Talk:Liberty (personification)

Ye old
The caption on the second image says "one of 50" when the link to lady liberty statues says "one of 200." 68.201.83.170 (talk) 18:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The rare 1891 US $1,000 dollar note also has an image of "Liberty" on the left side of the note. Only 2 actual notes were ever made though, so extremely rare. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.170.135.182 (talk) 12:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation
Both Goddess of Liberty and Lady Liberty redirect here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.195.102.149 (talk) 11:35, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I am considering removing
"On both Union and Confederacy flags" from the Depiction section because I can't think what it might be referring to. Feel free to convince me otherwise. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 21:24, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Your assessment seems correct, at least I couldn't find what the line meant, but I did change it to 'Union and Confederacy currency' with appropriate link changes. Maybe that's what the original editor was getting at? Randy Kryn 10:12 25 October, 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liberty (goddess). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031019201949/http://www.tmm.utexas.edu/events/past_events/goddess/goddess.html to http://www.tmm.utexas.edu/events/past_events/goddess/goddess.html
 * Added tag to http://www.caller2.com/2000/july/29/today/local_ne/619.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:57, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 27 May 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved to Liberty (personification). Most editors support the move to distinguish the personification from the goddess (Libertas). Liberty (goddess) now redirects to Libertas. (non-admin closure) —  Newslinger  talk   22:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Liberty (goddess) now redirects to Liberty (personification), as expected. Please see below. —  Newslinger   talk   00:50, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Liberty (goddess) → Personification of Liberty – Correct title for the subject. The current one is hopelessly confusing as we have Libertas for the actual goddess of Liberty (Roman). Nobody actually regards the personification covered in this article as a "goddess". To join several other "Personification of..." articles. Johnbod (talk) 17:46, 27 May 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943  (talk) 01:00, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Adding: or to Liberty (personification), see below. Johnbod (talk) 03:18, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose good faith request, would support Goddess of Liberty. Libertas is herself a personification, as are many other named personages, documents, artworks, etc. As the hatnote says, the Goddess of Liberty encompasses them all. And per common and understandable name. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Of course it's a good faith request, it's also a good and necessary one for what should be a significant article (but sadly it's currently just a pile of homework snippets). How on earth can you claim this or 'Goddess of Liberty' is the common name? Is that what most American 19th-century coins had on them? The vast majority of examples, like the Statue of Liberty just use "Liberty" without any nonsense about "goddesses". The vast majority of relevant references do not use "goddess". What point is "Libertas is herself a personification, as are many other named personages, documents, artworks, etc." trying to make?  I was intending to improve this article, but if it keeps the current ridiculous name, I doubt I will. Goddess of Liberty is much worse. I would accept Liberty (personification), we also have lots like that.  Johnbod (talk) 18:10, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The statue of Liberty means a statue of the image itself, of the Goddess (or more specifically the actual name of the statue Liberty Enlightening the World). When the older U.S. coins flowed "Liberty" across the hats or hair of the image it was meant to signify and name the Goddess portrayed. The point is any representation, such as Liberty Leading the People, Miss Freedom, or Marianne, seems to be female, and represents both the image of a goddess and of what the image represents, the concept of liberty. In many cultures the goddess of liberty is a "real" thing, and personifies the concept in such a way that the personification is almost always a female goddess. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:18, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Randy, do you actually know what a goddess is? It's a deity, who people worship, as the Romans did Libertas (perhaps not with much real devotion, as she was essentially a civic deity). Marianne is absolutely not a goddess - the French would laugh at the suggestion, nor are Father Christmas or Ronald McDonald gods. There  seem to be category confusions going on here, no doubt encouraged by the crazy title. You need to read Personification. Johnbod (talk) 18:38, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * This is a long term page title, and no, everyone who has ever edited or looked at it has not been in error. The concept of a female deity named Liberty is included in the numerous examples given on the page. The goddess of liberty descriptor on the Marianne page is a very long-term stable portion, and no, the French would not laugh at the comparison (the concept of Marianne herself comes, I've read at least, from the painting Liberty Leading the People). The essence and flow of human liberty created what you aptly call a civic deity rather than a religious deity, and in the U.S inspired the use of women representing Liberty on almost all American coinage for well over a century. The Statue of Liberty is not a statue personifying 'Liberty', it's a statue of Liberty. The civil deity. This is a well established concept. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:59, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's one of far too many pages that have never been properly thought about. Our Marianne is much poorer than the French one (not too suprising), which has no nonsense about goddesses.  The name Marianne goes back to the founding of the republic in 1792 - nearly 40 years later in 1830 Liberty Leading the People uses what was then very well-worn imagery, and not of any goddess.  The Roman Libertas was a proper goddess, with temples and priests, on whose altars people made animal sacrifices. This is totally different from the modern personifications.  But Libertas was a civic deity in the sense that her cult was part of the state apparatus rather than popular.  You are misunderstanding and twisting my words, & making up wild OR about "civil deities".  Johnbod (talk) 03:24, 28 May 2019 (UTC)


 * This page was given this name and the descriptor "Goddess of Liberty" on October 12, 2003, and has been so identified every since. A question. On the left is one of many US coins which depict Liberty. Liberty is named directly on these coins. She is always a woman. See Seated Liberty dollar for her sitting, and Standing Liberty quarter for her standing. Liberty as an individual woman has been shown on dollars, half dollars, quarters, dimes, and many coins no longer used since the first American coins were minted. If not a goddess Liberty then who is it? How is she defined throughout American history? Thanks for the Marianne information, I was unclear on that. Yet artworks such as Liberty Leading the People, the statue of Liberty Enlightening the World, and many more depict women named (nicknamed?) Liberty. Even if not a "proper" goddess honored with animal sacrifices (and we've all been there), "Liberty (goddess)", thus personified, is the proper name. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:32, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * No, it isn't. That something has been unchanged on WP since 2003 is the weakest possible argument. Hardly anything that old on WP is left, most of what is should be changed. I suggested above you read Personification and repeat that now. That is what the figure is, and that is the word we need in the title. Johnbod (talk) 21:44, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That an easily recognized concept has a stable long-term title and Wikipedia page since 2003 is a fine discussion point. Common names of articles from 2003 exist when the name is correct. You've rewritten the personification page with hundreds of edits in the past couple of weeks, and pulling this stable 2003 page into its definition is probably what I meant by "good faith". Yet someone could easily say that all human images of gods, goddesses, and such are themselves personifications. Liberty, as one of those, is just more recent than, say, Libertas, yet has now served the same role for centuries. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:00, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, and you'll see it is heavily referenced, mostly to academic books partly available on google. It briefly discusses the issue of disentangling of "real" deities that people actually believe in as spiritual beings, and personifications which people don't. We have Libertas for the former and this for the latter, but the current name needlessly and wrongly confuses the two. It needs changing. I've been doing a lot of reading on this, and references to godesses occur only in a few specific contexts. Johnbod (talk) 22:50, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Then who is the woman named Liberty on all the coins? You are apparently remaking this page with many edits. I haven't read your changes as yet, but I hope you keep to the sense of what this page reports on (just who is that woman?). Because of the large amount of work, attention, and academic focus you've recently given to build the 'Personification' page, please keep in mind that this should not be a continuation of that new page, that this article is about a related but not identical topic. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:02, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * She is the or a Personification of Liberty, which is why the page needs renaming to that! Johnbod (talk) 03:27, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * See, that's where your recent focus on personification may seem to make everything look like a personification. Yes, a personification, but again, who is she? Since this personification of Liberty is so specific and repeated and labeled on coins and statues, it is obviously a western form of homage to Libertas renamed 'Liberty'. Hence, the use of the goddess of liberty title on this article since 2003, which makes sense and hasn't been controversial. I see you've listed this page to members of the interested projects, who, hopefully, will see that the long-term name is accurate and defining. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:37, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think we've discussed this enough for now - let's see what others think! Perhaps some of them will read the references. Johnbod (talk) 04:07, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Including the references which specifically classify the images as that of goddesses. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:21, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Support the move; it makes a useful distinction. Concerning e.g. the image on US coins, the website of the United States Mint has this: "The Coinage Act of 1792 specified that all coins have an 'impression emblematic of liberty,' the inscription 'LIBERTY,' and the year of coinage on the obverse side ... The face of Lady Liberty appeared on our circulating coins for more than 150 years ... Congress chose to personify the concept of liberty rather than a real person ... Because of Liberty’s origins as a Greco-Roman goddess, early coin designs portrayed her with classical style clothes, facial features, and symbols." The image is derived from the goddess, but nothing in the 1792 act suggests that the image is intended to represent the goddess. On contemporary coins the word "liberty" floats next to a portrait of a president. Ewulp (talk) 02:26, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The page isn't about the US coins, although they play a part in it, but about all artistic and real-world uses of Liberty as a goddess. Your quote actually endorses keeping this page by directly showing that the origins of the coins image as the Greco-Roman goddess. It is understood from early on that the image on the coins is of a goddess, and that's what the page is about. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:08, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The passage says only that the coin designers based their personification of liberty on the Greco-Roman goddess of liberty. A similar inspiration led Horatio Greenough to depict George Washington as Zeus. Ewulp (talk) 05:51, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * "Because of Liberty’s origins as a Greco-Roman goddess, early coin designs portrayed her with classical style clothes, facial features, and symbols" seems pretty clear to me, and fits the present title of this page. And if George Washington were fictional and was consistently portrayed as a god then that would be an apt comparison. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * The comparison hinges on the importance of the word "origins" in that sentence: To personify liberty, medallists looked to Roman models for iconography. To create an image that would exalt Washington as the "Father of His Country", H.G. looked to Greco-Roman models for iconography. An example of a fictional character having ancient origins: Santa Claus is derived from Saint Nicholas, but the jolly guy in the red suit with the flying sleigh is not the same character as the 4th-century bishop of Myrna and he's not venerated as a saint in any church as far as I know. They get separate Wikipedia articles, both of which mention the relationship between the subjects. And yes, many reliable sources loosely refer to the woman on the US coins as the goddess, just as many sources refer to Santa as Saint Nick. Ewulp (talk) 22:58, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Support; clever solution and fits WP:PRECISE and WP:NATURAL well. Red   Slash  14:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment and question. The arguments for changing the present name seem to be missing the true and sourced nature and meaning of the pages topic, and the familiar image presented in art, on coins, and in the consistently dedicated image of a female goddess named Liberty. This goddess is not based on Libertas, it is Libertas under her English name. A form of Libertas in non-religious settings, dedicated to expressing the concept of liberty within numerous societies. That said, if the closer agrees that this stable long-term title should be somehow redefined as simply a personification (all fictionalized things are personifications, but some belong to a class-of-things such as this title), can we use 's alternate name, Liberty (personification) (which is at this moment a red link, so I'll put up a redirect), for brevity and a direct search result under 'Liberty'. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:19, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * As way above, I'm fine with Liberty (personification), & happy for it to go to that, which does make searches better. Ewulp, User:Red Slash, are you ok with this?  You keep saying "image of a female goddess named Liberty", but actual mentions of her as a goddess are very few and far between.  If she is a goddess, in or of what religion?  We have lots of articles like Death (personification), Wisdom (personification), Personification of the Americas, for things that aren't deities, but may appear depicted in classical dress.  Thomson does call his figure a "Goddess", but in the poem she seems a staunch Protestant. Liberty lacks all the basic characteristics of a deity, notably (in the period the article covers) anyone who believes she actually is a being with a real or spiritual existence: "A deity is a supernatural being considered divine or sacred.[2] The Oxford Dictionary of English defines deity as "a god or goddess (in a polytheistic religion)", or anything revered as divine.[3] C. Scott Littleton defines a deity as "a being with powers greater than those of ordinary humans, but who interacts with humans, positively or negatively, in ways that carry humans to new levels of consciousness, beyond the grounded preoccupations of ordinary life"".  She is a personalised metaphor, in the arts, for an abstraction, ie a personification. Btw, you also keep saying 'in numerous societies/cultures', but actually she is pretty firmly located within the Western tradition. Not "all fictionalized things are personifications" at all - most aren't. Johnbod (talk) 03:16, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Liberty (personification) would be my 1st choice for a page name as it's intuitive and is consistent with treatment of (I think) the majority of similar topics (which have alternate titles Personification of Death, Personification of Victory, Personification of Poland etc. as redirects). Ewulp (talk) 04:05, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Sounds like Liberty (personification) it is then. Thanks all! Johnbod (talk) 03:39, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * A reminder that the RM is still open and solid information and discussion points show that there is not a consensus to change this long-term (2003) accurate name. The RM should be relisted for more comments, but if closed now then it should close as no consensus to move. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:02, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
 * That's your opinion Randy, but at 3 to 1 the closer will evaluate the quality of the arguments. Johnbod (talk) 13:15, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Relisted
 * Support Liberty (personification). 'goddess' may be technically defensible, but I think 'personification' is less astonishing (given that these are 'goddesses' which are used in secular contexts). Another option would be Lady Liberty (paralleling the article we have at Lady Justice), but I'm not sure how commonly it's used to refer to the figures described in the article. BTW, it's not clear to me why Lady liberty redirects to this article, but the capitalized version is a dab page. I didn't think the name would ever properly appear uncapitalized like that, so it doesn't seem like a good WP:DIFFCAPS disambiguation. Colin M (talk) 02:36, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Why not a collab and call the page Liberty (goddess personifications)? The images referred to in the article are obviously images of either the goddess Libertas or of similar female personifications of the concept. All of the ancient world gods and goddesses are personifications of aspects of existence. Greek, Roman, Hindu, they represent either aspects of human experience and emotions or things humans fear, abhor, or honor in nature. These aspects are then personified and given names, and are called gods or goddesses. Just as this page, when read, obviously refers to the idea of freedom as personified by a particular woman who appears in many cultures and traditions, a woman who often wears the Liberty cap or carries other objects identifiable with this particular "goddess". Randy Kryn (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No, that doesn't work, or help. Sorry. For one thing, there aren't really any other personifications here. Not "all of the ancient world gods and goddesses are personifications of aspects of existence. Greek, Roman, Hindu, they represent either aspects of human experience and emotions or things humans fear, abhor, or honor in nature", or not all are just that. The issue isn't whether ancient deities are personifications, but whether modern personifications are deities.  And, apart from occasional loose talk, they aren't.  Johnbod (talk) 21:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Support per WP:NATURALDISAMBIG. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Support or move to Liberty (personification). It is clear that the portrayal of Liberty as a woman has become relatively divorced and distinct from its original association with a historical notion of a goddess, and that portrayal is the subject of this article. She is conceptually embraced by millions of people (perhaps hundreds of millions of people) who would deny that they pay homage to any goddess. The modern French and Americans have no belief in such a goddess, and consider her an entirely secular symbol. This article is primarily about that modern personification rather than the mythical deity, so having "(goddess)" in the name of the article serves to confuse the reader rather than to help identify the topic of the article. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:33, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose This is va depiction of a Roman deity in statue form, not a modern secular concept. Dimadick (talk) 11:16, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Randy, you've already opposed, at great length, above. Johnbod (talk) 14:13, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not Randy Kryn. Dimadick (talk) 17:32, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry - brain flip. But what makes you say this? The article is not about statues per se. If what you say is true, should we not merge it to Libertas? Johnbod (talk) 17:44, 22 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Support either. The goddess Liberty is our Libertas. Srnec (talk) 15:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Liberty (goddess) redirect
Note: The title Liberty (goddess) has been made a redirect to Libertas rather than to Liberty (personification). There may be links that were formerly linking to Liberty (goddess) that should be changed to link to Liberty (personification) now, since that is where the former article content has been moved. —BarrelProof (talk) 22:49, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No, the links to most if not all should stay at Liberty (goddess), there is no need to change any of them. They are representative of a female goddess, and Libertas is accurate in this regard per text of the article. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * But if someone wanted to have a link to what was previously in the article Liberty (goddess), that is no longer what they are linking to. If you consider the two topics indistinguishable, then merging the content of the two articles would seem appropriate. —BarrelProof (talk) 23:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Merging might be a good idea, but would have to be done carefully so no information is lost. They are one and the same in almost all cases. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * As one example, the article Libertas now contains two links to itself – one of them in the "See also" section, which is obviously an error. —BarrelProof (talk) 23:42, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed those and others, but also changed the redirect back. Everything linking to Liberty (goddess) seems to be US coins & other modern stuff that should come here. Johnbod (talk) 00:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

In hindsight, I should have moved Liberty (goddess) to Liberty (personification), and then submitted Liberty (goddess) for an RfD instead of redirecting it to Libertas. Currently, Liberty (goddess) points to Liberty (personification), as expected. If any editor has any objections, I recommend starting an RfD. Sorry for the inconvenience. —  Newslinger  talk   00:49, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Please see for context. —  Newslinger   talk   00:52, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Please let me get this straight. Liberty (goddess) was the former name of this page. It was then argued that no, that was an inaccurate title, and that the page name should be Liberty (personification). Okay, that was decided by the closer in the affirmative., you then got it right by redirecting Liberty (goddess) to its natural designation, Libertas. Where else would it go? Why would it point to this page when the main argument was that it was an incorrect title. If an incorrect title, it's also an incorrect redirect. Please redirect this back to Libertas, and if an RM is to be started it should be from that starting point, not from your redecision to direct it back to a page where it was removed and discarded in an RM. What is your reasoning for just moving pages around here and there, when, like I said, you got it right the first time. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Randy, you have been arguing above, at great length, that the Statue of Liberty, US coins, Mariane etc all show a goddess. Now you object that Liberty (goddess) redirects here, where all these are covered. If you thought that all these show Libertas, the logical thing would have been to argue for a merge.  But the RM discussion shows a clear consensus that the Roman goddess and modern depictions are two distinct topics, and all the articles linking to Liberty (goddess) are (as far as I can see) modern. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * From the page history of Liberty (goddess):
 * You originally created a redirect pointing from Liberty (personification) to Liberty (goddess).
 * After closing the requested move, I performed a round-robin page move, which swapped Liberty (personification) with Liberty (goddess). At this point, Liberty (goddess) is a non-functioning redirect that points to itself.
 * I then retargeted Liberty (goddess) to Libertas. (This is a departure from the expected result of the requested move, which would normally retarget Liberty (goddess) to Liberty (personification).)
 * After the discussion above and on my user talk page, retargeted Liberty (goddess) to Liberty (personification).
 * I would have performed the final retarget (#4) myself if I had been quicker. The reason is that the requested move showed consensus for moving Liberty (goddess) to Liberty (personification), but was less clear about how Liberty (goddess) should be handled, especially since there are so many links to Liberty (goddess). Deciding how each Liberty (goddess) link should be handled is outside the scope of this requested move, which is why I think RfD is the best way to handle a disagreement here. If an editor decides to submit an RfD, I think the "starting point" should be Liberty (personification), since that is the expected result of the requested move. —  Newslinger  talk   02:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , as the closer and page mover you should be able to explain just how Liberty (goddess), rejected as a title here, should not be redirected as you first decided, to Libertas. How is that not it's natural target? Please change it back to the Libertas redirect and then talk about RfC or RfD or what you would see as a next step. And yes, a merge, as I said above, may be the way to go. I never thought of it until it was brought up above, and it does make sense. But this present discussion is where Liberty (goddess) should redirect, and I can't see how that would go to this personification page and not to the Libertas page (Libertas in English: Liberty. Liberty (goddess) in Latin: Libertas. Hence your first instinct and redirect). Randy Kryn (talk) 02:35, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The first twelve words of the Libertas article: "Libertas (Latin for Liberty) is the Roman goddess and personification of liberty." seem to fit the descriptor Liberty (goddess) better than the lede of this page. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:44, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I do think Libertas is a suitable target for Liberty (goddess). However, there are many links to Liberty (goddess), and setting the target of Liberty (goddess) to anything other than Liberty (personification) would cause the articles which contain the links to point to different content than before the requested move. Since there is disagreement among you,, and on which of these Liberty (goddess) links should be changed to Liberty (personification) links, and the requested move discussion is not adequate to determine this, changing the target of Liberty (goddess) would be an editorial decision outside my role of closing the requested move. In an RfD, participants would have ample time to evaluate each of these links and decide on the best target for Liberty (goddess). But, it's outside the scope of this move discussion. You have the technical ability to revert Johnbod's last retarget (#4) above, but I strongly recommend starting an RfD without reverting, as this would cause the least impact to the articles containing the Liberty (goddess) links before consensus is established in a future RfD. —  Newslinger   talk   02:58, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't known why I'd start a request for deletion [EDIT: Oh, that linked to "Redirects for Discussion", I thought it was a deletion link. Do many editors know about that corner of Wikipedia?], but if you mean an RfC, it's an idea, and as long as no links are changed by anyone in the meantime (although there still seems to me to be an obvious redirect). I would suggest a merge discussion though, either before an RfC, at the same time, or as a part of an RfC. If an RfC is held may I ask that the language of the question be as neutral as possible, and if I start one, but not today, would like to work with on language if agreeable. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:14, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * He means Redirects for discussion, a quiet corner indeed. Merging cover how to start a merge discussion. I would point out that a merge is very clearly against the consensus just established. I can't see any justification for it myself, you just seem to be looking for a way round the decision just made.  I would oppose, obviously. Johnbod (talk) 03:23, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It's awkward to work "redirects for discussion" into a sentence, but I'll try to be more explicit when I refer to RfDs in the future. —  Newslinger  talk   03:47, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I do think that Libertas would ordinarily be a suitable target for Liberty (goddess), but first I think the links in other articles should be updated so they point to the correct place. —BarrelProof (talk) 04:28, 25 June 2019 (UTC)