  

• Retarget to Bill Gates per nom. Well used redirect and it's entirely reasonable that readers should expect an answer to this question. Since the question is answered with a sourced comment at the retarget it all seems fine to me. Just Chilling ( talk) 16:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep. The current target answers that inquiry without the necessary maintenance involved when the "title-holder" changes. -- Tavix ^{( talk)} 16:58, 6 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep per Tavix, if we redirect it to the current richest person then that requires more maintenance and will open up a can of worms if that title is ever in dispute. Better to redirect to an article which answers the question, as the current target does. Hut 8.5 21:58, 7 July 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep per the above. It might cause trouble if we redirect it to Bill Gates or whoever the current title holder is, so we should just keep it redirected to its current target. SONIC678| Hang out with me! 16:39, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.