Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 June 7

The result of the debate was speedy-deleted again as recreated content. If someone wants to appeal the original AFD discussion, please do so using the Deletion review process. Until that decision is overturned, however, speedy-deletion criterion G4 applies. Rossami (talk) 18:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recreation of a redirect that was deleted twice (see here and here) For An Angel (talk) 14:00, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as speedily as possibly - Tendentious recreation of the real name redirect of a BLP. Twice deleted unanimously in the last 6 weeks, including as recently as June 4th. There is also overwhelming consensus on the talkpage of the article, and at the BLP noticeboard that the name should not be included in Wikipedia.[1] [2]. Please also courtesy delete this heading of this discussion as both previous closing administrators have done. --Slp1 (talk) 16:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and please block if it happens again. Ashton1983 (talk) 17:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The result of the debate was delete. Wizardman 21:27, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another (nationality)-(nationality)-American redirect that makes no sense... and the name violates Wikipedia naming conventions to boot! B.Wind (talk) 07:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per precedent that such things are unnecessary, the fact that the name violates the MOS and that it is a very unlikely search term for the target. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 08:28, June 7, 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Unlikely search term, makes little sense. ~AH1^(TCU) 13:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete since the slashes make it cumbersome, but also note a better target if it is kept at Scotch-Irish American. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 09:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Redirect that makes little sense, slashes make it unsearchable as well. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 12:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per everyone DA PIE EATER (talk) 23:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete another User:Hashmi, Usman redirect that need to go. ww2censor (talk) 14:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The result of the debate was keep. Wizardman 15:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not mentioned in the text of the article, except as a blue link which redirects back to the same article --Snigbrook ^(talk) 00:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other redirects:

• Clean Cities → Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States
• Commercial Building Integration → Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States
• Industrial Technologies Program → Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States

I am also nominating these redirects for the same reason. --Snigbrook ^(talk) 00:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note - I have delinked the circular redirects. Keep easily-remembered Build America and Clean Cities (with capital C's only), weak delete Commercial Building Integration and Industrial Technologies Program as they are longer titles as they are less likely to be recalled. B.Wind (talk) 02:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all - the target page is pertinent to all of them, and all seem potentially useful as search terms. Type-in traffic is also conceivable. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 06:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.