The comment is correct. The "thing" is the variable that holds the "entry". The entry is removed by updating the "thing".
I don't think so. I think the 'indirect pointer' points to the previous 'next' (or the head). It doesn't point to the address of the previous 'next' (or the head). What you say is adding an additional level of indirection that doesn't exist.
Reality:
indirect -> previous next -> first element
What you're saying:
indirect -> address of previous next -> previous next -> first element
In reality indirect contains the address of the previous next, but it doesn't point to the address of the previous next.
indirect -> previous next -> first element
"indirect" points to "previous next". "previous next" isn't a list entry. "previous next" points to "first element", which is a list entry.
What does "holds" mean? If holds means actually contains the memory, then I don't see the distinction between "thing" and "entry". They both refer to the exact same piece of memory.