Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Redirect Archives/April 2006

April 1

The nominated redirect was Deleted by Makemi as (author request). -- JLaTondre 19:18, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was Bodincomagus → Moneu da Po -- I created this with the wrong name (should have been simply Bodincomagus) Ian Spackman 09:49, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Speedy delete as author request. I have tagged it as {{db-author}}. Kusma (討論) 15:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 10:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • John Thomas Daniels → John W. Daniels, the redirect is left over from a misidentification. --Cheesemaster 11:04, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was made to redirect to Married and maiden names. Johnleemk | Talk 10:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Married name → Maiden name -- Article tagged in January, but probably never listed here or not properly closed. Listing here out of deference to original nomination. -- JLaTondre 19:18, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep. The title of the Maiden name article is a bit misleading as it discusses married names and the customs related to changing name upon marriage. A redirect to that is better than providing no information. -- JLaTondre 19:18, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. Maiden name and married name are opposites. I can't see how one can be a redirect to the other. --Asbl 23:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Easily. Over half of the Maiden name article actually discusses various alternatives for married names. As I think about it, a better solution might be to rename Maiden name as Maiden and married names and have both as redirects to it. -- JLaTondre 23:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • I like JLATondre's suggestion. JoshuaZ 20:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've been bold and performed a move to Married and maiden names. On expriry of this nom pls rm tag from the rd (which I have snapped). John Reid 04:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 2

The nominated redirect was kept, due to no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 10:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nintendo nplay → Nintendo Revolution -- April Fools joke taken seriously by an editor. [1]. K1Bond007 05:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete Zebov 05:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete For reasons stated by K1Bond007. Daniel Davis 06:27, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete Wikipedia is a repository of INFORMATION, not MISinformation. If we had to list every rumor and whisper (including the ones we knew were true) about any article, the project would come to a grinding, screeching halt. The Eye 13:15, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep I can imagine someone hearing about the name "nplay" and searching for it here. --Maxamegalon2000 07:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep per Maxamegalon2000. +Hexagon1 (talk) 07:08, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak keep as creator and per Maxamegalon2000 and Hexagon1. Also, my apologies for taking the joke seriously. Chris Chan.talk.contribs 11:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete per nom. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted by Durin with summary (confirmed hoax). -- JLaTondre 23:20, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Era Clash → Era Clash: Final Fantasy VII -- Was part of an April Fool's Day hoax, as can be seen at the site who made the joke Ryu Kaze 17:07, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted and replaced with a redirect to Maiming. (Confusing, no useful history.) I have taken the liberty of ending the discussion early. - Mike Rosoft 19:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maim -> MAME - "To maim" means "to cripple", and all incoming links are in this meaning. (I don't understand why it's supposed to redirect there, but perhaps somebody can explain it to me.) - Mike Rosoft 20:05, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I think it is supposed to be in case someone doesn't know how to spell MAME. But too confusing and not terribly useful. JoshuaZ 20:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - looking at the comments on the user page of the editor who created this one, s/he seems prone to questionable edits and this one is particularly unhelpful. How many times would someone search for "Maim" when they mean "MAME", versus how many times would someone search for "Maim" when "Maim" is actually what they mean? The earlier Wiktionary link is far more helpful - this should perhaps be reinstated. IMO, Gingerfield rocks' reversion of the Wiktionary link back to the earlier unhelpful redirect is, if anything, vandalism rather than an attempt to help build an encyclopdia. CLW 08:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for the reasons give above. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 3

The nominated redirect was Deleted by Sceptre with summary of (RfD discussion). -- JLaTondre 22:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • 0000 → year zero (originally → 1 BC) -- Implausible as use as an actual year, and there seems an advantage to having unsubstituted templates showing a red link. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 03:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Perhaps, instead of deleting the redirect, it should be a disambiguation page between the ISO 8601 1 BC and the common usage which would be year zero. This doesn't help the red link problem, though. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 03:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment 0000 → 1 BC was originally created as a fix for a bug in the Wikipedia software that converted the valid ISO8601 date of [[0000-01-01]] into [[1 January]] [[0000]] instead of [[1 January]] [[1 BC]] as it should. However, since then the software appears to have been changed so that now [[0000-01-01]] is changed to [[1 January]] [[0]], where [[0]] does not go to any year but instead goes to the numeral 0, which has also been changed in the interim into a disambiguation page. Thus the original redirect now serves no useful purpose. Note that the ISO8601 date [[-0000-01-01]] now is correctly converted to -0000-01-01, where -0000 is converted to [[1 BC]] as it should. (ISO8601 uses astronomical year numbering where the astronomical 0 is the historical 1 BC.) Appearently the only way to fix the ISO8601 date format problem now is via a Wikipedia:Bug report. — Joe Kress 09:31, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 10:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Date redirects. These were nominated for speedy deletion as improbable typos, but they seem perfectly reasonable to me. - EurekaLott 02:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete (and actually to December 8, January 8, January 8, January 9), per WP:DATE). I could go either way on 09 January and 9 January, etc., but all appropriate redirects should be created by a bot in that case. 09 Jan and 9 Jan are implausible -- but all appropriate redirects should be created by a bot, if we decide those are appropriate. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 02:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment Further study shows that 08 Dec in plain text autolinks to Dec 08, so these redirects only are visible if someone does [[08 Dec|12-08]], rather than [[08 Dec]]. It's not confusing in and of itself, but does produce linkcruft in "pages starting with" special pages. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 02:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 10:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance by switching to Geico → GEICO -- It looks as though this redirect was created only to facilitate an entry in BJAODN. I doubt that anyone will ever search or look up this redirect, and it is only linked to from BJAODN. I'll conceed that it's funny, but still utterly useless :) (Note: There is no useful history on the redirect, and it's new -- only 8 days old) CanadianGuy 16:13, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I created the page, but I was completely unaware that it was even ON one of the many BJAODN pages, most of which I have not read. I agree that it may be unlikely that anybody would use it, so if there is consensus to delete it, then so be it. Firestorm 21:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete - Their slogans shouldn't be made into a redirect. Like Whatever you want, just Yell shouldn't go to Yellow Pages. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 10:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 4

The nominated redirect was speedily deleted as an attack redirect. - Mike Rosoft 23:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete, utterly pointless redirect. Royboycrashfan 02:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, pointless and POV. Grandmasterka 10:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Useless, pointless, etc. PJM 17:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Disgusta is a very common nickname for Augusta, GA
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 10:29, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This redirect is a bit of redirection vandalism, I've deleted the reference to an "aeroperiod" (which doesn't exist) from the article it directs to, but since my removal of the redirect was reverted by a bot, I'm asking for it to be deleted.

I am bringing this discussion to the appropriate project page. Royboycrashfan 00:39, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Google shows only 1 hit and that's Wikipedia[2]. -- JLaTondre 03:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Reverted to actual article. An earlier editor redirected to an AfD that closed as ambiguous & the article kept. As that redirect was not appropriate, I've reverted to last actual article version. -- JLaTondre 03:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply] The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted as vandalism (CSD G3). Kusma (討論) 03:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Omaha the Cat Dancer vandalized by Nutz → Omaha the Cat Dancer -- a title unlikely to be entered, no links to it, seemingly nothing in edit history worth keeping. Шизомби 04:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment There's also Ontario general election, 1945 vandalized by Nutz which should probably be nominated too, but perhaps there is some reason for keeping them that I'm missing? Шизомби 04:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete, nonsense. Royboycrashfan 05:51, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ontario general election, 1945 vandalized by Nutz → Ontario general election, 1945 -- per Schizombie John Reid 04:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete, nosense. Royboycrashfan 05:50, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Speedily deleted as redirect to a deleted page. Kusma (討論) 03:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Joseph milillo → Joseph Milillo -- miscapitalization redirect to deleted page. Joe 05:30, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Speedy R1. Royboycrashfan 05:50, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 5

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 10:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is a page for a D&D spell. The spell was never notable enough for the encyclopedia to begin with. It is now a redirect to Spells of Dungeons and Dragons, and the list at that article now includes the skull trap spell. The spell isn't significant enough for inclusion in that list, however (we're trying to keep the list to the most iconic), but I'm told I can't remove the spell from the list as long as this page redirects to it! So I'm asking for this redirect to be deleted so I can remove its merged text from the target article. I'd previously proposed the deletion of this article but User:TigerShark removed the tag. Powers 02:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete per nom. --Hetar 18:50, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Royboycrashfan 02:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 10:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • None as of yet → Decision -- Ostensibly because the article United States presidential election, 2008 gives "none as of yet" (an imperfect locution, to be sure) in place of a list of prospective candidates from Socialist Party USA, an anon editor has created a page for "None as of yet" and has, on two occasions, linked the phrase on the presidential election page. I PRODded the page when it was essentially a dicdef, but it's now been changed to a redirect to "decision", which seems a bit of a non-sequitur; in any case, it's surely an unnecessary redirect. Joe 21:02, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. The redirect is unnecessary to begin with, and makes no sense. -Will Beback 22:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted by JoanneB as part of AfD close out. -- JLaTondre 00:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply] The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 6

The nominated redirect was redirected to Google, since there was no consensus and I thought I'd be bold (as nobody wants this to redirect to where it currently goes). Johnleemk | Talk 19:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply] The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 19:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who is John Galt? → Topics of note in Atlas Shrugged -- Contents merged to target article. -- infinity0 17:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete . Since the Wiki doesn't employ artificial intelligence to directly answer questions. PJM 18:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep as per discussion below, unless someone plans to find a way of preserving the page history appropriately. Johnleemk | Talk 12:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep until transwikied to wikibooks:Atlas Shrugged with the rest of the fragments.Septentrionalis 17:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep per Johnleemk. -- JLaTondre 21:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 19:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Minor characters in Atlas Shrugged → Characters in Atlas Shrugged -- Contents merged to target article. -- infinity0 17:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which is why it's a redirect...I was under the impression we had to keep the redirect for the page history? NickelShoe (Talk) 17:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The AfDs (plural) stated to merge the articles, because the article name was too minor. A redirect means keeping the article name, too. Besides, nobody types in "minor characters of". -- infinity0 18:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Er, I asked about the licensing problems with deleting the page history of what how now been merged elsewhere. WP:MM says merges should always leave redirects in place, for instance. NickelShoe (Talk) 18:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see; but the consensus was split between "delete" and "merge and delete" (on "things in", but applies to all subpages). -- infinity0 20:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Again, Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Commenting_on_a_listing_for_deletion: "Note that merge into [[article]] and delete is only a valid option if the information on authorship of the content is somehow preserved, or for public domain text." I don't understand what it's hurting to have the redirect when it gives acknowledgement to editors whose contributions remain in Wikipedia in a different article. NickelShoe (Talk) 21:15, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep per NickelShoe. Besides merge history, the article title conforms to Wikipedia "standard" so the redirect would be usesful if someone adds that link to an article (i.e. avoids creation of a duplicate article). -- JLaTondre 23:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep until transwikied as with above article.Septentrionalis 17:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 7

The nominated redirect was Both kept. -- JLaTondre 03:11, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply] The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was
  • USS Ellyson DMS-19 → USS Ellyson (DD-454) -- I created this accidentally. I would have requested speedy deletion, but someone else edited to avoid the double redirect. I vote delete. Robert A.West (Talk) 17:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 19:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply] The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 8

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 20:32, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Walter Simmons → William Simmons -- I messed up and accidently entered the wrong name, Walter = William unless someone knows of a Walter Simmons to write about I suggest this be deleted Cloveious 13:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.--Amir E. Aharoni 20:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Since you're the sole person who has touched that page, you can tag it with {{db-author}}. Make sure to put the tag before the #REDIRECT. — TKD::Talk 05:49, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 20:32, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Scorpion (halo → List of vehicles in the Halo universe#M808B "Scorpion" Main Battle Tank (MBT) -- Highly implausible redirect, especially with the unbalanced parenthesis. It was apparently the result of a typo made back in 2004. The other "XXX (halo)" redirects at least have some utility in discouraging someone from creating a new article there, but, again, this particular redirect seems like a particularly unlikely typo, even if someone did create it some 21 months ago. — TKD::Talk 07:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.--Amir E. Aharoni 20:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 20:32, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, if only for the potential with the confusion with David Bowie's album.--Amir E. Aharoni 20:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedied by RHaworth (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) when closing AfD. Johnleemk | Talk 08:27, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Tony Danza → Donkey punch -- There's no information on this fictional sex move in Donkey punch and new edits that describe it are frequently edited out by a number of people on the basis that these edits are unverifiable original research. Brian G. Crawford 22:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Both of these are part of an article that was just AfD: Speedy Keep. Will be restored. — Linnwood 20:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both Even if references to Tony Danza in previous versions of Donkey punch are accurate, there's not enough to indicate there may not be other Tony Danza (sex moves). — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 22:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both and protect if necessary. Recreate at such time that it is verified and notable, which won't be any time soon. Шизомби 01:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 15:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • MACROBIOTIC → Macrobiotic diet -- There is already a redirect called Macrobiotic and there are no links to MACROBIOTIC. However it's the first time i nominate an RFD, so i'm sorry if i'm wrong. Amir E. Aharoni 15:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. CG 11:36, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. No proper reason not to delete. Please read the RfD instructions before nominating a redirect for deletion. Johnleemk | Talk 19:24, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Stuck caps lock key?
Alyssa3467 09:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.The Land 20:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 14:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • David (Thomas) King → David Thomas King -- Improper naming convention was used when the article was created I do not belive it will be a usefull redirect Cloveious 13:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.--Amir E. Aharoni 20:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If someone (for whatever reason) types this in, it will be helpful. Redirects are cheap; there is no reason to delete this. Johnleemk | Talk 19:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete (G7) as nominated by redirect (and article) creator and only editor — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC) Oops. Neutral. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 02:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The "sole contributor" moved the page, thus only they appear in the edit history. Royboycrashfan 18:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 10

The nominated redirect was Converted to disambig. -- JLaTondre 00:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

====Backus → John Backus==== -- There is more than one notable person named "Backus" in Wikipedia. There were only 2 articles linked to this redirect, and direct-linking to the correct article was trivial and not disruptive. Having this link interferes with searches for other people named "Backus" (e.g. Jim Backus) Gwimpey 22:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It ought to be a disambiguation page in that case. I'll start it although I see we have a lot of Backuses! ~ Veledan • Talk 22:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to DAB page ~ Veledan • Talk 23:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 21:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

====Andrea Gabrielle Gibson → TransGeneration==== -- Nothing links to it except the TransGeneration article itself. None of the other people featured in the series have their own articles or redirects either. Alyssa3467 12:18, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and delink in the TransGeneration page. The students are not going to be the subject of articles themselves until they do something significant, so they should all be redirects to this page. Ziggurat 20:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 21:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

====Critical Critic → Salient (magazine)==== -- The redirect page in its history has some sensitive detail. The page was initially about a pseudonym who wrote for the magazine. the columns were offensive. Previous versions (before becoming a redirect) have info on who the intial author is [3]. Furthermore, nothing actually uses the redirect and it is a highly unlikely search term Midnighttonight 09:29, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it's a possible search term, and redirects cost very little. 'Sensitive' information should only be deleted from the history of a page when it is potentially libelous or otherwise deleterious to Wikipedia, and this doesn't seem to be the best way to go about that. Ziggurat 22:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 11

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 20:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Muslims/Proposed Organization B → User:Striver/Proposed Organization B

Editor moved the page on my request to be under his own user page leaving a redirect from main space to user space. JeffW 03:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as cross-namespace redirect. — TKD::Talk 04:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy D... I think? gren グレン 21:43, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:48, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jamaica Estates → Queens

While Jamaica Estates is indeed a neighborhood in Queens, the Queens article itself provides no useful information about the neighborhood of Jamaica Estates in particular. Thus, providing a redirect to Queens serves little if no purpose. —Larry V (talk) 01:29, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Starting a separate article on it might be a good idea eventually, but, unless someone wants to do that now, delete since it's referenced from the Queens article itself, creating a confusing self-link. — TKD::Talk 04:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was supposed to be deleted. However, converting the links correctly will take some time. Will try to use AWB to correct everything, but can't promise much. Johnleemk | Talk 12:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPOVUW → Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

Confusing shorcut-to-section which doesn't work and uses an acronym that is not commonly understood, see Wikipedia talk:Neutral point of view#Shortcuts to sections --Francis Schonken 22:00, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete (nominator) --Francis Schonken 22:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Bensaccount 00:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 04:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Jon Harald Søby 10:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. (It would be nice if the software would support redirects to sections. Not for this one, but to create e.g. WP:WEIGHT.) AvB ÷ talk 12:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. PJM 19:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Strong Keep and Repair Indeed, I was fooled once and used it. Nobody got my point! BUT, it'd be a very useful shortcut IF it worked. Why can't WP redirects land on sections, rather than on top of the page? Fix it asap because it is a general handicap with multiple consequences. I also agree to the proposal for WP:WEIGHT, which is far more descriptive.  NikoSilver  (T) @ (C) 20:57, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:WEIGHT speedy deleted. NikoSilver admitted his test failed ("test failed, should have RTFM!! deleting content..."), sorry, section redirects (under whatever format) don't work, as I said above. --Francis Schonken 07:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for deleting that Francis. Can someone make it work?  NikoSilver  (T) @ (C) 18:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • It's currently impossible to fix this without hacking the MediaWiki code, so this is a question best answered by the devs. Johnleemk | Talk 19:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or repair old edits This is one I need to use with some regularity and it's what was on the WP:NPOV page as the shortcut for a long time. This policy has been the clincher reaching consensus, and it'd be ridiculous for these to all become red-links. I'm not the only one to use this. So if this is deleted, the person doing it should prepare for some robot cleanup as a courtesy at least to those who've relied on it. MARussellPESE 12:53, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: please, someone, replace all extant refs with WP:NPOV#Undue weight if/when this goes. — JEREMY 10:29, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 12

The nominated redirect was redirected to Remaster since Led Zeppelin does not have a monopoly on remasters.

Remasters → Led Zeppelin Remasters

Not all remasters are Led Zeppelin Remasters, so I think this should go to the search instead. I was editing Budgie, where there were some [[Remasters]] in the discography section that were blue links that pointed to Led Zeppelin Remasters, when they should be non-existent red links to create pages. Bjorn1101 01:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy redirect to Remaster, as this is current convention and practice. Johnleemk | Talk 10:17, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedy deleted, as per WP:SNOW and conventional practice among AfD closers. Johnleemk | Talk 10:19, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

R.E.C. Studios → REC Studios

Target has been deleted today through AfD; redirect does have history, but content is much as per the now deleted target. No reason to keep. Tagishsimon (talk) 15:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. PJM 19:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted by Fang Aili as R3, unlikely typo. -- JLaTondre 18:52, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crimean Ta → Crimean Tatars

This Crimean Ta is simply a mistake, as you can see in the 1st version of the article. Yahoo, who created the article probably wanted to name it Crimean Tatars, but a mistake occured. "Crimean Ta" is an abracadabra without any meaning. And, of course, there are no links to Crimean Ta. The article should be deleted. Don Alessandro 03:53, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 04:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Renesis13 17:19, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 21:22, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All India Engineering Entrace Examination → All India Engineering Entrance Examination

Mistakenly created by be with wrong spelling. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 05:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Possible (even if it's not plausible) misspelling. None of the criteria for deleting a redirect apply. Johnleemk | Talk 09:52, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apathy - just make sure if these things are kept to add Template:R from misspelling. gren グレン 13:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 21:22, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ted Kennedy/Draft 1 → Ted Kennedy

This was a duplicate page that now redirects. Manufracture 13:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - can't see it being any use at all. —Whouk (talk) 21:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • We need to preserve the page history; it was merged to the main article, so the redirect has a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page). Tentative keep. Johnleemk | Talk 20:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 13

The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 21:24, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grof, Stansilov → Stanislav Grof

Misspelled, improper last name first, unlikely search term Thatcher131 13:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep; those unfamiliar with our naming conventions may enter this instead. Johnleemk | Talk 14:23, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I added {{R to sort name}} since there's a template/cat just for cases like this. gren グレン 21:42, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 13:51, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polish imperialism → Międzymorze

Inherently POV-pushing redirect. Plus it does not make any sense. If there was a Polish imperialism, it was definitely a much wider phenomenon than just a single political project of 1918-1921. A separate article on Polish imperialism would be the proper way to go here. Balcer 14:45, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was redirected to a disambig. Johnleemk | Talk 15:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hero Game → Hero (computer game)

Recent move of stub article, less than 10 weeks old, no remaining internal links. Chris Chittleborough 01:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep. Plausible misspelling. If there is a similar game, then the page should redirect to the appropriate disambiguation page, but otherwise, there is no reason not to keep this redirect. Please read the instructions up there before making nominations not in compliance with policy. Only list redirects for deletion which do not conform to the principles outlined above. Johnleemk | Talk 10:19, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, I added Template:r unprintworthy so it's known to be unprintworthy... but, other than that it's harmless. gren グレン 13:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Possible confusion with Hero Games, who created the Hero System of generic pen&paper RPG rules which includes Fantasy Hero, Star Hero, and Pulp Hero, each of which has been called a "Hero game". See also H.E.R.O., another game. (I should have explained this above. BTW, I did read those instructions, and wrongly thought I was following policy.) Newbie-ish question/suggestion: should Hero Game be a disambiguation page? —Chris Chittleborough 14:27, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • If so, then yes. (Although maybe Hero game would be more appropriate?) Johnleemk | Talk 14:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have a draft disambiguation page at User:Chris Chittleborough/Hero (game). Could a more experienced Wikipedian take a look at it please? Edits very welcome. CWC(talk) 11:16, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • Looks good to me. If nobody objects, I'll close this within a day or two, making Hero Game redirect to Hero (game) (which Chris can move out of his userspace now, since it appears ready). Johnleemk | Talk 11:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • I've been WP:BOLD and (1) created Hero game as the disambiguation page, (2) created Hero (game) as a redirect to Hero game, (3) made Hero Game (capital G) redirect to Hero game. (This is not quite what User:Johnleemk suggested. I thought it easier all around to just make these minor changes than to explain them.) As far as I can see (corrections and advice welcome), all that remains is for the closing admin to delete User:Chris Chittleborough/Hero (game). (I didn't try to move it, having read somewhere that cross-namespace moves aren't supported. Is that right?) Cheers, CWC(talk) 13:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
              • Cross-namespace moves are possible and permitted if they page being moved is out from your userspace to somewhere else. Johnleemk | Talk 15:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 14

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 15:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Res cogitans → René Descartes

This gives the impression that we have an article on something we don't. It is only linked by one article and two pages listing it as a missing topic. If it is searched for it will likely direct the person to Res Extensa which would be a good start and allow them to explore the concept further without having it redirect them to Descartes... who is not the only person to employ the concept. gren グレン 13:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Why not write a one line description and mark it as a stub? Unless someone who knows the subject thinks it will never be a worthwhile article, then delete. -- Renesis13 17:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 15

The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bone Grafts → Bone graft

redirect from Bone grafts already exists, this redirect is unlikely due to combination of plural and case

  • Delete I originally used the {{prod}} template for this, but User:Thatcher131 subsequently listed it here. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 13:32, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Prod is not for redirects which is why he would have moved it here. -- JLaTondre 12:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's not that unlikely. Plural and title case are both common mistakes by those unfamiliar with Wikipedia convention. -- JLaTondre 12:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per JLaTondre. This is a textbook case for {{R from plural}} and {{R from other capitalisation}}. — TKD::Talk 20:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per JLaTondre, not an unusual redirect. feydey 20:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per JLaTondre and TKD. JoshuaZ 21:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per JLaTondre. Royboycrashfan 03:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guildford, England → Guildford

nothing links directly and Guildford is about the town in England Thatcher131 03:17, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, as it follows the standard naming convention for place names. It just happens to be well known enough to reside at the shortened version. -- Renesis13 17:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, useful redirect. Angr (talk • contribs) 17:39, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Renesis13. If I got the search results page for "Guildford, England", I'd have created the redirect, too. — TKD::Talk 20:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Renesis13. —Whouk (talk) 21:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Renesis13. PJM 12:37, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, useful redirect. Royboycrashfan 03:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Horspool's algoritm for string matching → Boyer-Moore-Horspool algorithm

Misspelling (algorithm) with no linking pages. The correct spelling Horspool's algorithm for string matching exists. No useful history. JohnWhitlock 00:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Unlikely but possible misspelling. No compelling reason to delete given. Johnleemk | Talk 08:12, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Lengthy search term, yes, but probably not the first time that someone's misspelled "algorithm" in that way. — TKD::Talk 20:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per all above. Royboycrashfan 03:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted by Harro5 as (CSD R1.). Destination deleted since originally listed. -- JLaTondre 11:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TIMELINE OF GUATEMALAN HISTORY → Timeline of Guatemalan history

Having all-caps versions of titles as redirects is uneccesary (a simple search will produce the correct page) Icarus 19:14, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. If someone has their caps lock key on while typing the URL manually, this redirect will be useful. Redirects are cheap. There is no reason to delete this. Johnleemk | Talk 19:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. {{R from other capitalisation}}. — TKD::Talk 20:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deesh → Douche

This was originally created as a junk article, then edited to a redirect. I can't see that anyone searching for "douche" would type "deesh." Joyous | Talk 22:26, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as above. --Roisterer 05:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Really farfetched transformation. — TKD::Talk 20:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per TKD. Royboycrashfan 03:22, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 16

The nominated redirect was Redirected to Karen people. This could have been done by anyone with no prior debate.. The Land 20:40, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Karen language → Karelian language

Karen language is a language in Myanmar while Karelian language is a language in Russia and Finland. (See Karen people FYI. Also requests Talk:Karen language to be deleted.) --Hello World! 12:50, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom: inaccurate and misleading. Smerdis of Tlön 13:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was redirected to Google. — sjorford (talk) 09:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Google test → Wikipedia:Search engine test

  • Delete: cross namespace redirect. --Hetar 04:15, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Google per the RfD of Google Test on April 6. — TKD::Talk 04:32, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect per TKD. —Whouk (talk) 21:22, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect per TKD. Royboycrashfan 02:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 02:18, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple cross-space redirects by User:Patricknoddy

I have not tagged none of the redirects since there are too many, but up for deletion are: WP:GOO → Google, WP:CHIPPER, WP:CHIP, WP:MLB, WP:MiLB, WP:MiLBLT, WP:WVP, WP:AIB, WP:AkA, WP:AI, WP:AlC and WP:AT. Also the {{shortcut|[[WP:]]}} tags added to redirected articles need to be deleted. I have noted the user on this matter. feydey 16:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete the lot. Johnleemk | Talk 16:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 17:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. —Chris Chittleborough 19:31, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as improper shortcuts. — TKD::Talk 20:46, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all -- Renesis13 22:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete All not WP pages. Besides, who will really use 'em, anyway?--Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 22:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Speedy Deleted by Johnleemk as redirect to deleted page. -- JLaTondre 00:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It is a good thing to do some housework. Tyrenius 00:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mail_Manager → SaiPACS

I want to work on the original topic SaiPACS Aspirevishal 15:41, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not sure I understand what you mean, but Mail Manager was deleted in accordance with our deletion policy through AfD. I have speedied SaiPACS (which redirects to Mail Manager) in accordance with current practice among AfD-closing admins. Johnleemk | Talk 16:41, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 16:56, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Judaism in the United States → Judaism

Only linked to by one article... but it gives the impression that this article exists... when it does not. gren グレン 21:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, although its too bad we dont have an article on this topic. JoshuaZ 04:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 16:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ice age 3 → Ice Age: The Meltdown

Was created as a result of an AFD debate. I doubt any one will be searching for it. Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 22:54, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as confusing, since that film is Ice Age 2. — TKD::Talk 05:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 14:54, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nupedia, the old free encyclopedia → Nupedia

No one is going to look for that particular string. Created by serial redirector, so even if he (they) say they will use it, it's still implausible. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:09, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. If somebody does search for it, it will be useful. It does not confuse the person using the redirect, as they are unlikely to expect anything else except an article on Nupedia. It's a damn unlikely redirect, but it might serve one out of every ten million people or something. Redirects are cheap. There is no reason to delete a redirect. "Nobody's going to use it" isn't a valid reason. Johnleemk | Talk 05:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. "Nobody's going to use it" is a perfectly valid reason to delete it, in my opinion. We shouldn't have redirects for random phrases just because "they don't hurt anyone". Especially when they are more complicated than the article name itself. -- Renesis13 22:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: You realize that your delete vote will take more space on the server than the redirect would have. savidan(talk) (e@) 05:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's not my point. If it is a real title of the encyclopedia, then I would vote to keep it. But as it looks like it's not, then I feel the reason to remove it is to control disorganization and pointlessness. I could create a redirect that say "Nupedia, the ancestor to Wikipedia" or "Nupedia, founded by Jimmy Wales" and it wouldn't use much disk space or processor time, but it would be totally pointless. Keeping that under control, is to me a large part of the goal for Redirects for Deletion. -- Renesis13 17:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Pointless, yes, but would it hurt? That is the major question. If it does not hurt, it can only be one of two things: neutral or helpful. Neither is totally bad. Looks like we'll have to agree to disagree here. Johnleemk | Talk 18:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • If it doesn't hurt anyone, does it not make sense to retain it? Just because something is more complicated than the real name does not mean we remove the redirect; someone with the wrong information could justifiably find it useful in the future. I see nobody has bothered actually reading the policy relating to redirect deletions, which clearly states that if a redirect doesn't hurt anyone (e.g. it's not misleading, it's not confusing, there's nothing else the page could conceivably redirect to, etc.), it shouldn't be deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, recently created and a useless phrase. Discourage people from creating useless redirects. Kusma (討論) 14:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. —Ruud 22:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 17

The nominated redirect was deleted as target page has been deleted. Royboycrashfan 18:55, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Terror → Armenian allegations

User Kayaakyuz created several redirects on 16 April to a POV article Armenian allegations they had copied from Turkish govt website, currently listed on AfD. The redirects obscure attempts to find the NPOV Wikipedia article. It is possible the title of the established article Armenian Genocide may change, so the redirect will not have a valid target. The names of many of the redirects and articles involve are themselves either insufficiently descriptive or contentious to one of the parties. Also Armenian Allegations, Armenian issue, Armenian Issue, Turkish Genocide, Turkish genocide, Armenian problem, Armenian terror, Armenian Terror, Armenian relocation, Armenian Relocation, Tehcir, Ottoman Armenians, Ottoman armenians --Cedders 15:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Isn't it better to wait for the closure of the AfD discussion on Armenian allegations, and reopen the discussion when that issue is settled? I did not check all, but for most nothing links to there, so if the main article goes they can be speedied, I suppose. (I agree that the names are contentious, but this is one of those topics where any name and/or content will be objectionable to one of the sides in the conflict.) I'm afraid I don't quite get how a possible name change of Armenian Genocide (which, as far as I know, is not under any kind of formal discussion) is supposed to have an impact on these redirects. LambiamTalk 23:33, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. I guess you're right, and suppose that's how these things are usually done (I'm a newbie). But maybe should they remain nominated (a) because redirecting from most of the terms to any conceivable article would cause confusion and/or be contentious (although I guess Ottoman Armenians could redirect to Armenians); and (b) to avoid readers being redirected to the POV fork and Google listing each 160K redirect instead of giving PageRank to Armenian Genocide. There's no formal discussion to move Armenian Genocide, but I think it's been moved before, and my Macmillan has the topic as 'Armenian massacre', which may be raised later about how the article summary can be presented more objectively before getting onto the opinion of genocide scholars, the UN, etc. --Cedders 01:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. To those (like me) who didn't fully appreciate at first glance that last sentence without markup, this is an umbrella nomination of Armenian Allegations, Armenian issue, Armenian Issue, Turkish Genocide, Turkish genocide, Armenian problem, Armenian terror, Armenian Terror, Armenian relocation, Armenian Relocation, Ottoman Armenians, Ottoman armenians. Tehcir was converted to a stub. -- JLaTondre 00:40, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted as irrelevant to the subject of the article. Royboycrashfan 18:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me → Pardon

unhelpful redirect - goes from a turn of phrase to a legal procedure —Whouk (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete' one has nothing to do with the other.--Tollwutig 19:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete' per Tollwutig. -- JLaTondre 02:57, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete' per Tollwutig.--Jusjih 13:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted as irrelevant to the subject of the article. Royboycrashfan 18:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me → Pardon

unhelpful redirect - goes from a turn of phrase to a legal procedure —Whouk (talk) 17:35, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete one has nothing to do with another, suggest Pardon Me or Excuse me be redirected on the other, and a article be written.--Tollwutig 19:27, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Tollwutig. -- JLaTondre 02:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Tollwutig.--Jusjih 13:44, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 18

The nominated redirect was deleted per author request. Royboycrashfan 10:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Al Mkhir → 99 Names of God

Tagged on 25 January by Savidan, but not listed here. Rationale of typo provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry. I meant to use {db-author}. Just a typo. "Al Mkhir" isn't one of the 99 names of god. You can also keep it if you want. I guess theres no harm in it. savidan(talk) (e@) 05:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 15:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blogorrhea → Blog

Tagged on 25 September by Solarusdude, but not listed here. Rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. Sounds like a neologistic portmanteau of blog and diarrhea. "+blogorrhea -wikipedia" gives 97,800 Google results. I suppose that at least it discourages the creation of a dicdef. — TKD::Talk 02:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.


The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 21:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Catharsis (British band) → Catharsis (band)

Tagged on 13 March by 200.55.107.111, but not listed here. Rationale of not a British band. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per tagger. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JLaTondre. — TKD::Talk 02:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unhelpful, implausible, and confusing. Royboycrashfan 10:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept as {{R from other capitalisation}}. Royboycrashfan 10:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cdpedia → CDpedia

Tagged on 7 November by Bruji, but not listed here. Rationale not provided. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept as {{R from other capitalisation}}. Royboycrashfan 10:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dvdpedia → DVDpedia

Tagged on 7 November by Bruji, but not listed here. Rationale not provided. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 21:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheaper by the dozen cast → Cheaper by the Dozen (film)

Tagged on 7 February by Fitch, but not listed here. Rationale of it was a test page originally provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't pipe up. Doesn't seem useful at all, and the original content was a bunch of edit-button clicks. Not sure why someone would link to cheaper by the dozen cast, ever. Just trying to help keep it clean 'round here. I didn't even post it here because it seemed like an easy one. Guess not. —Fitch 03:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- following the principle of least astonishment, it's clear someone who might conceivably type this in would be directed to the right page. Johnleemk | Talk 19:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Unambiguous, possibly useful. — TKD::Talk 02:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 04:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

China for Christ Church → Chinese house church

Tagged on 4 September by 64.12.116.200, but not listed here. Rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 04:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clinch (grappling) → grappling position#Stand-up grappling position

Tagged on 30 December by -Marcus-, but not listed here. Rationale of Implausible typo provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Implausible but possible. That is the key word. Johnleemk | Talk 19:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 04:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hold (grappling) → Grappling hold

Tagged on 30 December by -Marcus-, but not listed here. Rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as per my rationale for the other wrestling move. Johnleemk | Talk 19:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Converted to disambig page w/appoligies to Ceyockey. Looks like it was deleted without properly being closed and the archives don't go that far back. -- JLaTondre 02:42, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cyr → Cyrillic alphabet

Tagged on 25 October by Ceyockey, but not listed here. Rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Turn into disambiguation page. [4] suggests several more appropriate target pages. — TKD::Talk 02:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to dab, per User:TKD. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:06, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I did list the redirect here (see this diff); the rationale I used was: "This redirect creates confusion in that there is a "Cyr" listed on List of people by name: Cy that links to the alphabet article via this redirect and there is no discernable article for the person. Also, I've looked briefly to see if "Cyr" or a variant is a ISO-type code for the alphabet but have not found that information. Therefore, I would suggest deletion to avoid confusion unless there is evidence supporting the term being a valid abbreviation." I haven't looked further to see if there was subsequent discussion. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:06, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 10:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glass Plate Universities → Plate glass university

Tagged on 7 January by Colonies Chris, but not listed here. See Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives/January 2006#January 7 for delete decision on companion Glass Plate university. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per decision on companion. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 10:48, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Host file → Hosts file

Tagged on 2 March by Rissa of the saiya-jin, but not listed here. Rationale of all links from articles changed to link to Hosts file. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Common mistype. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Very plausible. — TKD::Talk 02:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Common misunderstanding too. —CWC(talk) 11:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Lack of links from article space is not a reason to delete a redirect. JoshuaZ 07:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per all above. Royboycrashfan 10:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 14:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol → Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol

Cross-namespace redirect about a self-reference only of interest to Wikipedians Kotepho 15:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as cross-namespace redirect. — TKD::Talk 02:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per TKD. --LV (Dark Mark) 21:09, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There's nothing wrong with having articles about Wikipedia or certain parts of it. The nominator does not understand the concept of "self-reference"--it simply means that articles should not be written with the assumption that the reader is viewing the article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whatever--it does NOT mean that the encyclopedia cannot contain articles about itself.
  • Delete as a cross namespace redirect. While there is nothing wrong with having articles about Wikipedia, this does not redirect to an article, but to a WP help page. --Hetar 08:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross namespace redirect. -- JLaTondre 12:33, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, as with the target article. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:47] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Edge Of Nowhere → Blizzhackers

Target article is also up for deletion and not likely to be kept, so why have the redirect hanging around? Daniel Case 17:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

comment Wait for that AfD to settle, and then deal with this. JoshuaZ 07:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment—If the article is deleted, then the redirect page can be nominated for speedy deletion per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Redirects. Ardric47 02:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 19

The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 14:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Korean churches in China → Christianity_in_Korea

Tagged on 02-Sept by 205.188.116.6 but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep -- valid and non-misleading redirect. Good call on digging up all these half-done RfDs, JLaTondre. Johnleemk | Talk 15:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: churches could also refer to other religions besides Christianity. --Hetar 20:23, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete While I find Hetar's possibility unlikely, given the makeup Korean religion, the title is about China not Korea and so is really a different topic. JoshuaZ 22:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JoshuaZ. — TKD::Talk 13:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 14:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of automobile models by size → List of recent automobile models by type

Tagged on 28-Aug by 200.125.60.59 but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete -- misleading. Johnleemk | Talk 15:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Royboycrashfan 16:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Johnleemk. — TKD::Talk 13:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 14:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MiniCode → Barcode

Tagged on 25-Sep by Yeryry but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, as MiniCode is mentioned in the article. (Note that ArrayTag was also nominated at the same time, but has been since delisted.) — sjorford (talk) 09:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was redirected to Hemolytic disease of the newborn. Johnleemk | Talk 14:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Morbus haemolyticus neonatorum → Rh disease

Tagged on 19-Mar by Snowmanradio but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 14:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Motorola v600 → Motorola V600

Tagged on 17-Dec by Mikecnn but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 14:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Murton (Yorkshire) → Murton, York

Tagged on 24-Feb by Jorvik but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no pages link to the redirect and the title is not an obvious one to search for.

  • Is there another Murton in Yorkshire this could lead to? Johnleemk | Talk 15:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep -- Yorkshire is a county in England. York is a city in Yorkshire. Murton is a village in York, and thus in Yorkshire. The redirect is valid. Johnleemk | Talk 20:25, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - it's a perfectly harmless redirect, and it could very easily be searched for by somebody who isn't familiar with WP naming conventions. — sjorford (talk) 09:59, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Johnleemk and sjorford. — TKD::Talk 13:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 14:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ng Hoi Yee → Margaret Ng

Tagged on 7-Jan by Instantnood but not listed here. Deletion rationale of Although the proper pronunciation is Oi, her name is spelt as "Ngoi". "Hoi" is a wrong spelling. provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete -- possibly misleading. Johnleemk | Talk 15:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep mispelling Borisblue 18:14, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 14:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nori (LAY) → Look Around You

Tagged on 29-Oct by Rapido but not listed here. Deletion rationale of the word "Nori" has nothing to do with the series provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 14:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oak Elementary School → Oak Avenue School

Tagged on 3-Dec by 69.181.82.102 but not listed here. Deletion rationale of wrong name for school. There is an Oak Elementary School in TN. provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 14:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Qlikech → QlikTech

Tagged on 27-Feb by Anthony Deighton but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as possible misspelling. — TKD::Talk 13:55, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 14:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Qliktech → QlikTech

Tagged on 27-Feb by Anthony Deighton but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 15:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SIDO → Sido

Tagged on 13-Oct by Sigorni but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, possible search term. Royboycrashfan 14:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 14:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sea of korea → Sea of Japan naming dispute

Tagged on 22-Jan by Ypacaraí but not listed here. Deletion rationale of not known name provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 14:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Temporally → time

Tagged on 16-Dec by Lincher but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Transwiki to wiktionary. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:51, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure how one would transwiki the redirect. "Time" is not a sufficient definition for "temporally" (ref [5]) so, while one could generate a definition for it, there really isn't anyting to move over. -- JLaTondre 02:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 15:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Earth, A Small Man, His Dog and a Chicken → The Earth, A Small Man, His Dog And A Chicken

Tagged on 13-Oct by Deelnemer8 but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Speedied. The Land 20:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Most Satanic Man Alive → Osama bin Ladin

Tagged on 25-Mar by Cyanidesandwich but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This redirect has no encylopedic value and has changed target multiple times (started at Dick Cheney). -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless found to be a valid name. I could think of some people who could be justifiably labeled this (e.g. Aleister Crowley, although he wouldn't fit the alive part), but unless it's a common label for the person in question, this redirect violates our neutrality policy and is just plain confusing. Johnleemk | Talk 15:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Converted to a disambig page. -- JLaTondre 12:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thieme → Richard Thieme

Tagged on 21-Mar by Afasmit but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry. Rational was that Thieme is simply a last name shared by many people. For example, it is the name of an international scientific and medical publisher. When people search for Thieme, they are unlikely to look for a business consultant by the name of Richard Thieme, whose article has all the looks of a self-promoting site. Afasmit 06:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 15:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikiportal:Doctor Who/Categories → Portal:Doctor Who/Categories

Tagged on 3-Nov by Sherool but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Redirect from template to portal space based upon page move. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was swapped with the article. Royboycrashfan 00:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yumiko Kokonoe → Usako Kokonoe

Tagged on 18-Apr by Jaimemrm2002 but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jaimemrm2002, who is a newcomer, conversed with me regarding this RfD. The rationale was that Yumiko Kokonoe is the real name of the actress, and not Usako Kokonoe (The article page on Usako Kokonoe also refers to her by Yumiko Kokonoe). As of now, Yumiko Kokonoe redirects to Usako Kokonoe. But it should be the other way round. So this redirect is to be deleted so that the article may be moved to that page. This is what User:Jamiemrm2002 said. Since I am not well versed with this subject, I am not voting. Just I put up his rationale. I will be informing his mistake as well. --soUmyaSch 06:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 14:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"jimmy jimmy" → Jimmy Jimmy

Tagged on 11-Apr by 85.1.105.57 (as AfD) but not listed here. Deletion rationale not provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 02:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep; clearly plausible redirect. If Jimmy Jimmy is deleted, however, then obviously this redirect should go as well. Johnleemk | Talk 15:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; inclusion of the quotation marks makes it both an unlikely search term and an unlikey in-line text usage. If we were talking about jimmy jimmy, that would be another matter. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as harmless redirect - people do search for items in quotes, because that's how you search for a phrase in Google and other search engines. Many such pages are created every day, and I see no harm in leaving the redirect once the page has been moved to the correct title. — sjorford (talk) 09:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. Royboycrashfan 03:24, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 14:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy Valley, California → Sandy Valley, Nevada

There is no such community in California. The CDP stops at the state line and the area is called Mesquite Valley on the California side. 69.35.49.210 03:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as misleading. Johnleemk | Talk 15:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 14:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Reeve jokes → Christopher Reeve

Recreation of deleted article (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Reeve jokes) which was then redirected. See no use for it as a redirect. Fagstein 06:17, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete unless there was any content merged, in which case it must be kept for GFDL compliance. Stifle (talk) 13:00, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The content was split off from Christopher Reeve in the first place, and there is now a healthy discussion taking place with one user who keeps wanting to re-add it. — sjorford (talk) 09:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 20

The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 03:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of The Analogs albums → The Analogs

The article has been merged. Visor 16:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as per the principle of least astonishment, and points 1 and 2 of when we should not delete redirects (see above). Johnleemk | Talk 17:04, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above, useful history. Royboycrashfan 03:31, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. — TKD::Talk 13:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedy deleted per author request. Royboycrashfan 02:56, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Island Brygge station → Islands Brygge station

Island Brygge does not exist; it was a typo on my account. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ghent (talk • contribs) .

  • Keep as per policy at the top of this page; conceivable misspellings are valid redirects. Johnleemk | Talk 17:03, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, plausible misspelling. {{R from misspelling}} has been added. Royboycrashfan 03:33, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. — TKD::Talk 13:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete as author request, if Ghent really is the author of the request, although not the nominator. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Ghent is the sole contributor to the article and thus the redirect qualifies as a G7. Royboycrashfan 02:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 03:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KSWB → KSWB-TV

delete Ronald20 01:28, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy keep as a likely bad-faith nomination. Not added on RfD page originally, nomination was originally on KSWB itself. --WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:32, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Looks like there was a copy and paste move on 26 August 2005, where all content from KSWB was copied and pasted to KSWB-TV. All subsequent edits to the KSWB page has been either to blank the redirect or to put it here on RFD. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep. OK, I fixed the cut and paste move and merged the page histories. However, the redirect should still stand unless the nominator wants to list the two pages on Wikipedia:Requested moves. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 19:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. Royboycrashfan 03:34, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Speedy Deleted by Redvers as R2. -- JLaTondre 19:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Tibbetts → User:Ben Tibbetts

Redirect into user namespace. Was tagged with AfD. Optichan 20:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy Delete, CSD R2 - redirect to user page.--blue520 09:27, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 21

The nominated redirect was redirected to Raimon Panikkar. Royboycrashfan 03:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Raimon pannikar → Raimundo Panikkar

False spelling B.B. 20:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was reverted to article. Merge requests don't go through RfD. Kusma (討論) 02:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian metal → Metal in Iran

This is a re-nomination, the article was shortly vandalized earlier. It redirects to a dead page (was a Copyvio till this morning, then got AfDed) -- - K a s h Talk | email 19:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some info from the history could be merged into Heavy metal in Islamic countries if that article survives deletion, or the redirect could be pointed there. Kusma (討論) 19:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I started the original article, however I think its best for it to be part or even redirect to Iranian rock and alternative music instead -- - K a s h Talk | email 20:07, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted as author request. Kusma (討論) 15:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

poop truck → fuck truck

Nonsense. Doesnt at all fit with meaning of the term fuck truck or its target page. My drunk roommate added this when I left my account open to use the bathroom -- I aplogize for inconvenience his silliness may have caused Interestingstuffadder 13:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Does this constitue speedy deletable due to request of author? (Since its the same user account but a different editor) If this is speediable, then lets do that. JoshuaZ
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted as author request. Kusma (討論) 15:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crap coach → fuck truck

Nonsense. Doesnt at all fit with meaning of the term fuck truck or its target page. My drunk roommate added this when I left my account open to use the bathroom -- I aplogize for inconvenience his silliness may have caused Interestingstuffadder 13:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Does this constitue speedy deletable due to request of author? (Since its the same user account but a different editor) If this is speediable, then lets do that. JoshuaZ
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 19:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fuck Truck → Wellesley College Senate Bus

If we're going to have an article of this name, then it should be related to Passion Wagons in general not a particular school bus. Why should that school have monopoly on the term? jmd 11:11, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then why not edit the article to discuss the subject of cars equipped for sex (or at least create a stub about that subject), adding a link at the top to the Senate Bus article? Catamorphism 12:20, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
STRONG KEEP See the long history of deletion debates on this subject. Quite simply, this is not a "passion wagon" (a car equipped for sex). This is a shuttle bus that has come to be known as the "fuck truck" and so referred to in numerous notable media sources (again, see all of the deltion debates on this matter) because it is the means by which some students travel from one college to another when they are meeting up with someone at the latter school in order to engage in sexual activity . As for this redirect, it is unclear why this redirect would be a candidate for deletion. As it stands, there is an article about the Wellesley College Senate Bus and that article provides multiple reliable references for the fact that the bus is widely known as the fuck truck. Quite simply, it is reasonable to think that a sizeable portion of users interested in this bus will in fact type in the term fuck truck. Without this redirect, those users will not find what they are looking for. Thus, this redirect serves the fundamental purpose that redirects are supposed to serve -- it reduces confusion. As for alternate meanings of "fuck truck", I just did a quick google search and fuck truck does not seem to be a particuarly widespread synonym for passion wagon -- the few sites I found using the term in this context were porn sites and user-editable sites. Interestingstuffadder 13:13, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, of course. Mattergy 13:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per Interestingstuffadder. The Senate bus has been known as the "fuck truck" since antiquity. Why should the United States have a monopoly on houses that are white?
  • Strong keep. This redirect is useful for navigation and has a nontrivial edit history. And this particular college shuttle bus has most notably always been called "Fuck Truck". If there is desire to have articles with alternative meanings, create a disambiguation page, keeping Fuck Truck redirecting to Wellesley College Senate Bus as the primary meaning. -- Mareklug talk 00:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep nontrivial edit history; 2 Afd's I think with a lot of acrimony. Don't stir the hornets nest. Thatcher131 04:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was turned into an article by...someone. This isn't RfD's business anymore. Johnleemk | Talk 16:19, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian metal → Metal in Iran

Redirects to a copyvio page (which is also up for deletion) - K a s h Talk | email 11:16, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. When any admin deletes the copyvio, any incoming redirect should also be checked for deletion, or a broken redirect will be created.--Jusjih 13:38, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Page was deleted but not the redirect :( -- - K a s h Talk | email 15:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was reversed by JzG. —Whouk (talk) 11:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spam blog → Spam blogs

Prevents move of article to proper name Polonium 21:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean that "Spam blogs" should be a redirect to "Spam blog", which should contain the article, I'm all in favour. I don't think there's any need to discuss that. PizzaMargherita 21:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect spam blogs to spam blog instead. The plural is supposed to redirect to the singular, not vice versa. Royboycrashfan 03:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since this is not really a deletion but a swap, I have boldly done that. Just zis Guy you know? 10:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 22

The nominated redirect was kept. If this redirect makes you unhappy, turn it into something besides a redirect, like maybe a separate portal. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:41] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Portal:Macedonia → Portal:Republic of Macedonia / Macedonia

The redirect was created as a result of a move and now it seems to have descended into an edit war. As there are only 2 links to this redirect in main namespace I think we could resolve the dispute about where the redirect should point by deleting the redirect. Dijxtra 13:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted as redirect to deleted page. Royboycrashfan 02:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List_of_songs_whose_title_does_not_appear_in_the_lyrics → List of songs with titles that do not appear in the lyrics

The target page was speedied as a redirect to a new target which went up for AfD and was deleted. GT 23:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy R1, missing target. Royboycrashfan 02:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted per author's request. Royboycrashfan 02:02, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forth zone → Zone of alienation

My own typo when creating the needed Fourth Zone redirect :(. Ukrained 19:24, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy G7. Royboycrashfan 02:00, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedy deleted per author request (WP:CSD#G7). Royboycrashfan 18:45, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Past amcotw → Template:Past AMCOTW

This cross namespace redirect was accidently created while moving around pages for the recently renamed Anime and Manga COTW TheFarix (Talk) 15:36, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, cross namespace redirect. Royboycrashfan 16:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete as a cross namespace redirect. --Hetar 08:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete as author request under CSD G7. — TKD::Talk 13:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Royboycrashfan 00:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal → Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal

  • Delete as a cross namespace redirect. --Hetar 02:43, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, cross namespace redirect. Royboycrashfan 03:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. — TKD::Talk 07:11, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as above. --LV (Dark Mark) 21:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Sorry for changing my vote (and going againstWhen should we delete a redirect), but after looking up the procedure more I feel this is actually a useful redirect. As the above link shows, there are often exceptions. For example, if you look at mediation cabal and 3RR, those are also cross-namespace redirects. Unless there is something painfully wrong about cross-space redirects that could otherwise be helpful such as those two that have not been deleted, I don't see why this one should be. Note that I also created this redirect, so I'm likely biased as it is as well, heh. Cowman109Talk 23:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC) Delete, in that case due to the explanation. Thanks for explaining it. I did incorrectly make that assumption without even realizing it. Cowman109Talk 01:54, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're making the assumption that these two have been actively kept. Since neither has been previously nominated, that's not the case. They probably just weren't noticed by anyone. Since you have pointed them out, I've nominated them for deletion as well. It's as easy to use the Wikipedia page titles themselves or the short-cut links already provided (WP:MEDCAB & WP:3RR) as it is to use the article space redirects. There's no need to confuse article space and Wikipedia space. Especially since using as WP: named link clearly indicates to everyone that you're talking about a Wikipedia adminstrative topic without them having to click on the link. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross namespace redirect. -- JLaTondre 01:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 00:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Snape kills dumbledore → Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Delete. Won't help search since it's highly unlikely somebody would enter this as a search term. Peter S. 09:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, unlikely search term and possibly vandalism. Royboycrashfan 13:34, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep likely search term with 46,000 Google hits; prevents recreation as an article of its own (Harry Potter trolling was deleted at AfD). CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 08:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but your reasoning makes absolutely no sense at all. Not every group of words that forms a coherent sentence which can be found in some search engine results means that it requires a article or redirect. Could you elaborate your reasoning why it is "likely" that somebody would ever enter this as a search term? Peter S. 19:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it was a very prevalent trolling method. Heck, it just came up again in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Lord Voldemort 3. So I believe it gets a lot of hits more than just because it's a coherent sentence. At one point I even supported having the article... but then again I'm a strange person. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 20:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed :-) Peter S. 23:21, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, its probably the first RfA to need a spoiler warning. JoshuaZ 23:45, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I'm gonna go with keep on this one, although there are possible spoiler issues involved (although I'm guessing you would probably know he kills him if you typed it in). Anyways, as Caesar said, prevents creation of unnecessary articles. --Hetar 08:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Caesar and Hetar. JoshuaZ 20:36, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a likely search term for people who are not familiar with Harry Potter canon, and may be trying to "get the joke" after seeing the phrase somewhere. Perhaps the target should be changed to Spoiler (media)#Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince? Lack Thereof 03:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 23

The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 00:13, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gambotto → Antonella Gambotto-Burke

Part of a spam campaign by an editor promoting Antonella Gambotto-Burke. See todays AfD.

  • Keep. Since the AfD nominations do not include Antonella Gambotto-Burke itself, they are not pertinent. A quick search turned up no other article titles with Gambotto's so this is a valid redirect. If others can be identified, then it should be turned into a disambig page. -- JLaTondre 18:39, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Royboycrashfan 00:13, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giancarlo_Gambotto → Gambotto

Part of a spam campaign by an editor promoting Antonella Gambotto-Burke. See todays AfD. Dlyons493 Talk 18:02, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

April 24

The nominated redirect was 2/3 kept. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:35] <freakofnurxture|talk>

List of programs broadcast by BBC, List of programs broadcast by the BBC, British Broadcasting Corporation/Programming → List of television programmes broadcast by the BBC

Unlikely search terms, created by incorrect page moves. Joe D (t) 00:43, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the two list ones. They are likely phrasings people might use for searching or linking. They reduce the chance of a duplicate article being created. Delete the British Broadcasting Corporation/Programming one. -- JLaTondre 01:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all three. I believe the third is an old name for the page, and should be kept just in case (however unlikely) someone decides to use it. -- SonicAD (talk) 15:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep first two, delete third (no history, no incoming links). Fagstein 20:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep first two per above, and delete third as unnecessary subpage. Ardric47 20:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep--Amir E. Aharoni 16:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, more implausible subpaging. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:35] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Simon and Garfunkel/Bridge Over Troubled Water → Bridge over Troubled Water

About as unlikely a search term as I can think of. A hangover from a bygone age? Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete in agreement with Mel Etitis. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, somebody obviously created these out of sheer boredom rather than from a failed search or a red link. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:35] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Suzumiya haruhi no yuutsu! → The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya

Title does not contain an exclamation mark, so I do not see why anyone would include it in a search, no incoming links. Shiroi Hane 23:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Melancholy of Suzumiya Huruhi, Suzumiya Huruhi no Yuutsu, The Melancholy of Huruhi Suzumiya & Suzumiya huruhi → The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya

Huruhi is a mispelling and, according to Google, not even a common one (one hit). No incoming links. Shiroi Hane 23:53, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hurahi suzumiya → The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya

Another mispelling, again no imbound links. I guess it's a plausible error, although google nets no results, but if we keep this shouldn't we also add Suzumiya Hurahi, Suzumiya Hurahi no Yuuutsu, Hurahi Suzumiya no Yūutsu, Suzumayi Haruhi... (IOW, slippery slope) Shiroi Hane 00:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

April 25

The nominated redirect was kept. Clarifies that we're not talking about Methuselah. It might also help avoid link-piping, in certain specialized contexts. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Deaths in AD 2005 → deaths in 2005

This rather useless redirect page is the only of its kind. Nothing links to it. The author seems to like creating useless things, such as article 10001 (number) and Category:Numbers of the googol family. LambiamTalk 11:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • No Vote. Useless, but not misleading. (Some would vote Keep for that reason, but I don't think something not being misleading is sufficient for it to remain -- even for a redirect.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 21:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Under policy, this is a valid redirect. Johnleemk | Talk 03:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, some kind of unintentional creation. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

HD 810 b → Iota Horologii b

This one looks like a typo: presumably the author intended to create HR 810 b instead, as Iota Horologii is HD 17051. Chaos syndrome 09:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, clearly a typo.--Jyril 08:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

1RR → Wikipedia:Revert only when necessary

While we're at it with 3RR: Unneccessary cross-namespace redirect with 5 incoming links that I'd be more than gald to repoint myself. As the guideline is typically only invoked by more experienced Wikipedians, who know that WP is the prefix for Projectspace shortcuts, there is no need to keep it. AmiDaniel (Talk) 03:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as cross-namespace redirect. -- JLaTondre 13:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: as a cross namesapce redirect. --Hetar 00:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, so that old revisions of articles using the redirect name of the template will still display properly. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Template:Infobox Television Station → Template:Infobox Network

Deprecated; previously used as an infobox on television station articles, which now use Template:Infobox Broadcast. All uses of the old version have been corrected. A What links here shows it is not included in any pages. Morgan Wick 03:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted as a vandalism repair. Just zis Guy you know? 11:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Film was created → Film

  • Re-direct kept when I undid a page move a bad Wikipedian made. Delete the re-direct. Georgia guy 00:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since this was a vandalism fix, I have speedily (FSVO) completed the request. Just zis Guy you know? 11:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted by Cyde with an edit summary of "Cross-namespace redirect." --Hetar 06:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR → Wikipedia:Three-revert rule

Cross-name space redirect. We should keep articles in article space and Wikipedia adminstration in Wikipedia space. -- JLaTondre 01:32, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as a cross namespace redirect. --Hetar 05:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, useful shortcut. - Sikon 06:06, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, useful shortcut, over 300 links to it. Could consider making it a soft redirect, but deleting it would generate a bunch of redlinks --Dijxtra 07:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Existing links can be changed to WP:3RR as part of closing and the creation of redlinks prevented so that's not a problem. -- JLaTondre 02:26, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very weak delete — it's not exactly doing any harm as it is, but I'm of the opinion that we should strongly encourage the use of WP:3RR-style shortcuts for consistency and unamibiguity. — sjorford (talk) 09:06, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Dijxtra. Royboycrashfan 10:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete and use WP:3RR instead, but don't delete until some friendly bot-farmer can migrate the existing references. Just zis Guy you know? 10:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I found out about this redirect delete proposal by entering 3rr. Encouraging WP:3RR is one thing, but preventing someone who doesn't know to use that syntax from finding the 3RR page is quite another. Making it a soft redirect is fine too, but completely deleting it makes no sense. --Serge 18:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep Merecat 05:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's a reason for having a seperate article and Wikipedia name space. Why confuse that with redirects? -- JLaTondre 02:26, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • What's the reason? --Serge 03:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • There are two reasons: 1) To avoid confusion and to clearly indicate when we're talking about adminstrative content and not an article. Most users of Wikipedia (i.e. our readers) do not care about adminstrative details. We shouldn't confuse them by mixing adminstrative topics with articles. 2) More importantly, redirects from article space to Wikipedia space remove potential article titles. While it may not be likely someone would write an article titled 3RR, it's not unconcievable and the prescence of the redirect is likely to detour them if they wished. -- JLaTondre 13:14, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'd also like to note that Wikipedia:Redirects_for_deletion#When_should_we_delete_a_redirect.3F states that "You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met..." Nowhere does the page state that you must delete such a redirect. This term is already linked, as stated earlier, in more than 300 pages, and as such it would break quite a lot of them as well. Is there evidence of a wikipedia policy page stating that cross-namespace redirects must be deleted? This might be one of the exceptions to the rule as it has already been labeled as useful by Serge. I also tend to forget to use the WP tag as well. I also believe that users less knowledgeable on the WP tag may use this link as well for reference, as people often use this term. Perhaps a redirect may not be the proper option here if it is causing so much controvery, however. Perhaps the page should simply be a sort of 'altered' redirect that clearly states it links to a non mainspace article, stating what the page they were likely looking for is. Cowman109Talk 19:08, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • JLaTondre, with all due respect, those don't seem like compelling reasons to me. 1) I still don't understand the purpose of making the line clear between the two namespaces. The beauty of Wiki is that it's all one namespace, and you can get to anything from one search box. If it crosses into the area of Wiki admin, so what? Why is it okay for a user to inadvertently stumble onto, say, an obscure technical medical page in the Wiki space but not okay for him to stumble onto some obscure Wiki admin concept? If that division is important to maintain, why not create and maintain countless other namespace divisions? In short, what makes Wiki admin stuff so special that it needs to be isolated in a separate namespace such that no one can unintentionally stumble onto it? 2) If someone comes up with a legitimate use of the title 3RR in the Wiki namespace, then a disambiguation page might be appropriate. Or, they can use 3RR for their article, and put a disambiguation link to WP:3RR at the top of their article. Nothing is necessarily permanent in Wikipedia. I just don't see what problem is solved by removing this redirect, or any like it. --Serge 23:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'd also like to point out Wikipedia:Redirects_for_deletion/Precedents#Should redirects to other spaces be kept? showing pages similar to 3RR being kept in the past due to their high usage. I believe it can be agreed that, as 3RR has 300 links, it can be considered in high usage. Cowman109Talk 19:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect per Sikon and Dijxtra. Edit: More in favor of a soft redirect. When I did a search for '3rr', WP:3RR did not show up until after 16 search terms. As I've stated above, this makes it too difficult for newer users unfamiliar with WP shortcuts. Cowman109Talk 16:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete, mixing of articles and internal Wikipedia stuff is grossly inappropriate. -- Heptor talk 23:24, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per no cross-namespace redirects, no matter how helpful they may be. Search will turn up WP:3RR anyway. AmiDaniel (Talk) 02:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC) Keep and convert to a soft redirect per the arguments above and below. AmiDaniel (Talk) 00:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • From what I've seen, there is no wiki policy that states that all cross-namespace redirects should be deleted. In fact, policy (from what I've stated up above) suggests the near opposite that should a redirect be helpful and heavily linked to, such that removing it would break many links, the redirect should in fact not be deleted. Cowman109Talk 00:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: these are all over the place and can be quite useful to save from typing the "WP:" Suggest we make an RfC. Morgan Wick 02:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I to now think we need a RfC. --Dijxtra 06:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Don't mix namespaces. It makes reusing material or changing its format very difficult: how will legitimate forks and mirrors know what to use? It's like misusing semantic html markup to hack/adjust the visual layout of a web page: see how much people with screenreaders appreciate that. Wikipedia:Avoid self-references applies here ~ Veledan • Talk 20:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Veldean, please explain. How does having a redirect from 3RR to WP:3RR make "reusing material or changing its format very difficult"? What material is made difficult to reuse by such a redirect? Changing the format of what is made very difficult by such a redirect? What is a "legitimate fork or mirror" and how does such a redirect make it impossible or difficult for it to know what to use? I don't understand the analogy with misusing html, which inevitably leads to web pages that cannot be rendered properly in some browsers. How does a redirect from one namespace to another lead to breaking something? --Serge 23:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The goal of the project is to make an encyclopaedia. As such, we should try to keep a separation between the encyclopaedia under construction (the pages in the main namespace) and everything which is not an encyclopaedia, but useful in the process of building the encyclopaedia (all other namespaces). Wikipedia:Three-revert rule clearly falls in the latter category. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 08:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • As per WP:ASR, there is nothing wrong with Wikipedia articles that refer to Wikipedia in the appropriate context. I cannot imagine a more appropriate context to refer to Wikipedia than something so Wikipedia specific as the Three-revert rule. What am I missing? See the Talk page. --Serge 16:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • If Wikipedia were any other website, AfD would have deleted an article on 3RR for being cruft. As a result, this argument is invalid, since the 3RR is not an encyclopedic topic. The whole point of ASR is to make life easy for our mirrors -- raising the "barriers to entry" in this case may well reduce the number of people interested in mirroring or reusing Wikipedia, which in turn reduces the number of people who can use the information in our encyclopaedia. Johnleemk | Talk 03:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Re. crossing namespaces: one of my biggest frustrations for quite a while on Wiki was using the search box to try to find something, which couldn't because (I now understand) it wasn't in the main namespace. So I would search for a guideline, policy or whatever and not get the result, which led me to the conclusion that it was a highly deficient search engine. I can't see why crossing namespaces is a problem. It's all part of the same thing at the end of the day, and might help people trying to edit to find some of the labyrinthine rules they frequently inadvertently fall foul of. Tyrenius 00:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • They aren't part of the same thing -- not from our mirrors' perspective. Johnleemk | Talk 03:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there some kind of deal with the mirrors? I thought they were just getting a free ride and of no great benefit to Wiki? Tyrenius 02:30, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. —Doug Bell talk•contrib 16:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The nominated redirect was deleted, as with another one just like it. Should have been speedied per precedent. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

  • Very strong keep - I use this abbreviation all the time when addressing administrative matters and warnings to users. I see no harm in keeping this redirect. 23skidoo 18:23, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was The nominated redirect was deleted, as with another one just like it. Should have been speedied per precedent. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Mediation cabal → WP:Mediation Cabal

Cross-name space redirect. We should keep articles in article space and Wikipedia adminstration in Wikipedia space. -- JLaTondre 01:32, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong delete, same as above -- Heptor talk 23:26, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Pending a compelling explanation of the importance of maintaining a wall between article and admin name spaces. See my questions in the 3RR section above. No point in repeating here. --Serge 23:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a crossspace redirect, and Serge I don't know about you, but Veledan's logic on 3rrseems quite sensible to me. JoshuaZ 04:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought my questions regarding Veledan's logic were pretty clear. --Serge 07:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. See above. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 08:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I don't understand why all of a sudden people think we should have cross namespace redirects. It is important that we maintain the distinction between the article namespace, and the WP namespace. Each have individual rules, benefits, and purposes. Surely we don't want anyone citing Wikipedia policy pages as encyclopedic sources for anything. --Hetar 00:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, apparently mistaken identity, or a misprint. latter page does not mention the man being known as Charles. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Charles Mason Lovering → George Mason Lovering

Redirect created as a result of moving the article to the subject's real name. -- Engineer Bob 05:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, could be confusing. Royboycrashfan 10:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted as redirect to deleted page (WP:CSD#R1). Royboycrashfan 18:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs with titles that don't appear in the lyrics → List of Songs Whose Title Doesn't Appear in the Lyrics

Broken redirect nagytibi ! ? 14:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. given reason does not seem to be accurate. It appears the redirect was created before the target article, but all's well now. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

An Encyclopedia of World History → Encyclopedia of World History

Target article has been deleted but the redirect still exists soUmyaSch 10:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had just created the redirect and was creating the main article, when you suggested deleting the redirect. While I applaud your diligence in editing, you might want to wait a little longer than four minutes before suggesting that a brand new page be deleted. —MJBurrage 11:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:28] <freakofnurxture|talk>

POV fork → Wikipedia:Content forking

Cross-namespace redirect Stifle (talk) 14:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete crossing namespace not is generally not good. JoshuaZ 04:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment as I've just found this redirect to be very useful (and the reason I've come here in due course), I have to conclude that it is good. One of my biggest frustrations for quite a while on Wiki was using the search box to try to find something, which couldn't because (I now understand) it wasn't in the main namespace. So I would search for a guideline, policy or whatever and not get the result, which led me to the conclusion that it was a highly deficient search engine. I can't see why crossing namespaces is a problem. It's all part of the same thing at the end of the day, and might help people trying to edit to find some of the labyrinthine rules they frequently inadvertently fall foul of. Tyrenius 00:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: cross namespace redirects create unecessary confusion for the many Wikipedia readers and visitors who use Wikipedia only for research. Deficiencies in the search engine or in my ability to navigate Wikipedia policies are no excuse for blurring the line between the article and WP namespace. --Hetar 00:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 26

The nominated redirect was redirected per nom. This does not require {{rfd}} nomination. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:17] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Wikipedia:CheckUser → Wikipedia:Quick and dirty Checkuser policy

Highly misleading redirect--it points to a rejected policy proposal, rather than to any information on CheckUser or CheckUser policies. If not deleted, then it should point somewhere more reasonable, like Help:CheckUser. I might note that information on CheckUser is stored only on meta. AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was moved to Mandrakes (Harry Potter), apparently plausible search term. Probably contains content which has been merged somewhere else, so let's keep it, GFDL, blah, blah, blah, etc. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:17] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Mandrakes: Harry Potter Version → Mandrake (plant)

unlikely complicated search term. Mandrake (plant) contains a section on myth/magic and a section on its use in Harry Potter Thatcher131 04:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or Move to Mandrakes (Harry Potter)--Amir E. Aharoni 13:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Move per Amir Aharoni. —Doug Bell talk•contrib 16:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was late in being speedily moved. Note that this had previously been subject to a cut and paste move in the opposite direction. The histories have been merged. For the record, "Nino" is pronounced "NEE-no", but we want "NEEN-yo". The tilde-free title has been tagged as an {{R from title without diacritics}}. We have bots to fix such typographic omissions automaticaly. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:17] <freakofnurxture|talk>

El Niño-Southern Oscillation → El Nino-Southern Oscillation

The current setup of these redirects directs a correct spelling (using an 'ñ') to an incorrect spelling. In order for the page to be moved to the correct spelling, the redirect must first be deleted. (El Niño is always spelled using the 'ñ', even in English meteorological literature.) —Cuiviénen, Thursday, 27 April 2006 @ 03:29 UTC

  • Shouldn't this be listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves instead? I support the goal, however it is achieved. Thatcher131 04:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • This isn't true. Dropping the accent is very common. Please refer to the article talk page, where the page naming was discussed, instead of jumping in like this William M. Connolley 08:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of what the main article should be named, the "other" name will obviously be kept as a redirect. This should be discussed at the article, and then if a move is needed but can't be done by ordinary editors because the target already has a history, it should be listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves for an admin to perform the move. Deleting the redirect in order to do the move is not the correct procedure, AFAIK. Thatcher131 13:40, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, my apologies, I hadn't encountered this sort of problem before. (Also, with regards to appropriateness, 9 of the first (all English and all relevant) 10 Google hits use "El Niño" rather than "El Nino".) —Cuiviénen, Thursday, 27 April 2006 @ 16:00 UTC
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — May. 3, '06 [05:47] <freakofnurxture|talk>

January 24, 2006, January 25, 2006, January 26, 2006 → January 2006

These redirects were presumably created to solve the redlinks you get when using, for example, "accessdate=January 25, 2006" instead of the required "accessdate=2006-1-25". I've fixed all these cases, and now nothing from (Main) links to any of these. LambiamTalk 19:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I have checked the incoming links to these redirects. No articles link to them except that I have just edited Bad Credit (band) because these article names do not change to British style per users' preferences.--Jusjih 13:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, moved to uppercase title Camino de Santiago. Redirect contains potentially useful edit history. — May. 3, '06 [05:44] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Camino de santiago → Way of St. James

Nominated by Damiancorrigan on April 20 with the rationale The Camino is never referred to as the Way of St. James provided, but never listed here. No vote. Royboycrashfan 17:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment — Me no understand. Should we then get a redlink Camino de santiago, giving nominator even more reason to be unhappy? Is perhaps the proposal to swap the two linkends of the redirect, that is, to move Way of St. James to Camino de santiago? If that is the case, this has been improperly listed here. LambiamTalk 17:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Perhaps he wants to revert to the status before it was changed to a redirect? If the comment is accurate, then Way of St. James should be merged into Camino de Santiago (note upper case), without leaving a redirect. But that would violate the GDFL. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 18:11, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. This seems like the best solution, but how does it violate the GDFL and can it be worked around? Mystache 16:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - lets leave everything as it is - Way of St. James is used, even if less popular than Camino de santiago--Aldux 13:32, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 27

The nominated redirect was made into a substub, get to work guys, make it as comprehensive as IRT Third Avenue Line. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:11] <freakofnurxture|talk>

IRT Second Avenue Line → Second Avenue Line

According to the naming conventions at Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City Subway, IRT Second Avenue Line refers to the elevated line, dismantled 1940 (which currently lacks an article), while the article Second Avenue Line is about the subterranean line, proposed 1929, construction to begin Real Soon Now. CComMack 23:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, no reason to delete. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:11] <freakofnurxture|talk>

D'n'D → Dungeons and Dragons

This redirect should be deleted for two reasons: D'n'D is an actual band, though non-notable (which is why the article was prodded), but if they ever become notable, an article cannot be created because of the redirect. Also, there is no logical way that someone using an accepted abbreviation for Dungeons and Dragons is going to type "DnD" with an apostrophe both after the first D and before the second, so this redirect also makes no sense. MSJapan 05:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I've seen this abbreviation(with both apostrophes) used before. If the band becomes notable we can deal with that then. JoshuaZ 05:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: If the band wants an article they can use (band). Although this spelling of the common D&D is a bit odd, I still think that the term as it pronounced refers to Dungeons and Dragons the majority of the time. --Hetar 00:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: A likely spelling for Dungeons and Dragons.--Amir E. Aharoni 12:58, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Reasoning that we want to save this article name in case the band becomes notable someday is one of the stranger reasons I've seen to delete. —Doug Bell talk•contrib 16:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If the band becomes notable you just create D'n'D (band) and make D'n'D a dab page ~ Veledan • Talk 17:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 28

The nominated redirect was speedily redirected to the real-world phenomenon of Copyright infringement (to which copyright violation, the non-abbreviated form, also points). — Apr. 29, '06 [21:51] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Copyvio → Wikipedia:Copyright problems

Another redirect from article space to the Wikipedia namespace. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:07, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. If brion's notable enough to have his own biography, start writing it. And cite verifiable sources, i.e. not his userpage. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Brion Vibber → User:Brion VIBBER

This redirect should be deleted because it is standard practice not to have redirects from article space to a user's userpage. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 07:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, patently malformed. The day we have a "Geordie:" namespace is the day I quit, that's worse than Toby, lol. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Geordie:Disambiguation → Geordie (disambiguation)

Residue from a page move. Nobody is going to look for this. The El Reyko 22:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, goes against naming convention. Not a likely search term. Royboycrashfan 00:07, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was moved to Leviathan (video game character), a plausible reference term. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Leviathan(Video game character) → Fairy Leviathan

All are the original titles of the respective articles when I first arrived at wikipedia. They are now incorrect due to new naming conventions and no longer serve thier purpose as all links have redirects that have been bypassed accordingly. ZeroTalk 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirect serves a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page) and is not confusing/misleading unless there is another character this could be confused with. We don't delete redirects because they don't comply with naming conventions or have no incoming links either. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was moved to Harpuia (video game character), a plausible reference term. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Harpuia(Video game character) → Sage Harpuia

Same as above. ZeroTalk 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirect serves a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page) and is not confusing/misleading unless there is another character this could be confused with. We don't delete redirects because they don't comply with naming conventions or have no incoming links either. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was moved to Fefnir (video game character), a plausible reference term. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Fefnir(Video game character) → Fighting Fefnir

And again. ZeroTalk 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirect serves a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page) and is not confusing/misleading unless there is another character this could be confused with. We don't delete redirects because they don't comply with naming conventions or have no incoming links either. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, plausible reference term. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Harpuia (Mega Man Zero) → Sage Harpuia

Ditto. ZeroTalk 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirect serves a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page) and is not confusing/misleading unless there is another character this could be confused with. We don't delete redirects because they don't comply with naming conventions or have no incoming links either. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, plausible reference term. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Fefnir (Mega Man Zero) → Fighting Fefnir

Ditto. ZeroTalk 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirect serves a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page) and is not confusing/misleading unless there is another character this could be confused with. We don't delete redirects because they don't comply with naming conventions or have no incoming links either. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, plausible reference term. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Leviathan (Mega Man Zero) → Fairy Leviathan

Ditto. ZeroTalk 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirect serves a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page) and is not confusing/misleading unless there is another character this could be confused with. We don't delete redirects because they don't comply with naming conventions or have no incoming links either. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, preserve edit histories, GFDL, blah, blah, etc. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Tekken: Dark Resurrection (PSP) → Tekken 5

Redundant to redirect below, and I've merged all relevant info into the Tekken 5 article where it belongs. Titles are also incorrect and misleading. Unlikely to be used. Does not link to any pages. ZeroTalk 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirect serves a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page) and is not confusing/misleading unless there is another character this could be confused with. We don't delete redirects because they don't comply with naming conventions or have no incoming links either. Redirects with content that has been merged should be kept unless there's a compelling reason not to. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Tekken PSP → Tekken 5

In relevance with above redirect. ZeroTalk 15:34, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirect serves a purpose (see the policy at the top of this page) and is not confusing/misleading unless there is another character this could be confused with. We don't delete redirects because they don't comply with naming conventions or have no incoming links either. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, as chronologically misleading. — Apr. 29, '06 [12:04] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Bank of Canada 2 → Bank of Canada (commercial)

Unlikely to be used. — Itai (talk) 12:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete- as Itai says, it's not likely to ever be used. The El Reyko 22:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Royboycrashfan 00:08, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was useless but kept anyway. — May. 3, '06 [05:49] <freakofnurxture|talk>

MACROBIOTIC → Macrobiotic diet

This was originally listed in AFD. PJM 12:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Useless--Amir E. Aharoni 12:54, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we can't have every article with a redirect in capitals.Tyrenius 13:58, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - why can't we have every article with a redirect in capitals? Someone with their caps lock key accidentally on would find this useful. The redirect is not confusing or misleading. Please refer to the policy at the top of this page -- redirects like these exist for a reason. Johnleemk | Talk 14:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Someone can be stuck with a capslock key, but the solution is not a redirect page, but a smart automatic redirect at the MediaWiki level.--Amir E. Aharoni 16:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Then file a bug report (or vote for it if it already exists). Even so, making article titles case-insensitive is a bad idea for probably obvious reasons. Furthermore, even if they were case-insensitive, this redirect would not be caught. Whatever the case, until then, this redirect is useful. Johnleemk | Talk 16:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • If you're going to cater for people with caplock keys on (well, they should know better, but anyhow), then there's no point having isolated cases - it's got to be site-wide. Isolated cases only encourage more erratic cases. Consistency is helpful in these matters. Tyrenius 02:36, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This was nominated and kept earlier this month. See Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives/April 2006#April 8. -- JLaTondre 15:48, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the last RfD. Royboycrashfan 23:09, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. No problems with having this... Redirects are cheap.
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 29

The nominated redirect was redirected to Louisville (disambiguation) and tagged accordingly. — May. 3, '06 [05:51] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Lousiville → Louisville, Kentucky

Redirect is derogatory to the city and also in my Wikipedia experience, a very uncommon misspelling. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 21:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Who's going to look for this? Royboycrashfan 23:05, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, plausible misspelling. feydey 11:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, very improbable but plausible misspelling, isn't negative, wouldn't cause any confusion... Redirects are cheap! Grandmasterka 07:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I entirely concur that redirects are cheap. However, please realize that some people in reality call Louisville "Lousiville" (reads: Lousy ville) as a derogatory statement. I thought that derogatory redirects were disallowed in the Wikipedia. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 08:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • What counts is common usage. This appears to be a plausible typo, and if Louisville is commonly referred to this, this redirect would appear to be as justifiable as Dubya is. Johnleemk | Talk 11:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • "Dubya" isn't derogatory though. It's just a way of pronouncing "W". Calling Bush "The Chimp" (which many do)--now, that's derogatory. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 14:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Read the next to last paragraph ("For example, redirecting Dubya...") in When should we delete a redirect? above. In any case, the plausible misspelling seems to outweigh any offensiveness. Google shows quite a few cases of it being ligitimately misspelled. -- JLaTondre 11:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, plausible misspelling. -- JLaTondre 11:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Plausible, but rare. This redirect is insulting to the great historical city of Louisville, Kentucky. I'm finding it interesting how people don't seem to get this. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 14:49, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • If the "Lousiville Technical Institute" (first result on Google search above) couldn't even get it right when Google last indexed them, I don't think it's that uncommon. -- JLaTondre 15:51, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Obviously, the vote isn't going the way I had hoped. Therefore, I've come up with an alternative solution. How about I change the redirect to go to Louisville (disambiguation) rather than Louisville, Kentucky. Let the derogatory misspelling be spread out to any potential use of Louisville. How about it? — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 14:55, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was redirected to Neutral point of view, a disambiguation page. It would be simple enough to run a bot to change "NPOV" to "WP:NPOV|NPOV" outside of article space, but... it's not really that important, is it? — Apr. 30, '06 [19:25] <freakofnurxture|talk>

NPOV → Wikipedia:Neutral point of view

Interwiki redirects are not supposed to be here. Either delete or replace with some other acceptable thing, like content or non-interwiki redirect Polonium 23:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, most people use the WP shortcut. Keep per below. Also, it helps make it easier to find these policy pages (like, say, Wikipedia is not). Royboycrashfan 23:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - There are a lot of incoming links, including User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles. Shiroi Hane 23:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There are approximately eight to nine thousand hyperlinks going to NPOV as shown by this link (not sure if that link works if you don't use popups). The load on the system would be drastically more to change each of those pages to WP:NPOV than to keep this redirect. A more informative soft redirect that clearly states the redirect points to another namespace may be in order.Cowman109Talk 23:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to soft redirect per above. AmiDaniel (Talk) 00:03, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or convert to soft redirect. FWIW, I found this vote when I attempted to reach the NPOV policy page. 66.167.252.202 04:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete or soft redirect per the many previous RFDs - cross namespace redirects are not a good thing. --Hetar 05:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or soft redirect. Metarhyme 19:03, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

April 30

The nominated redirect was kept, but please write a stub or something about the town to avoid the self-redirection. — May. 3, '06 [05:56] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Dubois, Indiana → Dubois County, Indiana

Article was created as a joke but then made into a redirect; however, the target article, about Dubois County, IN, lists "Dubois" itself as a town within the county, thus creating a reflexive setup. Larry V (talk) 02:55, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: There is no reason to delete this. Ideally the town should have a well-written article, (which the previous content obviously wasn't). But until then, it is quite reasonable to redirect to the county article, which refers to it, as you've stated above. — May. 1, '06 [11:00] <freakofnurxture|talk>
  • Comment: Agreed that there should be an article for it; however, the article about the county has a link to the town, which in turn redirects back to the county page! —Larry V (talk) 03:33, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Yates (1860-1936) → Richard Yates (son)

While disambiguating, I temporarily used this page. No longer necessary. John (Jwy) 00:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete per author's request. Cowman109Talk 00:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. While unlikely, it's possible someone could type this as a link. -- JLaTondre 16:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per JLaTondre. Redirects are cheap. JoshuaZ 16:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:33, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Yates (1818-1873) → Richard Yates (governor)

While disambiguating, I temporarily used this page. No longer necessary. John (Jwy) 00:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete per author's request. Cowman109Talk 00:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC) No decision... I didn't notice that this page had an edit history, while the redirect for deletion up above did not. Not quite sure what to do with this page, then. Cowman109Talk 01:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not so fast! If you check the history, the way the editing was done, this page now contains almost all of the history of the pages on two Illinois Governors names Richard Yates. An able admin needs to fix this, not delete all the history! -- DS1953 talk 01:17, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. History needs to be maintained and, while unlikely, it's possible someone could type this as a link. -- JLaTondre 16:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move. Copy the contents of Richard Yates (governor) to Richard Yates (1818-1873) (perhaps all four versions it the new history is significant); then delete Richard Yates (governor); then rename Richard Yates (1818-1873) to Richard Yates (governor). --teb728 07:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Its a plausible term for a searcher to type in, we need the history. It will be uneccessary effort to sort through all the history. JoshuaZ 16:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was already made into a great disambiguation page. — May. 3, '06 [05:54] <freakofnurxture|talk>

West High School → Salt Lake City School District

There are many West High Schools beside West High School (Salt Lake City). Most users will want the search page rather than this redirect. --teb728 07:45, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambig. Should be converted to disambig per [6]. -- JLaTondre 16:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Are you serious? Your Google link has hundreds of hits. It would make for a big disambig. -- teb728 06:10, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I get 56 but the only "West High School" I see is West High School, Sioux City. Kotepho 06:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes. Instead of Kotepho's search, I'd use [7] which reduces it to 23 after ignoring talk pages and omitted results. That's not that long of a disambig page (check Miller (disambiguation)). While the official name of many of these schools is "city name" West High School, I'd bet that most of them are simply reffered to as West High School in every day usage. I'm also willing to do the work when I get a chance in the next couple of days. -- JLaTondre 12:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done. -- JLaTondre 03:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedied. Johnleemk | Talk 12:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sucksnet → Suckage

Possible ad for http://www.sucksnet.com/; target article doesn't exist. 69.197.128.53 10:34, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedily redirected to Brzóza Królewska, as the creator most likely intended (note the diacritics). — May. 1, '06 [10:53] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Brzoza Krolewska → Brzoza Krolewska

Circular redirection, redir to same page soUmyaSch 10:43, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Redirect_Archives/April_2006&oldid=1144137758"