Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Redirect Archives/June 2006

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 1[edit]

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 11:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marvel Girl (brief profile) → Jean Grey[edit]

The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. Facto 22:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept pending AfD. If target is deleted, it is appropriate to speedy the redirect, as is common practice among AfD closers. Johnleemk | Talk 11:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Www.snitchseeker.com → SnitchSeeker[edit]

The "www." prefix on a title is useless. The redirect was made by the author of the article Neigel von Teighen 21:51, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: No harm in keeping this, it is at least possible that someone might search for this. --Hetar 00:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • SnitchSeeker is up for AFD. Redirect should follow AFD result. If article kept, redirect should be kept. -- JLaTondre 19:07, 3 June 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 11:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NAVCRUIT 1133.101 → Civil Air Patrol[edit]

This article was an attempt by a abusive user to prove a point. No useful information can be Googled on this topic aside from references to Wikipedia itself. McNeight 19:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete – per nom – Gurch 07:11, 2 June 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 DaGizza (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves) --Rory096 01:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Pedro Gastão of Orleans-Braganza → Prince Pedro Gastao of Orleans-Braganza[edit]

The article it is redirecting to does not exist. Rmpfu89 01:00, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, R1. --Rory096 01:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was removed (blanked) by Feydey. -- JLaTondre 11:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The Big Clock → Talk:The Big Clock (1948 film)[edit]

the book and the film each has its own article, so the two articles should not share the same talk page. 199.71.174.100 04:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • It was created as the result of a move. Just blank it. --Rory096 04:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just leave an edit summary like "blanking redirect to a different article's talk page" that explains the edit you're making and why, and you'll never be warned (unless the why is a bad thing)! :) --Rory096 05:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 2[edit]

The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 11:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concord spiders → Concord High School (North Carolina)[edit]

Poorly-named redirect for the name of the high school's athletics teams. It isn't linked to, and I only made the redirect since it was easy enough to merge the two articles without taking the original to AfD. fuzzy510 00:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per nom, has been merged. Need to keep the history of the merge source somewhere, and the redirect is a good place. Kusma (討論) 00:33, 3 June 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 11:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

K.C. DePass → Craig B. Hulet[edit]

Main article is up for deletion. Non-notable. Delete KleenupKrew 23:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect should follow AFD result. -- JLaTondre 14:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Craig Hulet → Craig B. Hulet[edit]

Main article is up for deletion. Non-notable. Delete KleenupKrew 23:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect should follow AFD result. -- JLaTondre 14:33, 4 June 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 11:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:Disambig, MOS:Disambiguation, MoS:DAB, MoS:Disambig, MoS:Disambiguation, Mos:DAB, Mos:DP, Mos:Dab, Mos:Dp, Mos:dab, Mos:dp → Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages)[edit]

Cross name-space redirect already covered by WP:MOSDAB. All were created on 3 February 2006 and only MoS:DAB is even used and it only has 10 links. -- JLaTondre 21:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have re-thought this based upon the comments received and decided that MOS: is little different than the WP: syntax. Therefore, I am withdrawing all but the four William Allen Simpson suggested as I don't believe those are needed either. -- JLaTondre 14:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Nomination withdrawn. I have re-thought this based upon the comments received and decided that MOS: is little different than the WP: syntax. -- JLaTondre 14:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:BIO → Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)[edit]

Cross name-space redirect already covered by WP:MOSBIO. Created 29 March 2006 and only has 10 links. -- JLaTondre 21:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep -- probably 1010 in edit summaries. --William Allen Simpson 01:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • 1010 must be an exaggeration, since the redirect was only created in March. Keeping based on use in edit summaries seems like a back door reason to keep a redirect that would otherwise be deleted. What's to keep someone from creating a bogus redirect, and then using it in edit summaries, and then using that fact as a reason to keep? Lbbzman 13:50, 3 June 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 11:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MoS:T → Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles)[edit]

Cross name-space redirect already covered by WP:MOS-T Lbbzman 14:44, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, common and much used shortcut pattern for MoS redirects. Haven't seen any possibly conflicting non-Wikipedia uses of "MoS:XY". Kusma (討論) 20:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are only two links (excluding the one to this nomination) and it was created two days ago. Perhaps you're thinking of WP:MOS-T? -- JLaTondre 21:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete cross-namespace redirect. -- JLaTondre 21:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have re-thought this based upon the comments received and decided that MOS: is little different than the WP: syntax. -- JLaTondre 14:33, 4 June 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 R. Koot. -- JLaTondre 20:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

12:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, it should be redirected to time or time interval then. It should redirect somewhere as it most certainly will be typed in the search box by some people. I think redirecting to clock is the best approach. It's not an hour, but it is the start of an hour. Hoof38 01:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • As far as I can tell, you're the first one to have ever typed it in. I suppose you're some people, but the opinions of some (other) people are not reasonable. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as well as all below; can't think of an obviously useful target for this one (noon doesn't work since some people still use the 12-hour clock). A disambiguation page between noon and midnight was deleted before. Kusma (討論) 02:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

4:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

5:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

6:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

7:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

8:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

9:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

10:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

11:00 → hour[edit]

It's just wrong -- could be a time, could be a time interval, could not be an hour — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(If there were instructions for doing a group RfD, I'd use them.)

WP:IAR and make your own instructions for this. Oh, and delete. Kusma (討論) 02:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 3[edit]

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 16:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured articles, Featured Articles, Featured Article, Featured article → Wikipedia:Featured articles[edit]

Needless cross-namespace redirects. Rory096 04:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 06:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Ordinary users who look for featured articles won't be looking for the meta page about them. mgekelly 12:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom & Mgekelly. -- JLaTondre 14:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as potentially confounding cross-namespace redirects. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 22:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Cross-namespace redirect. DarthVader 06:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Orphan (by piping), then delete. Featured articles occur also elsewhere. Kusma (討論) 23:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Featured articles orphaned, 3 to go. --Rory096 04:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Featured Articles and Featured Article done. --Rory096 16:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I (an "average user") was using the term "featured article" to find "Wikipedia:featured articles." I think its necessary. Another alternative would be to create a disambiguous page listing all the different types of featured articles. Royalbroil 15:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please refer to WP:ASR. Johnleemk | Talk 16:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is one of the things a Search in Wikipedia space should take care of. Also, there is a prominent link to WP:FA in the navigation bar. Should be enough. Kusma (討論) 23:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Kusma. The link in the navigation bar should be enough. (Oh, and a search for featured article does not really do anything for me. It just gives me an error... strange. ) Cowman109Talk 21:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's on the fricking front page! (featured article page thingie, that is) 68.3.18.67
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 16:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Changes → Help:Recent changes, Recent changes → Help:Recent changes[edit]

Needless cross-namespace redirects. This isn't even a term that can only be used on Wiki[mp]edia! Rory096 04:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 06:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 14:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as potentially confounding cross-namespace redirects. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 22:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Cross-namespace redirect. DarthVader 06:23, 5 June 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 16:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MTUT → Purgatory[edit]

Redirect is nonsensical; given the nature of the target subject, probably an in-joke of some sort. From a cursory Google search, it would seem that "MTUT" is mentioned nowhere else on Wikipedia and only as non-purgatory-related acronyms and handles elsewhere on the web. The submitter has only made a few other edits, none of which relate to or explain the acronym. 80.202.100.70 21:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Seems like nonsense; not a logical redirect. DarthVader 06:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and above. - Kukini 03:58, 6 June 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 16:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of all single-letter-single-digit combinations → Wikipedia:List of all single-letter-single-digit combinations[edit]

The list was recently moved out of the main article space, making this a cross-namespace redirect that is not subject to being hit by searches and has only a very few incoming article links and a very thin history. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:58, 3 June 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 a repost. Royboycrashfan 04:45, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SVEK → Swedish-Cuban Association[edit]

Previous RfD, readded Soman 14:28, 3 June 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 KimvdLinde. -- JLaTondre 22:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bubu → Wikipedia:Blocked users with bizzare usernames[edit]

Cross name-space redirect already covered by WP:BUBU Lbbzman 14:11, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, possibly confusing and not useful enough to justify cross-space redirecting. Kusma (討論) 01:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Kusma. — TKD::Talk 02:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. -- Kukini 13:08, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom & Kusma. -- JLaTondre 14:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Cross-namespace redirect. DarthVader 06:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Confusing redirect and cross-namespace. Cowman109Talk 22:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — Jun. 3, '06 [10:38] <freak|talk>

Pokémon comparative notability test → Wikipedia:Importance[edit]

unnecessary and confusing cross-namespace redirect Francis Schonken 10:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pokemon comparative notability test → Wikipedia:Importance[edit]

unnecessary and confusing cross-namespace redirect Francis Schonken 10:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon test → Wikipedia:Importance[edit]

unnecessary and confusing cross-namespace redirect Francis Schonken 10:34, 3 June 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 16:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clevan Thomas → San Jose SaberCats[edit]

Name of redirect is the name of a notable player for the team. Every other player without an article stays as a standalone redlink, and this should be no different. fuzzy510 07:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, per nom. - Kukini 03:59, 6 June 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 16:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bush Knew → 9/11 conspiracy theories[edit]

This is bound to offend some people and certainly seems non-objective and POV. – Zawersh 09:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete it for the reasons cited, plus non-notable neologism. Morton devonshire 21:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete ... a neologism that is speculative, the implied fact not verifiable to WP inclusion standards. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. POV redirect. Grandmasterka 20:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. DarthVader 06:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete highly POV. --zero faults |sockpuppets| 00:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Blatant POV. -- Avi 20:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 4[edit]

The nominated redirect was deleted as unneeded redirect under speedy criteria R3: implausible typo. ++Lar: t/c 13:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Piesoelectic → Piesoelectric[edit]

I just created it myself by mistake. Delete please. Sorry about that. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:11, 4 June 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 with dablink by Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 14:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Crowley → R. T. Crowley[edit]

Redirects to R. T. Crowley page, which is irrelevant to the context which Bob Crowley links come from. Bob Crowley is a Broadway Costume Designer, R. T. Crowley a technology innovator. E Man Speaks 06:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: If R.T. Crowley's first name is "Robert" then, presumably some people may refer to him as "Bob". If that is true, this should probably be kept until such time as the costume designer article can be written over top of the redirect, in which case we would want a dablink at the top of the page, saying something like For the [other guy], see R. T. Crowley. — Jun. 4, '06 [08:30] <freak|talk>
  • Keep per Freakofnurture. Kukini 13:05, 4 June 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 broken redirect. — sjorford++ 12:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kruszewnia → http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruszewnia_%28wojew%C3%B3dztwo_wielkopolskie%29[edit]

The article's content consists only of a redirect to the Polish Wikipedia article about the topic. MeredithParmer 07:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cross-project redirects haven't worked for some time, so I've speedied this (although it might help to have a specific CSD criterion for this). — sjorford++ 12:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept by default due to no consensus. Johnleemk | Talk 12:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VoteFair ranking → Kemeny-Young method[edit]

The term "VoteFair ranking" for the Kemeny-Young method is needlessly POV. Wikipedia's aim is to describe alternative election methods and not to promote them. Furthermore, the term "VoteFair ranking" is used only by User:VoteFair. This term is used for the Kemeny-Young method nowhere else. Markus Schulze 08:32, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Comparing [1] with [2] suggests that it is a reasonable redirect. --Henrygb 01:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are about 1000 Google hits for "VoteFair" and about 300 Google hits for "Kemeny Young". But when we look more closely at these hits, then we see that the Google hits for "VoteFair" are mainly only posts to Internet forums written only by a single person. However, there is not a single scientific paper or scientific website that uses the term "VoteFair". On the other side, the Google hits for "Kemeny Young" contain a large number of scientific papers and scientific websites. Markus Schulze 09:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am the person who created the VoteFair ranking page. I am requesting that the VoteFair ranking page be retained as a redirect page. It should redirect to Kemeny-Young method.

As noted above, a Google search returns 1000 matches for VoteFair ranking. I have been using the term "VoteFair ranking" for about a decade, and it is used in many places, including my recently published book titled "Ending The Hidden Unfairness In U.S. Elections", and my website at VoteFair.org (which is visited by thousands of unique/different American Idol fans).

Here are the Wikipedia guidelines that support my request:

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

3. They aid searches on certain terms.

5. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful — this is not because the other person is a liar, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways.

In case it is relevant regarding deletion, the Kemeny-Young method discussion page now explains why I created the new VoteFair ranking page.

VoteFair 07:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Kept. --Rory096 02:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pablo kleinman → Pablo Kleinman[edit]

Original capitalization mistake redirects to correct name. Einzelhaft 07:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 5[edit]

The nominated redirect was speedily deleted as WP:CSD#R3: redirect from an implausible typo. AmiDaniel (talk) 08:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ Varya Akulova → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Varya Akulova[edit]

Completely useless. Created because of a page move. Basically should be speedied except that I don't think it meets any criteria. DarthVader 08:26, 5 June 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. -- JLaTondre 19:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of minors → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not[edit]

Needless cross-namespace redirect, now orphaned. Rory096 22:59, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Unlikely search term as well. Thanks for orphaning. Cowman109Talk 22:14, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 6[edit]

The nominated redirect was Not a nomination. Further discussion belongs on talk page. -- JLaTondre 13:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey - articles for deletion[edit]

  • AfD and VfD were deleted and then replaced with a redirect to AFD and VFD, whereas before they were directed to WP:AFD, concerning the Manual of Style keeps that have occured here, should not these also be directed to Articles for Deletion ? 132.205.44.134 23:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, the MOS: is a specific syntax. These fall into the same category as AN/I (see nomination below) and other Wikipedia acronyms (see the RFD archives) where the result has been to do exactly what was done with these redirects (send to a disambig page with a dablink to the Wikipedia: page). Also, this belongs on the talk page as it's not a nomination. -- JLaTondre 13:19, 7 June 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 R. Koot. -- JLaTondre 13:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exploding Array Function → array[edit]

Implausible combination of words; not mentioned in target article. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 22:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I cannot find any information concerning this topic, not to mention the capitalization would make it a spelling redirect as well which is also overly unnecessary. I will likely change my opinion to keep if logical reasoning for this redirect is provided. Cowman109Talk 22:19, 6 June 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 15:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guidelines for the spelling of names of Polish rulers → List of Polish monarchs[edit]

Creates the confusing impression that a main namespace article is a spelling or naming conventions "guideline" in the project namespace sense. Changing this to an undesirable cross-namespace redirect would even be less of a solution. See also wikipedia:naming conventions (Polish rulers). Francis Schonken 14:21, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Francis. Seems misleading in my opinion, suggesting a guideline when it is a Wiki article. Cowman109Talk 21:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Zoz (t) 19:19, 14 June 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 15:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

September 31 → September[edit]

No such date exists. 64.192.106.146 13:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A better target would be September 30. Case could also be made for October 1.--Mathew5000 16:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I don't understand why a date that doesn't exist should have an article (or redirect). This may be a confusing redirect as it may lead people to believe that such a date exists in September if it were to somehow be entered as a search term. Cowman109Talk 22:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC) Changed my vote to keep per Ceyockey. Cowman109Talk 21:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP does no harm, and for those less fortunate who do not know 30 days hath September, April, June and November... This could enlighten them. 132.205.44.134 23:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Consider it something like a misspelling, in this case being a misconception of the number of days in the month. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as disambig. NTDOY Fanboy 01:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/Abstain could create an article that states "30 days hath September"! giggle Royalbroil 15:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, and note we also have redirects for February 31, April 31, June 31 and November 31 (there's also February 30, but that's an article). Actually, there are quite a few incoming links to all of these which are presumably typos or miscalculations. — sjorford++ 20:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As is - Instantly set user straight, and allows them to choose what they really meant with one click on the calendar.Juneappal 21:13, 13 June 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 15:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andy mccray & Andy McCray → Football[edit]

Two probable vanity redirects. Individual not discussed at target. -- JLaTondre 22:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete both per JLaTondre. — TKD::Talk 04:30, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both per nom. --Zoz (t) 13:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 7[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted -- Drini 00:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:O RLY? → Template:Fact[edit]

Bad joke, redundant. Consensus at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 June 7 was that it's unencyclopedic. --KJ 17:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, harmless. Redirects are cheap. It's not redundant to anything; it's a redirect! There was no consensus at the TfD (which was closed as speedy keep) --Rory096 17:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure what counts as consensus, but do you really want people to add {{O RLY?}} to articles? Most of the people who responed there were against keeping this redirect. --KJ 17:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Besides, it's very easy to mistake the O RLY template (edit: when included in article space as is, that is, --KJ 17:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)) as vandalism. --KJ 17:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep - I'm not sure why Kjoonlee is so vehemently opposed to this redirect. The "encyclopedic" criterion shouldn't necessarily apply to meta-content. Personally, I like the imagery of a horned owl looking down at me critically in warning to verify my facts. ~ Booya Bazooka 18:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Silly, useless redirect which will more likely confuse people looking at the wiki source than it will help anybody. --Fastfission 19:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Fastfission. Most{{O RLY?}} people will be confused by its appearance in wikicode. Kusma (討論) 20:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Fastfission. We are ostensibly editing an encyclopedia, not engaging in sophmoric humor. Redirects are cheap when they don't cheapen the ecnyclopedia itself. -- Avi 20:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per Fastfission. This redirect is both useless and potentially problematic. —David Levy 20:31, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep - harmless, and possibly used in enough articles by now that removing may cause more harm than alleged good. - Ugliness Man 20:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. FWIW, this template is used in about ten articles at the moment. Isopropyl 20:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • All the more reason to nip it in the bud now. -- Avi 20:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • And of course, it would be orphaned prior to the deletion. —David Levy 20:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Totally harmless-- Redirects can only very rarely do harm, and this one certainly does not. Redirects are cheap. There is no valid reason to delete this template.--Sean Black 22:54, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Totally Delete NO WAI! YA RLY. -- Drini 22:59, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Fastfission. Redirects are cheap but this one is potentially confusing and harmful. --Zoz (t) 23:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Drini said it best. — Nathan (talk) 05:04, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I was amused to see that it exists, but it would have confused the heck out of me if I'd run into it in an article. – Zawersh 05:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; could confuse those who haven't heard of the meme. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 11:30, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, no need to confuse people. feydey 12:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Harmless. People who actually suffer from any confusion probably should be kept away from Wikipedia before they start polluting the site with their mental (in)abilities. --Bobak 19:12, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete. When our critics blast us for using a sophomoric meme to identify failures in the encyclopedia, you'll see that this template is anything but harmless. Titoxd(?!?) 03:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Mildly amusing, but could appear to be over-the-top. — TKD::Talk 04:27, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep! good stuff. --Awiseman 17:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Titoxd's incredibly persuasive argument. --Cyde↔Weys 18:11, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Non-intuitive, unprofessional, and will just cause confusion. --Elonka 18:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: confusing and unecessary. --Hetar 18:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep: It's longer and less intuitive in meaning than {{fact}}, but I can also appreciate the humor in it (and yes, the vote of keep is correct). Further, I disagree that it can be mistaken as vandalism due to the fact that it is surrounded by {{ }} and therefore easily identified as a template tag. Lastly, as a redirect it is indistinguishable from {{fact}} unless editing the article, so I'm personally not too concerned about it reflecting poorly on Wikipedia's professionalism. --HunterZ 20:14, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Templates are subject to vandalism too. They're not immune, and *I did* perceive it as vandalism when I first saw it at Octopus. And as a matter of fact, some BSD people have criticised Linux (I'm not sure if it was the kernel or user-space) just because there was a comment in the source that said: "Should this be here?" --KJ 02:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No purpose, appears to have at least a small possibility of breaking some things, so why keep it? -- SCZenz 20:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete as per nominator. Polonium 23:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the childishness. violet/riga (t) 09:58, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • NO WAI, delete!!!1111 (So much of O RLY...) ;) - Mailer Diablo 16:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. For those that don't underestand this meme, having this on a page can be very confusing.--SomeStranger(t|c) 15:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete per Fastfission and Kusma. Also, it can easily be mistyped as {{O RLY}}. Invitatious 23:48, 11 June 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 Freakofnurture (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves) --Rory096 20:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Stubs cabal → Category:WikiProject Stub sorting participants[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect, made to make fun of stub sorting participants. Not in general use. Nomination for speedy delete got turned down, so listing here. --KJ 16:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Unnecessary. -- Avi 21:03, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unfounded derogatory reference. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 21:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unnecessary Adambiswanger1 03:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I find the word "cabal" extremely unprofessional and personally offensive, and wish we could just get rid of it everywhere that it's being used in an "official" capacity on Wikipedia. --Elonka 18:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was destroyed. — Jun. 18, '06 [14:50] <freak|talk>

War for the thorne(Disney) → The Lion King[edit]

A typo'd nonsense article was moved from this page, then the redirect redirected. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 17:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Who would search for this? Adambiswanger1 03:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete A google search shows nothing but... cold war references. Doesn't appear to have anything to do with the Lion King. Cowman109Talk 21:46, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 18:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested moves → Wikipedia:Requested moves[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Linked only from talk pages. --Zoz (t) 23:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. --Hetar 00:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. feydey 12:12, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • So? Keep it. AjaxSmack 19:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is a reason that Wikipedia pages start with "Wikipeda:" - it is important to clearly distinguish between encyclopedic content and user manuals. Redirects that cross this space cause confusion and are unprofessional. --Hetar 18:23, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's a redirect so there's no content cross. And Wikipedia is unprofessional; as far as I know, no one receives monetary compensation for contribution so it's inherently not professional. Requested moves has no encyclopedic usage and is good shorthand for those who do not bookmark or commit user manual page names to memory. AjaxSmack 18:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • It is in articlespace, redirecting to a non-articlespace page. Wikipedia may not pay contributors, but it is still an encyclopaedia. WP:RM is way easier to type anyway. --Rory096 01:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete has many potential meanings, only one of which is this cross-namespace redirect; delete as a source of confusion. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 22:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Ceyockey. — TKD::Talk 04:30, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete per above. --Rory096 01:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Orphaned. --Rory096 03:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 14:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was no consensus - default to keep. Kimchi.sg 12:25, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mixed expressway → RIRO expressway[edit]

This term is not in common use, and there is no obvious target for it. --SPUI (T - C) 16:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, as it is not threatening any other articles, and it may be a localized expression outside of our knowledge Adambiswanger1 03:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I can tell you that it's not such a "localized expression". If this "vote" is somehow interpreted as keep and this is kept, redirect it to expressway. --SPUI (T - C) 20:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was delete. Kimchi.sg 16:19, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Textpert & Textperts → 82ASK[edit]

Neologism, seems to be used solely for advertising by Re5ult, aka 82ASK. ArglebargleIV 04:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept and corrected to point to Rob Zicari. Kimchi.sg 18:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extreme Video → Extreme Video[edit]

Redirects to itself (loop) WillMak050389 11:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Change target to Rob Zicari. Per Extreme Video history, AxelBoldt did a merge, but looks like he put in the wrong target for the redirect. Per his user contributions page, the edit summaries show AxelBoldt merged to Rob Zicari so it should redirect there. -- JLaTondre 13:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Kimchi.sg 18:04, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kady Goldlist → ONE Family Fund[edit]

A bit of a mess. The creation of the redirect was a result of an AFD, but in hindsight there seems no benefit (indeed, no rhyme or reason) to the redirect since Ms Goldlist is not mentioned in the article (and seems not notable enough to be added). The redirect has already been blanked once by another contributor (I found it as an empty page). Arguably the AFD's "merge" consensus has been satisfied, because one of the external links on the ONE Family Fund article has a reference to Kady Goldlist as a donor. RobertG ♬ talk 15:41, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ehhh...Keep...weakly, if people are searching for "Kady Goldlist," they're probably looking for OFF, so I'm weakily saying keep. Yanksox 05:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete, her name brings up a whopping 35 google hits. I can't imagine that any significant number of people would be searchign for her- pm_shef 22:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Kimchi.sg 18:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Kitchen → Rothesay Netherwood School[edit]

Was previously up for deletion as non-notable. It was changed to a redirect instead of deletion. Paul Kitchen is the current head of the school. Up until today, there was link from the school article to the Paul Kitchen article (which of course redirected back to the school article). Usgnus 19:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and just don't link to it. Anyone who searches for Paul Kitchen might benefit from the school's article, so it's good. It also helps prevent recreation of that article. --Rory096 20:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 8[edit]

The nominated redirect was speedied. Johnleemk | Talk 15:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kypchakcha → New Kypchak language[edit]

Target article deleted. Amir E. Aharoni 09:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Kypchak Language → New Kypchak language[edit]

Target article deleted. Amir E. Aharoni 09:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kipchakia → Kypchakia[edit]

Target article deleted. --Amir E. Aharoni 09:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was keep. Kimchi.sg 16:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Software Devlopment Process → Software Development Process[edit]

worthless typo MaxEnt 04:50, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. No chance of being confused with anything else, does not meet any criteria for deletion. Tag with {{R from misspelling}}. Johnleemk | Talk 11:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Typos are are one of the main purposes of redirects. Ydam 11:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Johnleemk and Ydam. — TKD::Talk 00:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, per above. PJM 05:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. --Arnzy (whats up?) 13:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirects were deleted. Kimchi.sg 18:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:X-Men:_The_Last_Stand/Archive2 → Talk:X-Men:_The_Last_Stand/Archive 2[edit]

unneeded redirect --Facto 02:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per my comments below (isn't it usually above? Ah well). Cowman109Talk 22:23, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:X-Men:_The_Last_Stand/Archive1 → Talk:X-Men:_The_Last_Stand/Archive 1[edit]

unneeded redirect --Facto 02:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: For both of these I have to say that the page titles look similar enough to me that entering the redirect into the search engine could be a forseeable problem. Deathawk 23:56, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
they are useless redirects to talk page archives. The original archives were improperly named Archive1 and Archive2 (without the spaces) so I had to move them to Archive 1 and Archive 2. --Facto 00:02, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This would not be a search term. It would likely only be accessible by links. Therefore, an unneeded redirect. Cowman109Talk 22:22, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was keep. Kimchi.sg 16:24, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kepone toxin → Kepone[edit]

Kepone is poison, but is not a toxin (see the toxin article why, kepone is synthetic. Unlikely search target. No links. No useful history (only pagemove redirect, fix and rfd. Polonium 23:40, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep there are a handful of "Kepone toxin" finds on Google...not hurting anything, plausible —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Adambiswanger1 (talk • contribs) .
  • Keep. If someone made this mistake before, someone will make it again. This redirect prevents the creation of redundant and inaccurate articles. Johnleemk | Talk 11:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No. Kepone is not a toxin. This redirect is activly harmful, because it claims that kepone is a toxin. The redirect should be deleted and the page protected to prevent recreation. Polonium 23:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the toxin article says people use the word to describe all poisons, whether they be organic or synthetic. If some people think that should be discouraged, I think the redirect (which deletes an occurrence of "toxin") actually helps in this case. --KJ 02:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So we should delete Dubya to discourage references to Bush as Dubya? Terminological errors like these are the reason we have redirects. Saying this title endorses the categorisation of Kepone as a toxin is like saying the existence of Dubya endorses calling Bush by that nickname or that the existence of misspelling redirects endorse the misspelling of certain names. Johnleemk | Talk 10:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I've studied both medicine and law and there is no difference between 'poison' and 'toxin' in practise in either profession. - Richardcavell 04:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 9[edit]

The nominated redirect was redirected to boldness. — Jun. 12, '06 [15:08] <freak|talk>

Be bold → Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages[edit]

Article to project (interwiki) redirect. Polonium 23:24, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - No harm in having this redirect. I frequently find myself wondering the exact WP: link to a WP page, and redirects are useful. EuroSong talk 23:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's why we have the WP: pseudo-namespace. WP:Be bold would be fine, but this is in articlespace. --Rory096 07:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Change target to boldness while cross-namespace redirects are generally deleted, this one a) Has 1000-1500 wikilinks, likely meaning more serverload to change each of these than to keep the redirect, b) It is definitely useful, a very common term. I mean, it says 'Be Bold' at the top of this page. See the precedents for cross-namespace redirects that were kept. There is no set in stone policy that declares all cross-namespace redirects should be deleted. Specifically, one exception to the list of reasons to delete a redirect is if it is deemed useful. While there are many arguments that cross-namespace redirects are harmful, there have clearly been precedents and this may just as well be a similar case. Cowman109Talk 23:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The redirect is a self-reference and that is not good. This is an encyclopaedia, and we shouldn't be talking about the encyclopaedia in the space that is part of the encyclopaedia. --Rory096 07:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • The boldness link did not occur to me. Because it dablinks to Wikipedia:Be bold, as JLaTondre stated, it will still ultimately have the same effect for those wanting it. Cowman109Talk 16:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Normally the procedure is to include a disambig header on the article that would normally show up for the term, but I can't imagine the term "Be Bold" being the title of any legitimate article. Deathawk 23:54, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to boldness, to avoid a self reference. --Rory096 04:11, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which I already did, but was reverted... --Rory096 04:12, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Boldy keep, per Cowman109. PJM 05:14, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'm fairly new and was looking for the target article, and searched for "Be Bold", and there it was. I'm marking this "Comment", not "Keep", since I don't think I fully understand Rory096's comment above about articlespace. Would my search have found a WP:Be bold article? Change target per Rory096. Mike Christie 10:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to boldness which already has a dablink to Wikipedia:Be bold. This term is not limited to Wikipedia (it's a common phrase in self-help publications, it's the name of blog, etc, etc.) and Wikipedia shouldn't be claiming sole use of it. This is not the same as Wikipedia specific terms which are cross namespace redirects. -- JLaTondre 13:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's a redirect so there's no content cross. Be bold has no encyclopedic usage and is good shorthand for those who do not bookmark or commit user manual page names to memory. AjaxSmack 18:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target → Boldness in agreement with others above. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Kimchi.sg 16:29, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Acucullophallia → Circumcision[edit]

Made-up term does not exist in any dictionary, save dubious 'web dictionaries' Jakew 13:39, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • After looking at websites I never want to see again, it's a slang term meaning sexual arousal by circumcison. :\ It probably should be deleted'. And if notable, gain a page. Yanksox 05:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above - not a sensible redirect. PJM 05:11, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Lose the extra weight, it's not needed... Shenme 19:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per User:Dabljuh/teusp and discussion at Talk:Circumcision. — Scm83x hook 'em 20:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The word appears in at least one well-known printed book (cited at circumcision, unless Jakew has recently culled it). Also, note that above there seems to have been some confusion between acucullophallia (the redirect page) and acucullophilia, a different word which means "sexual arousal by circumcision." Acucullophallia means "the state of being circumcised", so the redirect is quite sensible. Further, the redirect seems to be needed, as it was created as a requested article. LWizard @ 07:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep Both web and print citations show that the word exists and is a synonym for "circumcised". The hostility towards this term stems from confusion with "acucullophilia", which refers to a fetish for circumcised men. This confusion has been cleared up on the circumcision page, which now briefly mentions both terms in the lead. Of course, this mention is further reason to keep the redirect. Al 14:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Actually, the 'hostility' stems from no such thing - there's no indication that there is or was any confusion between the two. The objection to the term is as stated - that no definition can be found in any credible dictionary (the term is mentioned in passing in one book, but is not defined). So we are left with the situation that we have no reliable source telling us what it means - hence it should not be included. Jakew 15:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Unfortunately, this is simply false. We know exactly what it means and there is no doubt whatsoever on this issue. Worse, you know it's false, so this appears to be intentional deception. Al 16:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • If there is no doubt as to what it means, then why are you unable to cite a WP:RS giving a definition? Why do you insist instead upon citing a 'source' to support the claimed definition that does not even define the term? Jakew 16:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I listed three on the talk page. Your response, of course, is to deny that they're WP:RS and then to ignore the etymology on top of that. This is not an honest response. Al 18:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • I agree - I did indeed state that they were not reliable sources. Furthermore, the theory of the etymology is original research (partly my own), and cannot therefore be included. Finally, please review WP:CIVIL and WP:FAITH. Accusing me of dishonesty is unacceptable behaviour, whether you agree with my views or not. Jakew 18:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Whatever. There is clearly no consensus for deletion, so I'm not going to debate this further. Al 23:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 10[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted by Enochlau. -- JLaTondre 12:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Wall of Shame" → Wall of shame[edit]

don't use quotes for emphasis, per wikipedia:naming conventions#Avoid non alpha-numeric characters used only for emphasis Francis Schonken 15:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, R3. --Rory096 01:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment apologies, I don't usually deal with these, however, I think the quotes were not a result of using characters for emphasis, but rather using them as modifiers for a specific search (i.e. the person was searching for the specific phrase, rather than the included words in any order). This is a result of the search tool on here being somewhat lame. I think this is a larger problem, including in terms of redirects. Mak (talk) 04:11, 11 June 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 16:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dek 10 → Dek 9[edit]

Someone tried to make a humorous countdown where Dek 2 redirected to Flatulence. I think he wanted to make a continuous redirect but it doesn't work. He originally redirected Farting to Dek 10 but I changed the redirect to Flatulence. Anyway, this is a silly idea and all redirects should be deleted. SCHZMO ✍ 11:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dek 9 → Dek 8[edit]

Same reason as above. SCHZMO ✍ 11:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dek 8 → Dek 6[edit]

Same reason as above. SCHZMO ✍ 11:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dek 6 → Dek 5[edit]

Same reason as above. SCHZMO ✍ 11:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dek 5 → Dek 4[edit]

Same reason as above. SCHZMO ✍ 11:56 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Dek 4 → Dek 3[edit]

Same reason as above. SCHZMO ✍ 11:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dek 3 → Dek 2[edit]

Same reason as above. SCHZMO ✍ 11:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dek 2 → Flatulence[edit]

Same reason as above. SCHZMO ✍ 11:56, 10 June 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 --cesarb 21:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Three-revert rule/Archive01 → Wikipedia talk:Three-revert rule/Archive 1[edit]

unneeded, housekeeping --Facto 04:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, G6. In the future, though, please don't move archives for no reason. There is no standard naming, and it really doesn't matter. --Rory096 04:51, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well the {{archive-nav}} template only works with archives with a single space between "Archive" and the "#" ex: "Archive 1" not "Archive1" or "Archive01"--Facto 05:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted twice over and salted --Cyde↔Weys 04:31, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BJAODN → Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect; a self reference. Also nominating Bjaodn. Invitatious 17:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Many pages currently link here, and the only reason anyone would type "BJAODN", as far as I can think of, is to get to Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. As such, I wouldn't consider this self-reference. IMO, it would only be self-reference if the search term were something in real life, such as if Sandbox redirected to Wikipedia:Sandbox (which it doesn't). Timrem 18:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC) Delete - I thought I had read WP:ASR thouroughly, but I must have missed that redirects from articlespace to Wikipedia namespace are considered self-reference. Timrem 22:24, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's in articlespace, making it a self-reference. --Rory096 00:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I see that now, after reading WP:ASR again, and have changed my vote. I would suggest that whatever bot replaces all the links, if this discussion decides to delete, replace it with [[WP:BJ|BJAODN]] so the text in which it is found remains unchanged. Another thought just occurred to me though. I don't know much about how bots work, but how would it treat something pipe linked when doing replacements? Would it replace [[BJAODN|some certain text here]] with just [[WP:BJ]], or would it insert [[WP:BJ|some certain text here]], and would that complicate my suggestion to replace BJAODN with [[WP:BJ|BJAODN]]? Timrem 18:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • It bypasses simple links like [[BJAODN]] TO [[Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense|BJAODN]] and piped links from [[BJAODN|blahblahblah]] to [[Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense|blahblahblah]]. It has no effects you can see outside of the edit box. --Rory096 03:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I dislike cross-namespace redirects, but there would appear to be very little possibility for confusion being foisted on the user in this case. However, the argument (paraphrased) 'keep because lots of pages link here' isn't a valid one, in my opinion. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 19:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Between 250 and 500 pages link to this page. The reasoning behind 'keep because lots of pages link here' is because that depending on circumstances, it may take much more system load to orphan a redirect with many links than to simply keep the redirect. Cowman109Talk 19:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have a bot to orphan redirects, I'll be glad to do this. System load doesn't have anything to do with it and is a moot point (300 edits in about 2 hours out of tens of thousands of hits per second doesn't have any effect), it's a self-reference. --Rory096 00:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongest possible delete ever of both. Needless self-reference, see WP:ASR. --Rory096 00:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Rory. — TKD::Talk 04:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Rory —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Makemi (talk • contribs) .
  • Is BJAODN notable? If so, write an article, have it reference WP:BJAODN in the usual fashion for articles wherein Wikipedia is the subject. Otherwise, replace the automatic redirect with a short stub/dab page which provides a link the user can click, but which informs them that they are leaving the encyclopedia. (Oh, and fix up all links to BJAODN to WP:BJAODN, making sure that it is obvious one is leaving article space, should a link to BJAODN be found there. --EngineerScotty 05:17, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I like to check BJAODN regularly (as a lot of the stuff on there is really funny), and i don't want to have to type the whole name into the bar every time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.23.169.138 (talk • contribs) 18:27, 11 Jun 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Try WP:BJ. That's even shorter. Invitatious 19:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The WP shortcut is much simpler, and there are not too many links here that would cause unneeded server load. Cowman109Talk 22:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I don't see anyone arriving at the page without the aim of being directed to Bad Jokes, so I don't see it as really being self-referential. Nobody who wishes to see an encyclopedia page will get here. On the other hand, a lot of people who can't remember the full name of what they're looking for will be lost. But maybe all this falls by the wayside next to the server load. Skittle 23:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep No compelling reason to remove this popular redirect. --71.36.251.182 17:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not including the reasons given above, you mean, right? --Rory096 05:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: its a useless cross-namespace redirect. At the very most this could could changed to a soft redirect, but I really don't see the need, WP:BJ is much simpler. --Hetar 18:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 13:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep because WP:BJAODN is stupid. Hundreds of links to BJAODN would have to be changed. Also, linking to BJAODN sound much better than WP:BJAODN. Think of it, when talking to someone in real life, would you say "Wikipedia Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense"? No! BJAODN is needed!
File:User-Flameviper12.PNG ~ Flame-viper 12 14:55, 13.06.06
    • You don't need to use WP:BJAODN, all that is needed is WP:BJ, which is even shorter than BJAODN. As other users are saying, changing all the links can be done by a bot fairly quickly. Also, you can always pipe link it so BJOADN is still displayed in the text. Timrem 18:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Used too much --Henrygb 17:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That argument makes no sense. It'll take a bot less than an hour to cleanup the incoming links. Rory's already been dealing with cross-namespace redirects (some with thousands of incoming links) for weeks now. --Cyde↔Weys 17:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cross-namespace redirect, need I say more? Needs to be deleted. --Cyde↔Weys 17:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It is the best known redirect to Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. Josen 17:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay, let me be very clear here. Unless someone can give me an actual reason why our policy against cross-namespace redirects should be ignored in this instance, I'm going to go ahead and delete it. Just because a redirect is "well known" does not make it any less of a violation. --Cyde↔Weys 17:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, WP:ASR. Those advocating violating policy, please refer to Cyde's post directly above me. Johnleemk | Talk 17:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Orphan and delete, not important enough for cross-space redirecting. However, could you point me to the policy it violates? It can't be WP:ASR, which is a style guide, not a policy, and explicitly does not say that cross-space redirects have to be deleted. Kusma (討論) 19:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Don't use cross-namespace redirects. A bot can easily make any subsequently necessary changes. — Rebelguys2 talk 19:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I just used this redirect and would have been hopelessly lost without it. Irongargoyle 02:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Just type a "WP:" before it, or use one of the other tons of shortcuts to BJAODN. --Rory096 02:57, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per preceding reasons. - DNewhall 05:22, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I found this place coz I just used the search box with 'BJAODN' and got the redirect (which would normally get me to the right page). If this would work without the redirect - I have no problem with deleting it. novacatz 09:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't WP:BJ easier? --Zoz (t) 13:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A search for BJAODN has WP:BJAODN in the results, so it would still be easy to get to (if you didn't want to use another shortcut). --Rory096 03:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ideally, I don't need to edit the address bar (i.e. use WP:BJ) to go places -- I would like to use search. and the default button is 'go' which gets the redirect currently. Maybe this is just my own habit novacatz 03:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The address bar?? Shortcuts like WP:BJ work in the same way as this does, in the search bar. --Rory096 21:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Cross-namespace redirects should die! —Keenan Pepper 23:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep less typing, more editing. Not a problem. --Grandmaster Flash the Rediculous Oaf of Imaginary Speculumation 04:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • ADDING FOLLOWING TO NOMINATION: BJADON, BjAoDn (CamelCase), BAD NONSENSE AND OTHER DELETED JOKES, BadJokesAndOtherDeletedNonsense (CamelCase also). Invitatious 13:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - cross-namespace redirects have no place in the main encyclopedia. Thue | talk 18:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Deleting this redirect could break some edit summaries that use it, and I think that old edit summaries cannot be changed by a bot. For example, someone may state that he or she moved some funny vandalism to BJAODN and put BJAODN in square brackets. Jesse Viviano 21:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • True, but it will be clear where he moved it, and if it's not, somebody could just search for "BJAODN" and the BJAODN is on the results. --Rory096 21:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - it's bad practice to delete most CSRs and keep others "just because __________". -- Renesis13 02:38, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I'm with Cyde. - Corbin Be excellent 03:12, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but orphan it is useful for people who forget about the other shortcuts and people might think it means that BJAODN has been deleted, however article shouldn't link to the redirect instead of either the actual page or a redirect in the same namespace as the actual page "" 19:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • It shows up when you search for it anyway. --Rory096 04:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Read the rules at the top of the page. There's accidental linking, search aids, broken links, and people who find it useful. --M@rēino 17:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That doesn't mean it's not a self-reference. This is an encyclopaedia. Do you ever see Britannica talking about itself inside its encyclopaedia? --Rory096 04:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 11[edit]

The nominated redirect was Withdrawn by nominator. --Rory096 20:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Richard → Keith Richards[edit]

Currently it redirects to Rolling Stones guitarist, while there is a notable footballer with exactly this name. MaxSem 17:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination withdrawn since it looks like that there were no Keith Richard the footballer. MaxSem 16:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keith Richards was known as Keith Richard in his early days. If there is another Keith Richard, then this should be turned into a disambig page. I would do that except that a quick Google search on Keith Richard or Keith Richard football didn't produce any hits that stood out to me. Can you provide more details? -- JLaTondre 17:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See 1958 FIFA World Cup (squads). MaxSem 19:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just to confuse matters further, FIFA suggests the footballer was actually Richard Keith (which is a redirect to somebody else again :) — sjorford++ 20:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This site (have to expand next to last arrow) also shows his name as Richard Keith. It looks like 1958 FIFA World Cup (squads) should be changed to Richard Keith and Richard Keith changed to a disambig. If there is no disagreement, I'll do that. -- JLaTondre 22:48, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. MaxSem 16:34, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revise as follows ... If there is a person who is notable enough for an article who goes by the name 'Keith Richard', that article should be entitled 'Keith Richard' and a {{Distinguish}} template used to point at the Keith Richards article (I don't think a reciprocal one would be necessary). If there is not a person who is sufficiently notable for inclusion who is named 'Keith Richard', keep the redirect and tag it with {{R from alternate name}}, as long as the note that 'Richard' was 'Richards' former name is included in the article; if it turns out that this name change did not take place, then tag it with {{R from misspelling}}. In addition, perhaps a {{Distinguish}} template should be added to Keith Richards pointing at Richard Keith, but that might be unnecessary. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Read the top of this page. "Note: If all you want to do is replace a currently existing redirect with an actual article, you do not need to list it here. Turning redirects into fleshed-out encyclopedic articles is wholly encouraged at Wikipedia. Be bold." --Rory096 00:52, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't going to write an article about him, I simply noticed misleading link while filling this category with existing articles. MaxSem 09:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Nominator removed the RfD tag, which is the same thing he did with the one below, so withdrawn. --Rory096 20:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frank bennett → Frank Bennett[edit]

Same as below. Personally I'll be more careful creating articles, but I'm not sure I understand the procedure for capitalization redirects (it seems below that this type of request for deletion is generally denied). I'd imagine that many users don't use any capitalization in searches, and thus an intermediate redirect would be sort of pointless. Inarcadiaego 16:49, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The first letter is automatically capitalized, so if someone entered 'frank bennett' as a search term, it would give you the first article. Cowman109Talk 17:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unneeded redirect as "frank benett" will go directly to "Frank Bennett" without this, and with it simply uses a redirect. (Mixed captialasation issues in WP:REDIRECT do not apply for this as they did for the CoES (below) (This redirect was up for afd, which I closed as a speedy close) Regards, MartinRe 21:29, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've placed an RFD tag on it as it's still open here. -- JLaTondre 22:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as "frank benett" will not go to "Frank Bennett" when it's typed into the address bar (i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_bennett). Not everyone uses the go button and since it's already created, there's no need to delete. Redirects are cheap. -- JLaTondre 22:54, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I understand what you're saying, but do enough people search for articles by typing in the address bar that it's worth it to keep a redirect that we all seem to agree is pointless (and unnecessary according to WP:REDIRECT and MartinRe's comment)? I don't think (m)any other similar titles have redirects on here. Inarcadiaego 01:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Some do, some don't. john smith does, for example. Having the redirect allows entry from the title bar, and lower case wiki-links, but also uses a redirct if typed from the go bar. nothing significant either way, I wouldn't create one, but I also wouldn't rfd one if I found one. But as it was rfd'd I lean towards delete, as while redirects are cheap, doing lots of unneeded cheap things can mount up. Regards, MartinRe 11:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and tag with {{R from other capitalisation}}. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Although unlikely, this redirect is not confusing or offensive in any manner, and redirects are cheap. Grandmasterka 05:45, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Withdrawn by nominator. --Rory096 04:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Council for european studies → Council for European Studies[edit]

Simple capitalization error in creating the article. Searches for "council for european studies" should go directly to the correctly capitalized article; the original redirect doesn't need to exist. Inarcadiaego 15:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - useful redirect as for mixed captialisation issues as per WP:REDIRECT. (This redirect was up for afd, which I closed as a speedy close) Regards, MartinRe 21:24, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've placed an RFD tag on it as it's still open here. -- JLaTondre 22:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - as I understand it, it's only when every word in the target article name has an initial cap that searching with no initial caps would take you directly to the article. For example, searching on "battle of frankenhausen" takes you to a search page, not to the article "Battle of Frankenhausen". --Mathew5000 21:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Close. it's when every word (after the first) has the same captialisation that "Go" works., it's only when captialisation is mixed that a redirect is needed. Regards, MartinRe 21:48, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as {{R from other capitalisation}}. -- JLaTondre 22:58, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • After reading the capitalization policy for redirects I agree with your comments and took off the RFD - thanks. Inarcadiaego 01:40, 12 June 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 equalization filter. Kimchi.sg 13:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shelving filter → Band-stop filter[edit]

Shelving filters or Shelf filters are not band-stop filters. someone should create a good Shelving filter article (and someone started to, but it wasn't very good) but, until they do, it's misinformation to equate to BSF. no information is better than wrong information. r b-j 02:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not change target to Electronic filter in the mean time? --KJ 04:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Or Equalization filter. --KJ 04:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And tag with {{R with possibilities}}. --Rory096 20:48, 12 June 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 Academic Challenger (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves)

Ckatz/Workspace/Templates → User:Ckatz/Workspace/Templates[edit]

Created by mistake in the main space; thanks to Dancter for catching this. Ckatz 05:18, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete R2. --Rory096 05:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Kimchi.sg 16:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copper High School → Robbinsdale Cooper High School[edit]

RFD1 tag applied by Schulte on 08-June, but not listed here. Rationale of typo -- incorrect name provided in edit summary.

  • Delete. While we normally keep misspelling redirects, Copper is a word itself and it possible there is a Copper High School which means this redirect would actually create confusion. -- JLaTondre 13:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. My apologies for not listing it here. When Gephart was creating the redirect, he simply made a typo with the name. --Schulte 18:28, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Kimchi.sg 16:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rabah Zobeir → Zobeir[edit]

RFD1 tag applied by Ori Redler on 04-June, but not listed here as RFD2 tag was mistakenly added to article. Rationale of It's not the right person. Rabah Zobeir should direct to "RABAH ZOBEIR" which was actually a slave of Zobeir Pasha.

  • Delete. Google search returns copies of 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica (ex. [3]) that verify the two are not the same. -- JLaTondre 13:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JLaTondre. Cowman109Talk 22:09, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 12[edit]

The nominated redirect was Withdrawn by nominator. —Cuiviénen 01:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:CydeWeys userpage.png → User:Cyde/Userpage[edit]

First off, I'm not sure whether this should be here, at IfD or at MfD. It's a very strange situation. However, this is a cross-space redirect and a misuse of image space, though I admire Cyde's creativity. —Cuiviénen 23:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cross-namespace redirects are only verboten when the originating page is in article space. Frankly, this shows a lack of understanding of policy. --Cyde↔Weys 23:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • On the contrary, cross-space redirects are discouraged in all uses. Now, I could see Wikipedia space-User space redirects as useful, but image space (like template space) is "part of the encyclopedia". I agree that it is harmless, but I preferred to get the opinion of others. (I don;t ultimately see the image as a problem, but I imagine that if the redirect were to be removed, you'd want the image deleted anyway.) —Cuiviénen 00:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, harmless fun that non-editors will never see. Kusma (討論) 23:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, or just revert to where it had the license (since the redirect wouldn't work anyway). No reason to delete the image, and it would be on IfD anyway. MfD shouldn't be involved. --Rory096 23:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I considered MfD because it relates more to the image as a redirect to a userpage than IfD would, and many deletions are brought there because they seem ambiguous as to the proper deletion category otherwise. —Cuiviénen 00:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I can tell, however, that others don't agree with me. Withdrawing. —Cuiviénen 01:01, 13 June 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 Marudubshinki. -- JLaTondre 22:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leidecker.dk -> itself. Malformed; doesn't appear to have an obvious target in Wikipedia. --EngineerScotty 21:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 13[edit]

The nominated redirect was All dealt with accordingly --Cyde↔Weys 13:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD & TFD → Wikipedia:Templates for deletion[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. WP:TfD should be used instead. Zoz (t) 20:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfAr → Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. WP:RfAr should be used instead. Zoz (t) 20:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CfD → Wikipedia:Categories for deletion[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. WP:CfD should be used instead. Zoz (t) 20:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfC → Wikipedia:Articles for creation[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. WP:AfC should be used instead. Zoz (t) 20:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Dealt with appropriately --Cyde↔Weys 04:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfD → Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. WP:RfD should be used instead. Zoz (t) 20:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IfD & IFD → Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. WP:IfD should be used instead. Zoz (t) 20:05, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NfD → Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. WP:NfD should be used instead. --Zoz (t) 20:03, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fuzzy lumpkins → Power Puff Girls[edit]

Delete. Doesn't even have the potential to be a popular search title. The second name isn't capitalized. Marcus 17:59, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep - It doesn't matter if the second name isn't capitalized, I know that most of the time I don't capitalize when I'm searching and redirects with lowercase letters are usually helpful. If Fuzzy Lumpkins is discussed in the Power Puff Girls article, the redirect should stay as it is. If he gets his own article, it should redirect there. Timrem 19:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Redirects are cheap. You need a really good reason to nominate one and this doesn't cut it. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 19:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As stated above, the name capitalization doesn't matter. And as far as potential to be a popular search title, I completely disagree. To search for a recurring PPG character which is well-known and has been in a great number of episodes and come up with nothing is illogical. -- Kicking222 21:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This was moved in from AfD, hence the unusual reason for deletion. Morgan Wick 01:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Redirect is mentioned in the target article. — TKD::Talk 03:00, 14 June 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 Pepsidrinka (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). --Rory096 03:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wilipedia:WikiProject Irish literature → Wikipedia:WikiProject Irish literature[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect (from article to Wikipedia namespace). Initially speedy deleted, but recreated since. -- User:Docu

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

June 14[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted by Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 20:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

League Leader’s Shield → League Leader's Shield[edit]

Looks like result of wherever the article title was pasted from. Article was moved, leaving this behind. Unlikely search term, to say the least. Fan1967 21:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia manual of style → Wikipedia:Manual of Style[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect SCHZMO ✍ 20:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Orphan and delete per nom. --Rory096 20:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 20:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Orphaning would be good too. -- JLaTondre 23:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; Wikipedia needs a : --Brownlee 10:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --WinHunter (talk) 04:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Manual of Style → Wikipedia:Manual of Style[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect SCHZMO ✍ 20:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Orphan and delete per nom. --Rory096 20:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 20:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Orphaning would be good too. -- JLaTondre 23:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --WinHunter (talk) 04:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What Wikipedia is not → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. SCHZMO ✍ 20:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Orphan and delete per nom. --Rory096 20:24, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 20:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Orphaning would be good too. -- JLaTondre 23:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --WinHunter (talk) 04:42, 16 June 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 Tilde --Cyde↔Weys 18:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[[%7E%7E%7E%7E%7E]] → Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Delete or change redirect to Tilde. (Sorry, I'm having trouble with the links.) SCHZMO ✍ 20:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[[%7E%7E%7E%7E]] → Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Delete or change redirect to Tilde. SCHZMO ✍ 20:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[[%7E%7E%7E]] → Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Delete or change redirect to Tilde. SCHZMO ✍ 20:05, 14 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 20:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

President George W. Bush's anger and resolve → George W. Bush[edit]

Strange, wordy, and POV name for a redirect. SCHZMO ✍ 19:58, 14 June 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/or redirected --Cyde↔Weys 18:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured image → Wikipedia:Featured pictures[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 17:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. feydey 17:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Orphan and delete (and merge this into the other nom). --Rory096 19:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 20:54, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Orphaning would be good too. -- JLaTondre 23:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --WinHunter (talk) 04:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR → Wikipedia:Three-revert rule[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. WP:3RR should be used instead. Zoz (t) 16:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Village pump → Wikipedia:Village pump[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Zoz (t) 16:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Speedy Keep as this belongs at Wikipedia:Requested moves instead of here. -- JLaTondre 23:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pan-Iranist party → Pan-Iranist Party[edit]

It is better to move the article to "party" than "Party" however it is not possible unless the redirect is deleted first. Thanks K a s h Talk | email 13:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as it seems that Pan-Iranist Party is the correct title. --Zoz (t) 14:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Kimchi.sg 18:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isolasi DNA → DNA extraction[edit]

Non English redirect. So craze tes 10:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • And? Is it wrong? It was an article added in the Indonesian language that we had full coverage on. I reidirected it. We have a whole category full of similar items: Category:Redirects from alternate languages. --Kunzite 11:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as R from alternate language. --Zoz (t) 11:33, 14 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 20:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion policy → Wikipedia:deletion policy[edit]

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 03:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Yanksox 03:57, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I only just typed it in 2 minutes ago absent-mindedly. - Richardcavell 04:44, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. feydey 05:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 10:57, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 23:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 18:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured images → Wikipedia:Featured pictures[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 02:07, 14 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 20:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"road safety" → Road-traffic safety[edit]

Same reasoning as for this redirect's alternate capitalisation cousin (nominated for deletion below), "Road safety". In this case, there are no incoming links. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete - R3 (unlikely typo). Timrem 02:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Road safety" → Road-traffic safety[edit]

I don't think we need to retain redirects that are quotated terms such as this; its not a likely search or direct URL-use term nor would I anticipate uses in the context of articles to require retention of the quotated redirect (there is a single such use now, Seat belt legislation, which I will leave intact pending resolution of this discussion. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete - R3 (unlikely typo). Timrem 02:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was corrected to point to Xserve RAID. Kimchi.sg 10:48, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RAID Admin → RAID[edit]

was tagged for speedy as "implausible typo. RAID Admin is Mac OS X software and is different from RAID". I don't know if it should rather be re-redirected elsewhere, so I bring this here. Kusma (討論) 20:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Change target to Xserve RAID which mentions the software (as it is for managing that device). -- JLaTondre 21:23, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Change target per JLaTondre. -- Usgnus 18:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept and changed to point to continuity. Kimchi.sg 18:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Continouos → Zero and First Order Holds[edit]

misspelling that is non sequitur of redirect topic. target article should go, too. r b-j 05:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

boy, i sure thought i filled out the template correctly, but it reversed the articles. i fixed it here. r b-j 14:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
should every misspelling of every word have a WP article or redirect? perhaps the common misspellings of noteworthy topic names, but not every misspelling. r b-j 18:29, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • If one person made the mistake, another will probably make it also. We shouldn't purposely create redirects based upon spelling mistakes, but once made, there is no need to delete them. We actually have a template ({{R from misspelling}}) and category for them (Category:Redirects from misspellings). -- JLaTondre 19:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
do to it want you want. i think it should disappear. it dumbs down WP. r b-j 02:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 15[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted by Johnleemk. -- JLaTondre 13:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As of version, As of version 1.0, As of version 3.2, As of version 4.0 → Wikipedia:As of version[edit]

CSRs. Invitatious 23:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 13:07, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles needing attention, Pages needing attention, Wikipedia utilities/Pages needing attention → Wikipedia:Pages needing attention[edit]

CNRs. Invitatious 23:19, 15 June 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 Johnleemk. -- JLaTondre 13:20, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blank maps → Wikipedia:Blank maps[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect SCHZMO ✍ 22:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was All deleted --Cyde↔Weys 13:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion/Australian Mathematics Competition → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Australian Mathematics Competition[edit]

CSR to closed AfD discussion. Invitatious 22:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

19xx in Australia → Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/19xx in Australia[edit]

Obvious CSR. (I'm tired already. There's lots of them!) Invitatious 22:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article deletion → Wikipedia:Deletion Policy[edit]

CSR.Invitatious 22:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article improvement drive → Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive[edit]

CSR.Invitatious 22:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article merge → Wikipedia:Proposed mergers[edit]

CSR.Invitatious 22:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article series → Wikipedia:Article series[edit]

CSR.Invitatious 22:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation → Wikipedia:Articles for creation[edit]

CSR.Invitatious 22:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Deletion → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion[edit]

CSR.Invitatious 22:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian cuisine → Category:Armenian cuisine[edit]

CSR. Invitatious 22:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are You a Wikipediholic Test → Wikipedia:Are You a Wikipediholic Test[edit]

CSR. Invitatious 22:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was all deleted. The template should be changed to avoid linking directly to the templates. A list article would be a more appropriate target. — Jun. 18, '06 [15:06] <freak|talk>

BC-FedRep → Template:BC-FedRep (and MANY OTHERS)[edit]

Main space to Template redirect. AB-FedRep deleted below, but not the others. I was also nominating, in addition to the redirect above, MB-FedRep, NB-FedRep, NL-FedRep, NS-FedRep, NT-FedRep, NU-FedRep, ON-FedRep, PE-FedRep, PQ-FedRep → Template:QC-FedRep, QC-FedRep, SK-FedRep, VA-FedRep, YK-FedRep → Template:YT-FedRep, YT-FedRep. All have the same redirect pattern unless otherwise noted. Invitatious 22:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 13:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Committee → Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee[edit]

I'm pretty sure it isn't specific to Wikipedia. Invitatious 21:48, 15 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 20:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archaean/Infobox → Template:Archaean Infobox[edit]

What do you think it is? Invitatious 21:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 13:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Being a dick → Wikipedia:Don't be a dick[edit]

CSR linking to essay on meta:Don't be a dick. Invitatious 21:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. — Jun. 18, '06 [14:45] <freak|talk>

ISB number → ISBN[edit]

I personally have no idea what the "N" part is for, but I have never came across a book which states the "ISB number". Plus, any search engine hits are un-releated to each other. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 18:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Keep (redirects are cheap, this one won't do harm 21:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)). ISBN stands for International Standard Book Number. I would understand the purpose of ISBN number, but not ISB number. But maybe it actually has a purpose. Invitatious 19:34, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, unlikely but possible search term, avoids redundant acronym. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, even if it's not used much, it's harmless. Redirects are cheap. --Rory096 21:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rory096 --WinHunter (talk) 04:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - it's harmless. - Richardcavell 05:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Redirects are cheap. --Zoz (t) 13:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per EA, Invit, and Rory, although ISBN number is, unfortunately, a more common locution (as UPC code). We should probably block indefinitely anyone who uses ISBN number... :) Joe 16:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I've seen "ISB number" used, very occaisionally. Kim Bruning 18:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, no reason for deletion. --Cyde↔Weys 19:02, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — Jun. 15, '06 [21:55] <freak|talk>

"TCC" → The Casual Courier[edit]

quoted string, bypassing TCC disambig page, etc. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 18:02, 15 June 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 Can't sleep, clown will eat me (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). --Rory096 21:11, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is gay → Wikipedia[edit]

POV and offensive name. SCHZMO ✍ 14:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted anyway. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 18:01, 15 June 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 as there are other Goehring's. -- JLaTondre 10:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goehring → Hermann Göring[edit]

I'm guessing the sole purpose of this is for an uncyclopedia page [4] Qqqqqqq 14:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep This one seems useful to me because (a) it's a common English spelling; (b) he's certainly the most famous person of that name. Fan1967 14:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Fan1967. --Zoz (t) 16:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - blimey. The target does not exist in the English language. - Richardcavell 05:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 12:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Be bald (sic) → Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages[edit]

I don't know what my reason for nomination is. Cross-space redirect maybe? Invitatious 13:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • WP:BJAODN and Delete --Zoz (t) 14:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; Crossnamespace and there's enough alopecia related humour already. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 14:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Smurrayinchester. - Tangotango 09:55, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirects were redirected to Good faith, except for one, which was redirected to Bad faith. — Jun. 15, '06 [20:41] <freak|talk>

Assume Good Faith → Wikipedia:Assume good faith[edit]

Also: Assume good intent, Assumed good faith, Assuming bad faith, Assuming good faith. Not specific to Wikipedia. Invitatious 13:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Yanksox (talk) 13:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target for the good intent/faith ones to good faith. Change the bad faith one to bad faith. Johnleemk | Talk 15:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target per Johnleemk. --Zoz (t) 16:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Change target Assume Good Faith - this one is important for newbies who may see the term referenced, but not know about namespaces. Delete the "assuming" and "assumed" ones - they are useless. BigDT 17:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's a bad idea. Keeping the hard redirect encourages people to use this link, violating our self-referential style guide. The soft redirect as provided at good faith works better. Johnleemk | Talk 17:50, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I see your point then ... as long as someone typing in "Assume Good Faith" can get to WP:AGF, that's reasonable. I still suggest delete on the others - they are useless. BigDT 20:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was all deleted. — Jun. 15, '06 [21:57] <freak|talk>

Animated Films by Bill Plympton → Template:Animated Films by Bill Plympton[edit]

CSR to template space. Implausible search as well. Invitatious 13:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 16:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriate tone → Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles[edit]

Cross-space redirect. Term does not only apply to Wikipedia. Invitatious 13:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 16:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anetode/Death-stub → Template:Death-stub[edit]

CSR. Invitatious 02:47, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And now for something completely different... Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense! → Wikipedia:And now for something completely different... Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense![edit]

Useless unused cross space redirect. Invitatious 02:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Useless and silly. Who's going to type that in? Why have such a cross-space redirect. Looks like someone just couldn't be bothered typing 'Wikipedia:' at the beginning of their link. Skittle 11:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, if somehow this is kept make sure to label it as a self-ref. gren グレン 12:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 16:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aluminum alloys → Category:Aluminium alloys[edit]

Cross space redirect. Invitatious 02:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I like this sort of redirect as it helps people find what they're looking for, no problem with a self reference or users getting lost between encyclopedia space and crazy Wikipedia/User space. Mak (talk) 04:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep --Brownlee 10:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why? This is not a vote. --Rory096 21:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Airports in Bosnia and Herzegovina → Category:Airports in Bosnia and Herzegovina[edit]

Cross space redirect. Invitatious 02:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Airlines of Bosnia and Herzegovina → Category:Airlines of Bosnia and Herzegovina[edit]

Cross space redirect. Invitatious 02:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AIO category redirect → Category:Adventures in Odyssey[edit]

Obvious Invitatious 02:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I'm mystified as to how it came about. Mak (talk) 04:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aerospace museum → Category:Aerospace museums[edit]

Cross-space redirect. What should this be changed to? Invitatious 02:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC) Also Air museum. 02:28, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adolf Hitler/Infobox → Template:HitlerInfo[edit]

Cross-space redirect. Nothing links here. Invitatious 02:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AdelSuburbBox → Template:AdelSuburbBox[edit]

Redirect from main space to template. Invitatious 02:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A template for making year pages → Wikipedia:Timeline standards[edit]

Obvious. Cross-namespace redirect, and implausible search. Invitatious 02:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 16:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AB-FedRep → Template:AB-FedRep et al.[edit]

Main space to Template redirect. Invitatious 02:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC) Also nominating BC-FedRep, MB-FedRep, NB-FedRep, NL-FedRep, NS-FedRep, NT-FedRep, NU-FedRep, ON-FedRep, PE-FedRep, PQ-FedRep → Template:QC-FedRep, QC-FedRep, SK-FedRep, VA-FedRep, YK-FedRep → Template:YT-FedRep, YT-FedRep. All have the same redirect pattern unless otherwise noted. Invitatious 21:10, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 21:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was redirected per below. — Jun. 15, '06 [21:40] <freak|talk>

AD/CE → Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)[edit]

Should this be changed to AD, CE, or simply deleted? Invitatious 01:46, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Change target to Common Era. The Common Era page appears to be more devoted to describing the usage of AD vs. CE, whereas the Anno Domini page gives only a passing mention of CE. Lbbzman 02:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to Common Era per Lbbzman. --Zoz (t) 16:24, 15 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 20:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2012 US Presidential Election → Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/U.S. presidential election, 2012[edit]

Redirect from Main space to old VfD discussion. Invitatious 01:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 16:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 12:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2006 AFL season/Ladder → Template:2006 AFL season/"Simple" Ladder[edit]

Unlinked Main space to Template redirect, also 2006 AFL Season/Ladder. Invitatious 01:36, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2005 Britannica takeover of Wikimedia → Wikipedia:2005 Britannica takeover of Wikimedia[edit]

Main space to April Fool's joke redirect. The main space is for encyclopaedic content only. Also nominating other redirects that go to the same place:

Invitatious 01:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC) 13:13, 15 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 20:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2004 U.S. presidential election controversy/2004 U.S. presidential election controversy → Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/2004 U.S. presidential election controversy[edit]

Main space redirect to old VfD discussion. Invitatious 01:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 16:24, 15 June 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 1 (number). — Jun. 15, '06 [21:58] <freak|talk>

1.0 → Wikipedia:Pushing to 1.0[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Linked from several software articles not having to do with Wikipedia. Invitatious 01:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — Jun. 15, '06 [22:05] <freak|talk>

1933 Atlantic hurricane season buttons → Template:1933 Atlantic hurricane season buttons et al.[edit]

And the following others:

All have the same format target as the main one listed at the top. Useless unlinked Main space to Template space redirects. By the way, there should be a procedure for listing many similar redirects in one nomination on RfD. Invitatious 00:33, 15 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 20:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1924 songs → Category:1924 songs[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect Invitatious 00:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Why is it a problem to cross namespaces when it helps the user find what he or she is looking for? - Richardcavell 05:33, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 16[edit]

The nominated redirect was redirected to Psalms. Kimchi.sg 11:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Psalm 82 → Yam (god)[edit]

Misleading. zafiroblue05 | Talk 00:09, 17 June 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 Naconkantari. -- JLaTondre 12:22, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marc scibilia → Marc scibilia(Singer) → Marc Scibilia(Singer)[edit]

One's a double-redirect; and they both lead to an empty page up for speedy --EngineerScotty 20:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was William Annis converted to disambig. William annis redirected to William Annis. -- JLaTondre 20:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William_Annis → Billy_Annis[edit]

See William annis RFD below. LordMcD 18:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William_annis → Billy_Annis[edit]

There are only two articles linking to William annis; one is looking for Billy Annis and the other is not, which confusingly leads people to believe that an English footballer is in an synthpop band. LordMcD 18:41, 16 June 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. -- JLaTondre 12:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

toolkit → Widget toolkit[edit]

there exist other toolkits than widget toolkits e.g. Toolkits for User Innovation Zigo1232 09:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 17[edit]

The nominated redirect was cross namespace gren グレン 22:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blank map → Wikipedia:Blank maps[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Mathew5000 20:39, 18 June 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 Makemi (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves)

Adam Wang → User:MUBOTE[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 16:18, 18 June 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 Freakofnurture (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves)

Tawkerbot → User:Tawkerbot[edit]

... Rory096 14:42, 18 June 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 consensus) – Gurch 11:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shadow the Hedgehog (video game features) → Shadow the Hedgehog (video game)[edit]

Unlikely to be entered into the search bar. ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 04:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is useful in discouraging recreation of a deleted page. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:42, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can't page protections be used for that? ' (Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!) 04:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Right, but then it would be a {{deletedpage}}. Redirects are always better than random pages with self-references in them that are completely useless. --Rory096 14:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, that redirect was created when those pages where merged together. I am not making a vote here, though. Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 14:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • There doesn't appear to be any history there, and the result of the AfD was delete, not merge. Keep anyway, redirects are cheap. --Rory096 17:56, 20 June 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 consensus) – Gurch 11:24, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bad-lad and trap-bath splits and æ-tensing → Phonological history of English short A[edit]

Odd redirect. No one's going to type in this looking for the phonological history of English short a. I wonder why this redirect was created? Voortle 23:43, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • It looks like the article was created there in the first place, in which case, keep to prevent anybody recreating it. Redirects are cheap, and "odd" is not a worthwhile reason for deleting. — sjorford++ 13:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete then add {{deletedpage}} to the redirecting page. Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 14:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Er......why? {{deletedpage}} is a last resort, only to be used for acts of repetitive vandalism. There's nothing like that here. — sjorford++ 17:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per sjorford. — TKD::Talk 07:20, 21 June 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 Johnleemk (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves)

Requested pictures → Wikipedia:Requested pictures[edit]

Needless orphaned cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 18:55, 17 June 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 Derek Ross (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves) --Rory096 18:56, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Direct logic → Direct Logic[edit]

article doesn't exist — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, R1. --Rory096 17:53, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Kimchi.sg 10:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WAITES → Waits[edit]

If someone's looking for an article on waits they're not going to type it in ALL CAPS. – ∅ (∅), 10:30, 17 June 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. -- JLaTondre 12:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kutter → Anton_Kutter[edit]

Redirect should be removed and replaced by a disambiguation page referring to Anton Kutter and Hermann Kutter 84.150.250.197 11:21, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • DONE - article is now a disambig page for all instances of Kutter I could find - Peripitus (Talk) 11:23, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Kimchi.sg 11:26, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bolos, got to love them... or else! → [[Bolo Marks Technical Data]][edit]

Appears to be a pointless redir, has only one contributer with one edit, the contributer was in fact queried about it roughly 7 months ago to no avail whoda 11:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 13:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unlikely to be searched for, no significant history or incoming links. - Tangotango 09:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Changed target to Tracy and tagged with {{R from alternate spelling}}. -- JLaTondre 14:18, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Traci → Tracy Brookshaw[edit]

There is more than one Traci, but I don't think we should go down the path of disambig pages by first name. JLaTondre 13:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why not? — Jun. 17, '06 [16:10] <freak|talk>
    • There are exceptions to any generalization as there are famous first names. However, in general a disambig page based upon a common first name is going to pretty useless & hard to maintain when it starts reaching into the 100s of articles. -- JLaTondre 00:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. She's not Elvis. Fan1967 00:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm tempted to say that this should redirect to Tracy, a disambig page as a possible mispelling, though I'm not sure if that is the best course of action. Looking to see what others think. Cowman109Talk 01:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Seems reasonable. Checking the "Traci" articles we have ([5]) finds pretty much Traci Lords the most notable of the few listed, and she's included on the Tracy DAB page, as are people with other spellings like "Tracey". Fan1967 02:37, 18 June 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 neologism. There is a 6-to-3 majority in favo(u)r of doing so, and Rory's argument was convincing. Kimchi.sg 11:21, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protologism → Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms[edit]

There's a bit of history here. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protologism was closed as delete on 23 March this year. The article was recreated as a redirect a couple of days later, and the redirect was listed here immediately. The RfD did not lead to a consensus, so when I closed it I decided to make the article a soft redirect to wikt:protologism, which I judged to be a good compromise between the various positions taken at the RfD debate (see Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives/March 2006#March 27). However, this soft redirect did not last long. I'm bringing the redirect up again in the hope that we now do manage to get a consensus.

Personally, I think cross-namespace redirects are to be avoided. I don't think this one is useful enough that it merits ignoring the rule. Thus, delete. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete would my preference. {{wi}} would be better than a cross namespace redirect. This word does have some (minor) usage outside of Wikipedia and Wikipedia should not be claiming it for its own. -- JLaTondre 14:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • We had this before, and it should have been deleted then. The only reason this breathes is that someone rather unhelpfully created it as a redirect after AfD had correctly deleted it. Wikipedia does not collect navel-gazing neologisms, by redirect or otherwise. And before someone says "but we have X other neologistic redirect", well, yes, perhaps we do, and we should delete that too. -Splash - tk 15:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Splash. Joe 16:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that Freakofnurture has some difficult allowing this debate to remain open, presumably as he disagrees with its premise. He's closed it 3 times now, and I've re-opened it. Please would someone keep an eye out, thanks. -Splash - tk 16:52, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy redirect to neologism, a clear alternative to a cross-namespace redirect and simply an editorial action. --Rory096 17:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, the previous RfD said it should be a soft redirect to wikt:protologism, and Splash made that into a cross-namespace redirect. I still think neologism, which is what it was before the last RfD, is a better target, though. --Rory096 17:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Soft redirects are an oxymoron anyway. — Jun. 17, '06 [18:44] <freak|talk>
    • It is no more acceptable to retain a neologism as a redirect than it is any other form. It is just slack editorial standards not to delete this. -Splash - tk 19:21, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sure it is. Redirects are cheap, and this is used by at least a few outside people. It's harmless. --Rory096 21:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • The problem with retargeting to neologism is that that article hardly mentions "protologism" and does not explain what it is. I think redirects should only be used if the target page actually explains the term. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 04:22, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • True, but it would redirect to a related term that links to wikt:protologism, so it's better than just nothing at all. --Rory096 15:06, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to neologism per Rory. Kusma (討論) 17:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to neologism per Rory. --Mathew5000 20:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target as above. Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 14:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Jitse Niesen and Splash. Minor concerns that including this redirect in article space violates WP:NEO and WP:SELF. --Muchness 14:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to neologism, as per above, and as per previous closures by two separate administrators, both of which were reverted by Splash. — Jun. 20, '06 [15:24] <freak|talk>
  • Redirect to neologism, and for what it's worth, I don't think the repeated reversion of the closure of this RFD was at all appropriate. --Cyde↔Weys 04:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bandwagon speedy change target to neologism; also, maybe add a line in that article about this term referring to a proposed new word. BD2412 T 04:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment It seems there is a realistic chance that Wiktionary will delete their article on wikt:protologism, on the grounds that it's a protologism itself. See wikt:WT:LOP#P. Therefore, the soft redirect option possibly won't work. ais523 10:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is an excellent reason for Wikipedia to delete it as well. WP does not collect neologisms, and surely if the project that does doesn't want this one, we don't keep it either. We're just being soft, when we have clear practise and input from elsewhere telling us to get a grip. -Splash - tk 15:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Uh, no there isn't. It was listed at RfV by a new user, who didn't say anything but that it's a protologism. There are 4 sources, it'll easily pass RfV. What makes you think it'll be deleted? --Rory096 06:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 18[edit]

The nominated redirect was kept by default, no consensus. Mangojuicetalk 03:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Knob rot → Gonorrhoea[edit]

nonsense redirect, original article was submitted for speedy deletion whoda 21:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete nonsense--Jusjih 00:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Probably someone's made up term for it, I don't think this is a valid slang term. If someone brings forward a source it could be saved. Grandmasterka 02:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete would set a dangerous precendent. --Wisden17 20:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. --Arnzy (whats up?) 13:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as people may type in this phrase to find out what it means - I've heard this English slang phrase used whilst living in the South-East of England, as well as the North-West. see: [6], (possibly not the best site: [7], although it does explain the phrase in the contexts I've heard it), [8] (although it is a UK Government forum, Anne's post explains its meaning to someone who hasn't heard of it before), and [9]PDF (page 11). TheJC TalkContributions 23:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I have heard this slang term used before and I didn't know what it was. This would've been one way to find out. Yeah, we shouldn't have an article on "knob rot", but this is just a redirect, and redirects are cheap. --Cyde↔Weys 14:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Useful for someone who doesn't know the correct term. Whadaya know, I agree with Cyde.Dgies 01:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (keep). Looking at sites on the Google search, this is a term used generally for male sexually transmitted diseases with symptoms there, so it could be used for herpes, chlamydia, etc., not just gonorrhoea. In that case, it should be redirected to sexually transmitted disease. —Centrx→talk • 03:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 19[edit]

The nominated redirect was all deleted per precedent, etc. — Jun. 19, '06 [21:05] <freak|talk>

Wikipediest → Wikipedia:Wikipedians[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wp wikipedians → Wikipedia:Wikipedians[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:36, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wp list of wikipedians → Wikipedia:Wikipedians[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect, trying to be some sort of odd shortcut. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:35, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedist → Wikipedia:Wikipedians[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia community → Wikipedia:Wikipedians[edit]

Yet another cross-namespace redirect. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipede → Wikipedia:Wikipedians[edit]

Unhelpful cross-namespace redirect. Only two incoming links. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:20, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiPedians → Wikipedia:Wikipedians[edit]

Cross-namespace, CamelCase redirect with no particularly useful history and only two incoming links. AmiDaniel (talk) 20:07, 19 June 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 CambridgeBayWeather (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves).

--Rory096 06:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of cartoon and comic character pairs → List of comic and cartoon character pairs[edit]

Reason Target page non-existant CPAScott 19:05, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 10:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barine → Arvède Barine[edit]

The name "Barine" used to result in a long list of possible entries that use this last name, this list is bypassed if this redirect remains. Bob em 16:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like what other entries? Aside from Arvède, the only other Barine seems to be a character in a play by Sartre [10]. --Mathew5000 21:47, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment, I have no problem making it into a dab page if there are other entries... but looking through the edit history there was the redirect or just " [[Arvède Barine]]" which didn't automatically redirect... so, I'll say keep unless there is a dab page. gren グレン 22:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Looking at the edit history, the nominator is the only real contributor to the page (one rv by someone else). Sounds like CSD G7. Timrem 19:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete G7 applies. The "long list" the nominator refers to is probably the result of a search with no exact match. Mangojuicetalk 03:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirects were both deleted as malformed (no space before parentheses, thus the pipe trick fails it). One of them contained the edit history of the target article, due to a copy/paste move. I have fixed this. In the future, please check for non-trivial edit history and mention it when making RFD nominations, thanks. — Jun. 19, '06 [21:02] <freak|talk>

Do No Harm(Tv Episode) → Do No Harm (Lost)[edit]

No one would type this in, people will be able to find the correct article by visiting Do No Harm. Also no links to the page.Tomcage9Talk Contribs 10:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: no links except a disambiguation page which is listed for deletion and another redirect which I am about to list. Tomcage9Talk Contribs 10:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do No Harm(TV Episode) → Do No Harm(Tv Episode)[edit]

Redirect to another redirect. Unrequired as no one will type this in. No links to the page. Tomcage9Talk Contribs 10:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 20[edit]

The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 10:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Sharpe Story Plots → Wikipedia:Richard Sharpe Story Plots[edit]

Cross-space redirect created by move —Mira 05:11, 21 June 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 cross-namespace redirect. Kimchi.sg 11:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Napoleonic/Sharpe:Wikiproject → Wikipedia:Richard Sharpe Story Plots[edit]

Cross-space redirect created by move —Mira 05:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 07:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 12:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 11:29, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Monopoly → Template:LondonMonopolyBoard[edit]

The Monopoly template was just a copy of the London game board layout of the board game Monopoly, copied from the Monopoly (game) page. I considered the template name to be too generic, moved the content to Template:LondonMonopolyBoard, and made the necessary change in the article. Nothing now links to Template:Monopoly; it could be deleted. JohnDBuell 01:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Moved from WP:TfD.--SomeStranger(t) 20:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the redirect is not appropriate as there are multiple versions of the game monopoly. There is no one "official" version that deserves this redirect.--SomeStranger(t) 20:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 07:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Arnzy (whats up?) 01:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 12:14, 23 June 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 smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 18:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Integrated Science, Business, and Technology → Integrated Science, Business and Technology[edit]

Target article was deleted qswitch426 18:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, R1. --Rory096 18:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Integrated Science Business and Technology → Integrated Science, Business and Technology[edit]

Target article deleted qswitch426 17:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, R1. --Rory096 18:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The nominated redirect was Speedy deleted by Gwernol (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). --Rory096 18:04, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andy anggianto → User:Fiexe[edit]

Cross-space redirect Fram 13:24, 20 June 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 consensus. Mangojuicetalk 03:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple unofficial anthems → National Anthem of Scotland[edit]

No obvious logical connection: if someone would look for "multiple unofficial anthems" (however improbable that is), there is no reason for them to expect to be carried to the one for Scotland Fram 13:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Any unofficial anthem could refer to any country --Arnzy (whats up?) 13:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 13:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as misleading. - Tangotango 13:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, cool the beans... the redirect only exists due to the original author misnaming the article (or rather, naming it as it would appear in text) and it then being moved. /wangi 20:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to National anthem. I have already done so for Multiple unofficial Anthems.-Mathew5000 05:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to National anthem. — TKD::Talk 07:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Wangi. Redirect created after page move, and the only pages linking to it is this RfD page, and talk:Scotland - the latter discussing the creation of an article by that title. TheJC TalkContributions 01:55, 30 June 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 CSD R3, and since better redirect Bartholomew (Spyro character) exists.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91(review me!) 11:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bartholomew (Spyro charcacter) → Bentley (Spyro character)[edit]

Typo by the Wikipedian creating the article. Actual article was Bartholomew (Spyro character), which has since been merged into Bentley (Spyro character) for lack of notability. No further edit history or apparent internal links to the old redirect. Stratadrake 12:56, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clarifying: I've already merged the Bartholomew article's info into the article for Bentley and changed the old article (Bartholomew (Spyro character)) into a redirect. That was when I noticed the redirect in question, Bartholomew (Spyro charcacter). --Stratadrake 00:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or change destination to Spyro the Dragon (series), depending on how related "Bartholomew" and "Bentley" are. - Tangotango 13:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Note that not Bartholomew but "charcater" was misspelled. Implausible typo. --Zoz (t) 13:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as typo per Zoz. --Arnzy (whats up?) 01:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, very implausible typo, borderline r3. --Rory096 18:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was delete as CSD G4 - repost. Kimchi.sg 14:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

March 27, 1964 → Good Friday Earthquake[edit]

If an article for a date is to be created, (which I would oppose, as we don't have any dates around there), it should be an ARTICLE, not a redirect. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 02:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I don't see anything wrong with this; lots of dates are redirects, e.g. July 8, 2002. It's not so unlikely that someone might type a date into the search box looking for a specific event. For example, if you type July 20, 1969 into the search box, you should be taken directly to Apollo 11.--Mathew5000 03:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: July 8, 2002 redirects to July 2002. A redirect to a different date is different than a redirect to a specific event. July 20, 1969 taking you to Apollo 11 would be a surprise for those looking for the end of the Football War. It shouldn't be Wikipedia's job to prioritize one article over another. However, March 27 doesn't list anything else for 1964 so it's not currently an issue in this case. -- JLaTondre 10:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to 1964. Less confusing over the long run. — TKD::Talk 07:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - this date should be linked as March 27, 1964, so March 27, 1964 shouldn't be redirected anywhere. — sjorford++ 15:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: A redirect at this article was previously deleted, and if I remember correctly, one of its incarnations was this very version. Perhaps a speedy as {{db-repost}}? — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 16:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I don't think any individual date should redirect to an event. Kusma (討論) 17:02, 22 June 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 Kusma (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). --Rory096 06:16, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

July 1979 → July[edit]

or perhaps, it's redirecting to 1979. In any case, we don't have any nearby month/year articles or redirects. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 02:08, 20 June 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. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Comment Spam Number Mystery" → Comment spam number mystery[edit]

No sensible reason why this would ever be referenced with quotes around it, most likely a mistake that was then redirected, but should probably be deleted now Gnewf 19:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, R3. --Rory096 22:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.


The nominated redirect was Nothing to be done here --Cyde↔Weys 17:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Chemical Romance → You know what they do to guys like us in prison[edit]

It is a song that should have its own page and not get redirected to the band. All systems go 23:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you want to delete the redirect You Know What They Do To Guys Like Us In Prison pointing to My Chemical Romance. If you want to create an article about the song, just do so, the redirect does not have to be deleted for that. See the top of this page. Kusma (討論) 23:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 21[edit]

The nominated redirect was Converted to disambig. -- JLaTondre 01:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Swirl → Swirl (band)[edit]

Since the addition of the swirl (organization) page there are now two swirl pages. I'm thinking that the Swirl redirect shouldn't direct to just one of them because if you search for swirl meaning to find the organization you won't be able to find it. Rugadh 21:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 17:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright tags → Wikipedia:Image copyright tags[edit]

Cross-space redirect. SCHZMO ✍ 21:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. feydey 07:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Yanksox (talk) 05:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 03:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - non-encyclopedic main namespace pollution. -- Omniplex 20:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tags → Wikipedia:Image copyright tags[edit]

Cross-space redirect SCHZMO ✍ 21:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. feydey 07:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 03:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - non-encyclopedic main namespace pollution. -- Omniplex 20:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Don't be a schlong. — Jun. 26, '06 [17:30] <freak|talk>

Schlong → Penis[edit]

I don't beleive that this should be deleted, as it is conceivable that someone might search "Schlong" on Wikipedia; however, the {{rfd}} tag was placed on it by 194.66.185.193 at 10:29 on 19 June 2006, so I feel duty-bound to list it here. In other words: keep. Lockesdonkey 20:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I didn't know what a penis was, but I now know it is a schlong. Wikipedia's so damned useful. Seriously, though, keep. Seems an obvious redirect. David L Rattigan 20:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; common slang term, and deters duplicate article creation. — TKD::Talk 03:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was already deleted by somebody else. — Jun. 21, '06 [17:11] <freak|talk>

A VC → Fred Wilson (venture capitalist)[edit]

Redirect to deleted article Bugwit grunt / scribbles 10:48, 21 June 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 because I saw no mention of "shain" on the latter page. If I'm missing something, let me know. — Jun. 21, '06 [17:11] <freak|talk>

Shain → Babe: Pig in the City[edit]

Makes no sense. LWizard @ 08:00, 21 June 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, cross-namespace redirect, malformed, made no sense. — Jun. 21, '06 [17:11] <freak|talk>

Sqwirl → Image:Manet,_Edouard_-_The_Absinthe_Drinker.jpg[edit]

Makes no sense. LWizard @ 07:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, phrase is not mentioned in target article. — Jun. 21, '06 [17:11] <freak|talk>

Fuck Wikipedia → Criticism of Wikipedia[edit]

Pretentious, useless. Kookykman|(t)e 15:44, 21 June 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 a redirect to Carmelita Spats – Gurch 10:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cake Sniffer → Lemony Snicket[edit]

- What does the insult Cake Sniffer have to do with the author/character from The Series of Unfortunite Events? All systems go 17:45, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, but change target to Carmelita Spats, the character who actually uses the (fictional) insult. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 20:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. This seems appropriate, since the term is discussed on that page. Keep --Philosophus T 00:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Please take your request to Wikipedia:Requested moves – Gurch 12:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Twentysomething → Twentysomething (disambig)[edit]

I'm trying to do a complicated sort of reshuffling to merge Twenty something into its correct spelling Twentysomething while still preserving the talk page and without deleting either page's information. So, basically, I need this page freed up to complete the merge myself. KyleGarvey 19:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • This should be at Wikipedia:Requested moves. --Rory096 08:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm going to do the move myself, if someone deletes the page. Or at least, I'd prefer to. KyleGarvey 18:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • It should still go to WP:RM, because it relates to a page move. — sjorford++ 18:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • I understand. But Twentysomething satisfies the conditions for RFD; the deletion isn't controversial; and I know exactly what to do. Could someone from here just delete it? I don't want to go to WP:RM, and I'd appreciate if you let me finish what I started before it sits any longer. KyleGarvey 20:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Since this is not WP:RM, I'm just looking at it as an extremely useful redirect. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 19:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 22[edit]

The nominated redirect was kept (no consensus) – Gurch 12:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aetherometry → Aether theories[edit]

Aetherometry isn't mentioned at all on the Aether theories page, and it is very different from the theories discussed there. It doesn't really have too much in common with aether theories at all, concentrating more on things like leukemia early warning kits and measurements with no uncertainty. Philosophus T 21:07, 22 June 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.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91(review me!) 10:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pearland JROTC → George W. Bush[edit]

No apparent connection, former target was deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pearland Army JROTC. Rory096 08:22, 22 June 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 R1 by InShaneee (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). --Rory096 05:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warren wickman → Warren Wickman[edit]

Target deleted Johndarrington 01:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedy delete as G6, although it doesn't matter either way. Kusma (討論) 00:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Path integral → Talk:Line integral[edit]

Path integral has been rewritten as a disambig, so this seems unnecessary. (I reverted blanking of the redirect, as I feel that it would be better if it were deleted entirely, and it's better discussed as an RfD than an MfD.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 00:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 23[edit]

The nominated redirect was speedy delete per WP:ASR. Cross-namespace, reposted redirect with no incoming links. AmiDaniel (talk) 22:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion[edit]

Self-referential cross-namespace redirect. Deleted by Cyde (talk • contribs) on 15 June 2006, recreated by Calsicol (talk • contribs) on 22 June 2006. There was one incoming link, which I have now changed to point directly to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion – Gurch 14:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, if possible, as db-repost. --Zoz (t) 14:14, 23 June 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 Jimfbleak. -- JLaTondre 11:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plant Vagina → Flower[edit]

Not a term one would use to find "flower"; nor is it biologically accurate. Flowers contain both male and female organs; and platns have nothing resembling a penis or a vagina. Looks like someone being naughty to me. If anyone with better biological knowledge than I thinks this is appropriate, though, I'll quickly change my mind. EngineerScotty 05:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Closed as keep on the grounds of no consensus. While cross namespace redirects are certainly discouraged on Wikipedia, they exist in large numbers. There is community consensus to delete them where they cause problems for the encyclopedia. The users requesting the deletion of this redirect have not shown that there is a problem for the encyclopedia; the users requesting it's retention have shown a possible utility in the redirect.

Votes for deletion → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion[edit]

Cross namespace redirect Yanksox (talk) 05:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 12:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: useful to the many wikipedians who still have the term "votes for deletion" in their heads. AndyJones 12:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Those Wikipedians should type Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. --Zoz (t) 13:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Or even WP:VFD. No reason to have a cross-namespace redirect for that (and since articles for deletion is red, it's not even like it's the same thing as for people with AfD in their heads). --Rory096 06:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Per bullet 5 of the "avoid deleting redirects if" section at the top of this page, "Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do." Rossami (talk)
  • Delete all cross-namespace redirects. — sjorford++ 14:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless you plan on fixing those 1,500 links. - Keith D. Tyler (AMA) 20:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for the reasons stated above. Still widely used by many Wikipedians. I know there's a thing against "cross namespace redirects" (whatever the heck that means) but IMO this should be an exception to the rule. I also feel few Wikipedians know to (nor give a darn to) type "Wikipedia:...." before these things. As far as they're concerned, these pages are part of Wikipedia. If none of that is convincing, then I'm claiming the redirect should be kept as per points #3 and 5 under "avoid deleting such redirects if..." in the "When should we delete a redirect?" section, below. Plus there appears to be a precedent for VFD being kept as a redirect. (AFD goes to a disambiguation page so it doesn't count). 23skidoo 21:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to soft redirect to discourage cross-namespace redirection. Failing that, delete and repoint all incoming links. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete after orphaning. — TKD::Talk 03:41, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Self referential, needless. --Rory096 06:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This isn't even a valid Wikipedia term anymore. -- JLaTondre 13:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, it's a cross-namespace redirect (thus violating WP:ASR) and I've orphaned it. --Cyde↔Weys 15:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross-namespace redirect, and one whos meaning we want to discourage anyway. --Hetar 05:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Obviously useful. Osomec 16:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • How is this "obviously" useful? The damn thing has no inbound links and our deletion process hasn't even been called that for a long while. I'm sorry if I don't see the obviousness of this, but I think you do need to explain it, because it's hardly clear-cut. --Cyde↔Weys 23:03, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - non-encyclopedic main namespace pollution. The target also has several shortcuts. -- Omniplex 20:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; WP:ASR. ~ PseudoSudo 23:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep People will type this into search. Chicheley 23:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why would they, exactly? Seeing as how the process hasn't even been called by this name for some time? --Cyde↔Weys 13:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep to avoid breaking old links. -- Kjkolb 03:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • There were about 3000 incoming links to the redirects Be bold / Be Bold, all of which were cleaned up by Cyde after the RFD closed. Should this discussion result in a deletion they will be repointed; breaking old links should not be a concern. ~ PseudoSudo 04:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Old cruft that needs to go. jni 07:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. Stamp out Russlish! Mackensen (talk) 13:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This link predates the creation of the Wikipedia space. It is, in fact, where WP:AFD started. It's a very old link and is another that is very likely used by outsiders (such as writers on the concept of social software) to link to one of our core policies. Deleting this link would violate clauses 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the "avoid deleting such redirects" section at the top of the page. Rossami (talk) 04:57, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:ASR. While it is a guideline, not policy, does not mean it should simply be ignored. CNR's can cause confusion, when readers browse a enclyopledia, they do not expect to fall through a crack and end up behind the scenes without warning, which CNR's do. Making it easy to find WP pages via search for people who forget to type "wikipedia:" is not a strong enough reason, if in doubt, we should remember that wikipedia is an encylopedia, and by default, we should assume people want encylopedic content, and act accordingly. Regards, MartinRe 13:27, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 24[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted as violations of WP:ASR. It doesn't make sense to impose your own preferred shortcuts in violation of policy on the entire encyclopedia. If you want a certain shortcut, make it a bookmark or code up a custom JavaScript. --Cyde↔Weys 18:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Categories for deletion → Wikipedia:Categories for deletion[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 22:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose So what, it's useful. Osomec 16:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per precedents for cross-namespace redirects. Mr. Osomec is ignoring the fact that even without this redirect, Wikipedia:Categories for deletion will still show up - in position 1 - in the search results, so there is no chance that removing this will cause anyone to lose their way to CfD. Kimchi.sg 18:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - main namespace pollution. -- Omniplex 20:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - useful, as many people forget to type in the "Wikipedia:" namespace tag before.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91(review me!) 10:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 13:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Anyone care to say why cross-namespace redirects are bad? Chicheley 23:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 23:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, harmless cross-namespace redirect. -- Kjkolb 03:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. jni 07:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for adminship → Wikipedia:Requests for adminship[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 22:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Obviously useful. Osomec 16:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - non-encyclopedic main namespace pollution. -- Omniplex 20:08, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - useful, as many people forget to type in the "Wikipedia:" namespace tag before.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91(review me!) 10:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, obviously. Cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 11:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, obviously. Cross-namespace redirect - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Not obvious at all, but really rather bizarre. Chicheley 23:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 23:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, harmless cross-namespace redirect. -- Kjkolb 03:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per long-standing practise of avoiding self-references and cross-namespace redirects. jni 07:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Harmless and possibly useful for those who do not wish to type "Wikipedia:" before every Wikipedia-related topic. --Gray Porpoise 15:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for Adminship → Wikipedia:Requests for adminship[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 22:08, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Yanksox (talk) 22:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Obviously useful. Osomec 16:31, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - non-encyclopedic main namespace pollution. It already has a shortcut. -- Omniplex 20:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - useful, as many people forget to type in the "Wikipedia:" namespace tag before, and many people consider the title to be Adminship, instead of adminship.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91(review me!) 10:45, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 13:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 23:57, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This so-called policy is based on a completely imaginary problem. Chicheley 23:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, harmless cross-namespace redirect. -- Kjkolb 03:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per long-standing practise of avoiding self-references and cross-namespace redirects. jni 07:28, 27 June 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 Crzrussian. -- JLaTondre 22:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tuçe Kazaz → Tuğçe Kazaz[edit]

Typing error while moving from Tugçe Kazaz. CeeGee 15:02, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep redir created as a result of a plausible typo. Kimchi.sg 10:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Plausible typo shouldn't be enough. A typist can simply correct a typo. Entering a variant name correctly is much more problematic. Rbraunwa 04:48, 27 June 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 until an actual article written. -- JLaTondre 17:13, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Autopista → Autopistas de Puerto Rico[edit]

Autopistas are found in others countries, including Spain. Autopista really deserves its own article, but until it has one, redirecting to a list of only Puerto Rican ones would be confusing. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 10:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 10:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Devarajan/Filmography → Filmography of G. Devarajan[edit]

together with G. Devarajan/Filmography these are pointless and undesirable redirects left over after I moved the page to a more policy complient title. Eluchil404 03:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 10:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BATTLE OF HALDIGHAT → Battle of Haldighat[edit]

Doesn't quite meet CSD R3, but I think it's unnecessary and implausible. –Dicty (T/C) 12:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Could keep it as a convenience feature for mouth breathers with caps-lock stuck on. But if you can't figure that out, how can you search for anything on Wikipedia? Dgies 01:17, 3 July 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 EWS23. -- JLaTondre 22:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James Brady (disambiguation) (disambiguation) → James Brady (disambiguation)[edit]

Nobody is going to type "(disambiguation) (disambiguation)" in the search box. —EdGl 18:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy Delete - R3 (unlikely typo) Timrem 19:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 25[edit]

The nominated redirect was kept; nomination withdrawn. — TKD::Talk 11:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doweld → List of botanists by author abbreviation[edit]

Redirect would have its merit if there was actually such an entry in the list. Otherwise, if the linker/crator cannot be bothered to check the proper botanist, the redirectshould not exist. Circeus 01:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC) Nomination retracted. Circeus 00:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 10:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Louisville Communist Journal → The Courier-Journal[edit]

Not a plausible search term (if anyone actually does call the paper this, I really doubt they'd ever search for the nickname over the paper's real name). Seems to exist just to disparage the article it redirects to, see recent POV insertions into that article, which mention this phrase [11]. W.marsh 23:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The redirect was made by a half vandalism/half Kentucky-related articles user with a grudge against the newspaper. The redirect must be simply for his own satisfaction (or I suppose people he personally tells to search that term at wikipedia.) BabuBhatt 20:28, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Two google hits for "Louisville Communist Journal". Not a notable nickname. -- JLaTondre 22:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Implausible search term, as it's definitely not a common nickname for the C-J. GassyGuy 10:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept – Gurch 10:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

C:CSD → CAT:CSD[edit]

redundant cross-namespace redirect, common style is CAT:, technical background at m:Help:Namespace manager -- Omniplex 19:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redundancy is not a decent reason for removal of a useful shortcut, that does no harm. Proto///type 22:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, CAT:CSD is short enough. — xaosflux Talk 22:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I use this shortcut all the time. Wikipedia ain't paper, and five characters is more convenient than 7. It irks me a bit, frankly, that I'm going to have to have to remember to type out CAT instead of C for a week until this gets closed. JDoorjam Talk 01:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, useful type-in shortcut, no collision with encyclopedic content has been shown. Once there are plans to introduce a C: namespace, we should certainly delete this, but why now? Kusma (討論) 02:30, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep since I use this shortcut very often, as I'm sure do other users.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91(review me!) 10:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep whom does it bother?! Is there a "C:" namespace? How's this x-space? - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This so-called policy on "cross-namespace" redirects is absurd and has already done major damage to Wikipedia's usability, especially for newer users. It must be stopped now. Chicheley 00:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Convenient, very little chance an article will be created starting C: (and if there one does need to be, then it can always replace this shortcut when that time comes). I'm all for deleting cross namespace redirect when they are sitting firmly in the article space, but this isn't the main article. Petros471 11:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Even we non-admins use this to check for backlogs. --ais523 17:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep I use this all the time, it is useful to me, and I am sure others. Prodego talk 20:02, 30 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 22:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"augustus greely" → Adolphus Greely[edit]

really unuseful title (was stub), article since moved twice Zigger «º» 07:52, 25 June 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 previous RFD (Jan 2006) — sjorford++ 10:46, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ugly bags of mostly water → Human[edit]

umm... yeah. i was checking "what links here" and this stuck out as rather odd.

This has already been deleted once, so I've speedied it. — sjorford++ 10:46, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept – Gurch 10:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The most annoying thing in the world → Crazy Frog[edit]

Yes it is annoying, but not that annoying. This redirect represents someone's non-neutral point of view. Omphaloscope » talk 08:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep; "The most annoying thing in the world" was actually the former name of the crazy frog, before it became a ringtone. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 08:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Smurrayinchester. As a side note, if you look at the beginning of the music video (approx 11th second to 17th second) you will see WANTED - the most annoying thing in the world. TheJC TalkContributions 09:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. --Zoz (t) 11:53, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as this is the former name of this subject, thus a valid and plausible redirect. Yamaguchi先生 08:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep p/ Smurrayinchester & TheJC. +Hexagon1 (t) 10:14, 5 July 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 KimvdLinde, per Mboverload/Digitalme's request. ~ PseudoSudo 23:18, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:0FA → User:Mboverload/Zero Featured Article, WP:*FA → User:Digitalme/Any Featured Article[edit]

WP redirects pointing to userspace essays; see WP:1FA's RFD. ~ PseudoSudo 22:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, sure, I see.--digital_me(TalkˑContribs) 22:49, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 26[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted per noms. --Cyde↔Weys 13:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki fairy → Wikipedia:WikiFairy[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 19:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 00:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Harmless and the proposal is based on a pointless concept. Chicheley 00:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless possibility of confusion with encyclopedic content can be shown. Kusma (討論) 00:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, see WP:ASR. Yanksox (talk) 03:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per long-standing practise of avoiding self-references and cross-namespace redirects. jni 07:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 14:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Harmless and possibly useful for those who do not wish to type "Wikipedia:" before every Wikipedia-related topic. --Gray Porpoise 15:16, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. feydey 07:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 11:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikignome → Wikipedia:WikiGnome[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 19:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 00:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It is harmless and no credible reason for deletion has been put forward. Chicheley 00:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless possibility of confusion with encyclopedic content can be shown. Kusma (討論) 00:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per Kusma Lectonar 13:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per long-standing practise of avoiding self-references and cross-namespace redirects. jni 07:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 14:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Harmless and possibly useful for those who do not wish to type "Wikipedia:" before every Wikipedia-related topic. --Gray Porpoise 15:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Come on people its harmless having it causes no confusion its these stupid ugly nerds that want to stymie creativity that want things to be deleted. I say delete them and send them to the fat farm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.154.220.53 (talk • contribs) on 22:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. feydey 07:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 11:20, 28 June 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 per CSD R2. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 20:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kris Craig Interview → User:Pub biographer/Kris Craig Interview[edit]

Cross-space redirect Fram 11:20, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept – Gurch 10:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

C:WPCVG → CAT:WPCVG[edit]

New (2006-06-12) cross-namespace redirect moved to CAT:WPCVG, common style is Special:Prefixindex/CAT:, see also m:Help:Namespace manager. -- Omniplex 05:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as per below (C:CSD). Proto///type 11:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per below (C:CSD). - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Harmless and the proposal is based on a pointless concept. Chicheley 00:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Reasonable "pseudo-namespace" like WP:. -- JLaTondre 14:01, 27 June 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 attack. Kusma (討論) 05:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giant douche → George W. Bush[edit]

This redirect only points to George W. Bush and previously pointed to John Kerry. Silly and pointless either way it originally pointed. Basically its an offensive redirect. Kevin_b_er 05:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept – Gurch 10:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

C:UBT → CAT:UBT[edit]

New (2006-06-17) cross-namespace redirect moved to CAT:UBT, common style is Special:Prefixindex/CAT:, see also m:Help:Namespace manager. -- Omniplex 05:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry for being dense, but what exactly in m:Help:Namespace manager says that we shouldn't have C: shortcuts? Why do we even use CAT: instead of the shorter C:? Kusma (討論) 05:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it says that "pseudo-namespaces" (like WP: or WM:) might be transformed into real namespaces. I can't tell you more about it, all I know is that help page, and from my POV Special:Namespaces is either invisible, or not (yet) enabled. No idea who invented CAT:CAT, check the history. It got some traction, see the "Prefixindex" link. Belatedly adding C: would only confuse it more than necessary, one vs. three characters is no huge gain. CAT for category could be also slightly more obvious than C for somebody who doesn't know it. -- Omniplex 05:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Question forwarded to the Pump. -- Omniplex 04:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per below (C:CSD). Proto///type 11:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per below (C:CSD). - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Harmless and the reasoning put forward is of no value. Chicheley 00:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Reasonable "pseudo-namespace" like WP:. -- JLaTondre 14:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 12:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not paper → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not[edit]

inter-wiki redirect Polonium 17:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. See this redirect's previous RfD, and Special:Whatlinkshere/Wikipedia is not paper (344 inbound). ~ PseudoSudo 22:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:ASR; recommend an AWB team repoint the applicable redlinks after this RfD closes. ~ PseudoSudo 22:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Does no harm whatsoever. Chicheley 00:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless possibility of confusion with encyclopedic content can be shown. Kusma (討論) 00:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - cross-namespace redirect. gren グレン 01:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. cross-namespace redirect. jni 07:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 14:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 11:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Chicheley. jgp (T|C) 23:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Omniplex 02:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Does not harm and no possibility of confusion here. This link predates the creation of the Wikipedia space. It is, in fact, where WP:NOT started. It's a very old link and is likely used by outsiders (such as writers on the concept of social software to link to one of our core policies. Deleting this link would violate clauses 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the "avoid deleting such redirects" section of Wikipedia:Redirect. Rossami (talk) 04:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this breaks the fourth wall between the encyclopedia and the messy, nitty-gritty process of writing the encyclopedia. We shouldn't be confusing our final product, which is a stand-alone free encyclopedia, with the vehicle, Wikipedia, that was used to make it. --Cyde↔Weys 18:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as with all cross-namespace redirects. Linking to this is just lazy and unnecessary. Let's keep the encyclopedia clean and separate from its internal workings. — sjorford++ 10:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, as above. Petros471 10:43, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross-namepsace redirect. --Hetar 21:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete cross-namespace redirect. ViridaeTalk 14:27, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per "Cross-namespace redirects are bad because they result in a person (reader) walking around a building (encyclopedia) and falling into the pipework (project space) because the builders (editors) thought cracks in the walls and floors would be useful for them to get around. Delete as per WP:ASR, as a unneeded (numerous WP: style shortcuts) minor convenience for a sub set of editors does not outweigh creating a standalone encyclopedia for readers. If people do not specify "wikipedia:" in a search, we should remember that, first, and foremost, we are an encyclopedia, and return encyclopedic results by default. MartinRe 00:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The title specifically includes "Wikipedia"; if someone is searching for or linking to it, it is rather certain that its purpose is to find out what Wikipedia is not. Any encyclopedia article on the subject would have as its only source that very page that is the target of the redirect. —Centrx→talk • 03:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 27[edit]

The nominated redirect was kept as a redirect to The Moon is a Harsh Mistress – Gurch 13:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rational Anarchist → Bernardo de la Paz[edit]

Bernardo de la Paz was merged with The Moon is a Harsh Mistress per consensus. Rational Anarchist would seem to be a term for a political philosophy but it has a redirect to Bernardo de la Paz on the grounds that the character calls himself a rational anarchist in Heinlein's novel. Redirect isn't really appropriate, much less so now that it would redirect straight to the novel. Delete. KleenupKrew 22:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Needed for the history. No good reason to delete here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JJay (talk • contribs)
    • Comment. In any such case the page could be moved to a subpage of the target's Talk page and the given redirect deleted? —Centrx→talk • 03:25, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as re-redirected to The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. No harm, and it's more appropriate pointing to the novel than to Bernardo, as there may have been others. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 00:00, 28 June 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 redirect to The Moon is a Harsh Mistress – Gurch 13:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rational Anarchism → Bernardo de la Paz[edit]

see Rational Anarchist above, same situation applies. Delete. KleenupKrew 22:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was cleaned up accordingly. — Jun. 28, '06 [00:21] <freak|talk>

Gregory Helms → Gregory Shane Helms and I hate him → Gregory Helms[edit]

Vandal moved Gregory Helms to I hate him, then back, then back to it so it couldn't be returned. Page currently at Gregory Shane Helms. Gregory Helms needs deleting so that Gregory Shane Helms can be moved there, and I hate him needs deleting as it's an attack page. --- Lid 22:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 11:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editcountitis → Wikipedia:Editcountitis[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect (violation of WP:ASR). --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 20:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. If there's a policy against cross-namespace redirects, it's a strange one. See User talk:Mr. Lefty#Cross-namespace redirects Art LaPella 23:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Completely useless link to an unimportant essay in project namespace. Wikipedia specific neologisms should not appear in encyclopedia. jni 07:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 13:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not useful. A search will turn up the desired article without the redirect.--Rbraunwa 13:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 13:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per clause 2 of the "avoid deleting redirects" section - aid in the event of accidental linking. Redirects are cheap. Rossami (talk) 04:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this breaks the fourth wall between the encyclopedia and the messy, nitty-gritty process of writing the encyclopedia. We shouldn't be confusing our final product, which is a stand-alone free encyclopedia, with the vehicle, Wikipedia, that was used to make it. --Cyde↔Weys 18:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, as above. Petros471 10:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Cross-namespace redirects that aren't incredibly useful should probably be avoided. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 23:28, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Cyde. -- JLaTondre 13:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete p/ Cyde↔Weys. +Hexagon1 (t) 10:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Closed as converted to disambig. -- JLaTondre 19:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Kahn → Michael Kahn (film editor)[edit]

Deletion of the "Michael Kahn" page will allow for the creation of a disambiguation page titled "Michael Kahn" to distinguish between "Michael Kahn (film editor)" and "Michael Kahn (theatre director)". -- FunPod3k 12:52, 27 June 2006

  • Comment Michael Kahn (film editor) was created by a page move, and therefore the only history on Michael Kahn was it being moved and a redirect being created in it's place. I've created a disambiguation page in it's place and added cross-linking at the top of the two articles. TheJC TalkContributions 18:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted (edit history is a Nihilartikel, AfD consensus was to redirect but would have been deleted otherwise) – Gurch 13:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Camel → Camel[edit]

This redirect is not useful. It is extremely unlikely that someone would search for "The Camel" when they mean "camel". -- Kjkolb 05:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I agree with Kjkolb.

--Rbraunwa 14:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I also agree with Kjkolb.

Cas Liber 00:36, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Speedy Delete, created in error. — xaosflux Talk 03:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Pedro Garibay" → Pedro Garibay[edit]

The redirect title includes a typo (the quote marks) Rbraunwa 04:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. jni 07:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete - CSD G7 (the only author requests deletion) Timrem 21:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 28[edit]

The nominated redirect was deleted by Freakofnurture – Gurch 11:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete → Wikipedia:Speedy deletions[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment My point exactly. I DB'd it, and the DB was removed, then put back. Delete, 'cos they shouldn't redirect into Wikipedia stuff. --69.145.123.171 23:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. jni 05:48, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 17:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 17:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Yanksox 22:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Omniplex 02:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per clause 2 of the "avoid deleting redirects" section - aid in the event of accidental linking. No possiblity of confusion. Redirects are cheap. Rossami (talk) 04:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this breaks the fourth wall between the encyclopedia and the messy, nitty-gritty process of writing the encyclopedia. We shouldn't be confusing our final product, which is a stand-alone free encyclopedia, with the vehicle, Wikipedia, that was used to make it. --Cyde↔Weys 18:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom (and can somebody relist Votes for deletion too) /wangi 18:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was changed to Porte d'Orléans (Paris Metro) for now – Gurch 11:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Porte d'Orléans → List of stations of the Paris Métro[edit]

Porte d'Orléans is not just a metro station but also the surrounding area. --SPUI (T - C) 23:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 13:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox → Wikipedia:List of infoboxes[edit]

Cross-space redirect SCHZMO ✍ 15:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. jni 05:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 17:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 17:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Omniplex 02:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this breaks the fourth wall between the encyclopedia and the messy, nitty-gritty process of writing the encyclopedia. We shouldn't be confusing our final product, which is a stand-alone free encyclopedia, with the vehicle, Wikipedia, that was used to make it. --Cyde↔Weys 18:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, as above. Petros471 10:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget I came to this redirect because I was trying to find out how to use Wikipedia infoboxes. I couldn't find any info on how to use these. Perhaps it should redirect to Help:Infobox as that actually explains what they are. The guidelines on Wikipedia:Redirect would suggest keeping this under exceptions 3 and/or 5. I think a disambiguation page would also be appropriate as was done for Redirect and Template. Dgies 21:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Help:Infobox is still a cross-namespace redirect. Unless we have an encyclopedia article on infoboxes (which we shouldn't have as they aren't notable outside of Wikipedia), this link shouldn't point to anything. --Cyde↔Weys 00:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • While Wikipedia:Redirects_for_deletion#When_should_we_delete_a_redirect.5F section 5 says you might want to delete cross-namespace redirects, it specifically says "but note also the exceptions listed below this list" and I claim that exception 5 "Someone finds them useful." applies. Out of the blue I found this redirect because I was searching for Infobox and this redir helped me. I'm obviously not the only person who found it useful, and I think the chance that it would confuse someone looking for a main space article is pretty low. Dgies 06:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: The inability of users to properly use the Wikipedia search function is no reason to allow cross-namepsace redirect to exist. --Hetar 06:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Cyde. -- JLaTondre 13:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was This belongs at Wikipedia:Requested moves. -- JLaTondre 13:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Letchworth Garden City → Letchworth[edit]

It seems wrong that we redirect from the official name for the town, to an informal one (really, the redirect should be the other way around) Ratarsed 09:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — Jul. 1, '06 [14:38] <freak|talk>

"Rapator" → Rapator[edit]

This was prodded, but I've seen this kind of deletion be controversial before, so moving it here. No vote. Original prod concern was: Article "Rapator" was created by moving page from article Rapator by a user not familiar with Wikipedia: WikiProject Dinosaurs guidelines. "Rapator" (with quotes) is an unlikely search term, so there's not even a need for the redirect, which is all that remains in this article (all content was re-inserted into Rapator).--Firsfron of Ronchester—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mangojuice (talk • contribs)

  • Delete as typo, and an unlikely search term. feydey 07:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this is not controversial, as the 1,000 other dinosaur genera articles on Wikipedia do not have quotes in their title. Since no one will search for "Rapator" (with quotes), it's an unlikely search term, and it's the only article (of 1,000) with quotation marks in the title, which is why I prodded it in the first place. If there has to be a vote, I will certainly vote for delete.--Firsfron of Ronchester 09:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, obviously. Possible speedy as R3. --Zoz (t) 13:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Obviously delete. These should be speedy deletion candidates. jni 05:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, perfectly reasonable redirect. — Jun. 28, '06 [00:19] <freak|talk>

Rap (disambiguation) → Rap[edit]

This appears to be a redirect of one unused disambig page for Rap to another disambig page for Rap. (Redundant Rap Redirect, so to speak). Dreadlocke 00:03, 28 June 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 List of sovereign states, with no objection to changing to a better topic if need be. — Jul. 3, '06 [16:07] <freak|talk>

Independent States → Latin America[edit]

I can see no reason why this redirect should exist. I'm not aware of any entity called "Independent States" in the history of Latin America. gadfium 19:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A little bit more poking around indicates that it refers to the "Spanish Speaking Commonwealth of Independent States" (1810s-1820s). I doubt that there is a need for this redirect, but if there is it should go to South American Wars of Independence. Nothing links to it at present. My vote is to delete it.-gadfium 19:46, 28 June 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 (technical cleanup, author requested deletion) jni 07:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

‎User:AnnaKucsma/Geography/United States → User:AnnaKucsma/Geography/United States[edit]

Basically, I had something weird happen with that first "U" when I created the page. I did a "move page" and now have the page in my Userspace (rather than amongst the articles), but the redirect is still here to be tripped over.  -- Anna Kucsma 16:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

June 29[edit]

The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 13:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LUE Trinity → Shock site[edit]

TBH, I had absolutely NO idea what the "LUE trinity" was when I found this. Turns out, "LUE trinity" is a semi-protologism in the Gamefaqs community, referring to a trio of shock images, including Goatse, Tubgirl, and a deformed baby. As a hyperspecific protologism, we don't need an article for it, even a redirect. It is not, and should not, be mentioned in the Shock site article. Mangojuicetalk 18:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 13:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adorable Bunnies → Shock site[edit]

Adorable bunnies is a minor shock site that has long been removed from the shock site article. Mangojuicetalk 18:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 20:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 13:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redcoat.net/pics/tubgirl.jpg → Shock site[edit]

A very specific, but not commonly referred to, web address for a specific shock site. Mangojuicetalk 17:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 13:23, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bakla.net → Shock site[edit]

Redirect is actually to a section of shock site that hasn't existed for a long time. Bakla.net never contained any content on its own; the site was delisted at some point in the past. It's a dead meme; according to Alexa, it at one time managed to reach an Alexa rank as high as around 23000, but I know of no sources on Bakla.net, so we shouldn't have an article on it per WP:WEB. Mangojuicetalk 17:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. —Centrx→talk • 03:22, 4 July 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 somebody wants to write neutral, third-person prose about editing disputes on Wikipedia, this can be redirected to it. I don't see that happening, but I won't slam the door on it. — Jul. 3, '06 [16:05] <freak|talk>

Wikilawyering → Wikipedia:Wikilawyering[edit]

Cross namespace redirect. Should be orphaned first. Zoz (t) 17:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom; yes, all need to be. ~ PseudoSudo 18:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete but incoming links should be redirected first.--Jusjih 01:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Omniplex 02:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per clause 2 of the "avoid deleting redirects" section - aid in the event of accidental linking. Based on a review of the "what links here", there is no possiblity of confusion. Redirects are cheap. Rossami (talk) 04:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per clause 5 of the "when should we delete a redirect" section - cross-namespace linking. Clause 2 talks about articles, not Wikipedia material. Duplicate articles and accidental linking are non-issues here because you don't link to alien namespaces from our encyclopedia, either accidentally or deliberately. Redlink is easier to fix than a redirect web. Cheap crap is still crap. jni 06:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this breaks the fourth wall between the encyclopedia and the messy, nitty-gritty process of writing the encyclopedia. We shouldn't be confusing our final product, which is a stand-alone free encyclopedia, with the vehicle, Wikipedia, that was used to make it. --Cyde↔Weys 18:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "Cross-namespace redirects are bad" because they result in a person (reader) walking around a building (encyclopedia) and falling into the pipework (project space) because the builders (editors) thought cracks in the walls and floors would be useful for them. Regards, MartinRe 21:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, as above. Petros471 10:39, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Big time delete, no cross namespace redirects. Netscott 08:49, 3 July 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 Freakofnurture – Gurch 21:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletions → Wikipedia:Speedy deletions[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. No incoming links outside of user space. Delete. – Gurch 11:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Petros471 11:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 17:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 18:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Omniplex 02:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per clause 2 of the "avoid deleting redirects" section - aid in the event of accidental linking. No possiblity of confusion. Redirects are cheap. Rossami (talk) 04:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. jni 06:07, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rossami. Can somone link the "Cross-namespace redirects are bad" policy for me? - brenneman {L} 07:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this breaks the fourth wall between the encyclopedia and the messy, nitty-gritty process of writing the encyclopedia. We shouldn't be confusing our final product, which is a stand-alone free encyclopedia, with the vehicle, Wikipedia, that was used to make it. --Cyde↔Weys 18:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "Cross-namespace redirects are bad" because they result in a person (reader) walking around a building (encyclopedia) and falling into the pipework (project space) because the builders (editors) thought it would be useful for them. Regards, MartinRe 21:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was delete. – Will (message me!) 14:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for arbitration → Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect. No incoming links outside of user space. Delete. – Gurch 11:33, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Petros471 11:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 17:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. ~ PseudoSudo 17:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Omniplex 02:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per clause 2 of the "avoid deleting redirects" section - aid in the event of accidental linking. No possiblity of confusion. Redirects are cheap. Rossami (talk) 04:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. jni 06:06, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rossami. Harmless enough, although I always just pipe it. - brenneman {L} 15:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this breaks the fourth wall between the encyclopedia and the messy, nitty-gritty process of writing the encyclopedia. We shouldn't be confusing our final product, which is a stand-alone free encyclopedia, with the vehicle, Wikipedia, that was used to make it. --Cyde↔Weys 18:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "Cross-namespace redirects are bad" because they result in a person (reader) walking around a building (encyclopedia) and falling into the pipework (project space) because the builders (editors) thought it would be useful for them. Regards, MartinRe 21:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No Cross-namespace redirects. Netscott 08:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Cyde & MartinRe. -- JLaTondre 14:07, 4 July 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, CSD R2 --Cyde↔Weys 16:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dariush tahririhah → User:Boregard6[edit]

cross-space redirect Fram 09:25, 29 June 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 Cruft --Cyde↔Weys 13:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fancruft → Wikipedia:Fancruft[edit]

Redirect across namespaces. There is some history here (it used to redirect to Fan fiction). --ais523 15:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 17:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. See AceMyth's edit summary; compare google:fancruft with google:-wikipedia+fancruft. ~ PseudoSudo 17:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- Omniplex 02:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per clauses 1 and 2 of the "avoid deleting redirects" section. Redirects are cheap. Rossami (talk) 04:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. jni 06:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; this breaks the fourth wall between the encyclopedia and the messy, nitty-gritty process of writing the encyclopedia. We shouldn't be confusing our final product, which is a stand-alone free encyclopedia, with the vehicle, Wikipedia, that was used to make it. --Cyde↔Weys 18:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, as above. Petros471 10:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Cyde. -- JLaTondre 14:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep re-direct to Cruft. Re-directs are cheap, re-directs that point to articles in the proper namespace which explain the term reasonbly well are even cheaper! Yay unto the Chicken 12:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

June 30[edit]

The nominated redirect was speedily deleted as attack. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 03:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cum whore → Kim Kelly (actress)[edit]

Seems like an attack, although it is a pornographic actress. But surely there are other pornographic actresses that fulfill that criteria. --Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 03:15, 1 July 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, and this is a speedy deletion criteria. Shouldn't have been brought here. --Cyde↔Weys 18:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2006 Duke University lacrosse team rape hoax → 2006 Duke University lacrosse team scandal[edit]

Leftover from page move vandalism. TacoDeposit 16:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete waaay POV. Redirects from vandalism aught to be speediable as nonsense. -- Scientizzle 18:24, 30 June 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. -- JLaTondre 19:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TISD → Tomball Independent School District[edit]

TISD can refer to any of several Independent School Districts, all starting with "T" including both Tomball ISD and Texarkana ISD, which we both have articles for now. MaxMahem 14:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've made it a disambig page. Please add anything else that TISD might stand for... -- Scientizzle 18:31, 30 June 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 --Cyde↔Weys 14:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FartButts → Wikipedia:And now for something completely different... Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense[edit]

See below. Pointless. Delete. – Gurch 12:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

February 33 → Wikipedia:It's Bad! It's a Joke! It's Other Deleted Nonsense![edit]

Redirecting to BJAODN from article space? Pull the other one. No incoming links. Utterly useless. Delete. – Gurch 12:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FelineFanatic13 → Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/FelineFanatic13[edit]

A redirect from someone's name (in article space) to their RfA. No incoming links. Cross-namespace debate aside, this seems unnecessary. Delete. – Gurch 12:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was keep (no consensus) – Gurch 11:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Antarticopelta → Antarctopelta[edit]

I originally prodded this redirect, but the prod tag was removed by User:Mangojuice as a "perfectly reasonable redirect". However, R3 states "R3 Redirects as a result of an implausible typo that were recently created. However, redirects from common misspellings or misnomers are generally useful." However, this is not a common misspelling. Incorrectly-spelled "Antarticopelta" returns exactly five hits on a Google search, all of which are this article on Wikipedia, or its mirrors. This is not a commonly misspelled word. It was a typo created by an inexperienced editor, and any valid content has since been moved to the correctly-spelled article. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs team is not large enough to maintain and expand all 1,000 correctly-spelled articles and keep an eye out for dozens of improbably-misspelled articles, too. Delete.Firsfron of Ronchester 06:39, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I thought this was a plausible typo. I am not at all surprised that the typo returns few ghits. To me, it's plausible, because of the "artic"/"arctic" confusion. Plus, redirects are cheap. Mangojuicetalk 14:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But if it's a plausible mispelling, wouldn't it show up somewhere else on the internet? But it hasn't. Only on Wikipedia would there be votes to keep a misspelling that no one's ever misspelled before. :/--Firsfron of Ronchester 19:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Anyone might easily type "antarticopelta" into the search box when looking for "antarctopelta". Nothing implausible at all about that. Misspellings are far more likely to occur in a search than in a web page which shows up on Google. I also don't understand why the WikiProject Dinosaurs team would need to "keep an eye out for" redirects like this. --Mathew5000 19:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Because we get lots of vandalism from the kiddies, who like to add info on "Bonersaurus" or add lots of zeros to sizes. I'm a member of three wikiprojects, and I guarantee the dinosaur articles get more vandalism than the other projects on which I work. I've currently got 1,400 pages on my watchlist, and judging from the rest of the dinosaur crew, they have similarly large amounts of pages on their watchlists, too (User:Ballista's page says he's got 1,200 on his watchlist). We spend part of each day just cleaning up bad info that's been added by (presumably) young writers. Anything that helps us clean house, like deleting misspelled articles and being able to then remove them from our extensive watchlists, is a good thing.--Firsfron of Ronchester 20:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If the redirect is deleted, then it might be re-created in future by a well-meaning but inexperienced editor (as happened originally [12]). If left as a redirect, it should in theory save you work for that reason. I understand your point about dinosaur pages being subject to more vandalism than average, but is that true for dinosaur pages that are mere redirects? Pages that are redirects get hardly any edits, so they should not be much of a burden on your watchlist. --Mathew5000 21:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - as outlined above, no hits on google Cas Liber 00:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not an asset to WP and anything to reduce my watchlist (currently 1,443) would be welcome - if it were a plausible mis-spelling, Google would surely come up with something other than this WP page? - Ballista 04:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: No harm in keeping this, if one editor created it, it's more than plausible that it could be useful to someone else out there. --Hetar 21:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Surely we're not resorting to the Google test to find out how people misspell words? -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was (deleted). — Jul. 1, '06 [14:29] <freak|talk>

(Spongebob) → SpongeBob SquarePants[edit]

I have never seen the show or character referred to with parentheses around the name. If this redirect stands, should other words randomly placed it parentheses redirect as well? It doesn't seem to serve any purpose. GassyGuy 02:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — Jul. 1, '06 [14:39] <freak|talk>

"BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER" and "ANGEL": CROSSOVER APPEARANCES AND PLOT TIE-INS → Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel character and plot crossovers[edit]

The excessive caps make this redirect useless. NatusRoma | Talk 05:03, 30 June 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 Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 22:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Daimler → Talk:Daimler Motor Company[edit]

Confusing redirect after the Daimler itself was converted into a dab page. S.K. 09:25, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 13:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brandy Alexander (wrestler) → Brandi Alexander[edit]

This redirect was created in response to an AFD. The article was AFD'd due to a lack of notability; however the article was only mis-named, with the correct name proving the notability easily. When the article was moved, this redirect was left behind. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 13:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I could understand someone using a Y instead of an I but tacking the wrestler part on the end seems fairly redundant. ViridaeTalk 14:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Someone created the page here once, and having the redirect prevents that from happening again. They put (wrestler) at the end because the page Brandy Alexander already exists. This redirect isn't harming anything, so I see no reason to delete it. Timrem 15:10, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the redirect is more of a maintance issue, then an encylopedic one. Yanksox 16:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I modified the Brandy Alexander disambig page to catch this possibly misspelling, so the redir is now redundant. It's much less likely that someone would both misspell the name, and add the (wrestler) suffix. Dgies 00:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Dgies. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:39, 6 July 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 consensus) – Gurch 11:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Raja Sundernath → Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath[edit]

subject of redirect is not even mentioned in target article —Hanuman Das 13:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. ---Baba Louis 20:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it looks like (from this Google search) that Raja Sundernath is the guru of Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath. But I'm not sure...might be worth adding to the article if it can be verified. -- Scientizzle 23:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 13:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oliver Knox → Chronicles of America[edit]

Character in nn book of the same name as the target. The target has been rewritten to refer to a series of history textbooks, and now the redirect does not make sense. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chronicles of America --Mr Stephen 17:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. (I was the one who changed it to a redirect a few days ago.)--Chaser T 21:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom since nom info verified by Chaser. Herostratus 05:54, 2 July 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/June_2006&oldid=1138526921"