May 1
User Giano:19th century architecture → User:Giano/19th century architecture
Link to userspace, made by move to fix accidental creation of userspace article in main namespace. Tangot a ngo 10:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Bill to slash funds to the UN → H.R.2745
Name is inherently PoV (Possibly "offensive" as per reasons above) and is highly unlikely to be linked to or used by anyone. 68.39.174.238 14:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 2
SVEK → Swedish-Cuban Association
Derogatory naming, used solely by political opponents of the Association. 'svek' is Swedish for 'betrayal'. Not aiding accidental linking in any meaningful matter. Soman 07:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Accidental linking from what? (Nothing links to it now...) If it's a term used by political opponents it should probably be kept.
Grand
master
ka 07:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment- Is the word "svek" used in any other context? If so, delete. If not, keep per Grandmasterka. Reyk YO! 09:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- It is used in Sweden, probably by the political opponents. http://search.yahoo.com/search?_adv_prop=web&x=op&ei=UTF-8&fr=fp-top&fr2=op&va=svensk+kuba+SVEK&va_vt=any&vp_vt=any&vo_vt=any&ve_vt=any&vd=all&vst=0&vf=all&vm=i&vc=countrySE&fl=0&n=10 -- Advocatus diaboli 10:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. Not the actual abbreviation; furthermore, I can't find Google hits for SVEK used this way, but quite a number for the recording company Svek records, so it does not seem to be the most common meaning. - Andre Engels 13:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 3
Butterflies (TV Series) → Butterflies (TV series)
prodded as unnecessary redirect after editor changed all the article links to the correct title. I removed the prod tag and am posting it here as a courtesy Thatcher131 15:29, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Valid redirect as per policy. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep Highly plausible as a search or as being used by someone else later. Redirects are cheap. JoshuaZ 16:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per naming conventions. -- Slgrandson 19:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep; {{ R from other capitalisation}}. — TKD:: Talk 12:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Obvious keep, common capitalization error. Grand master ka 02:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
"single-fire process" → Single-fire process
Result of a move, simply has extra quote marks Tango 16:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 4
Barons' Wars → Category:Barons' Wars
Redirect from main namespace to category namespace Andre Engels 13:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as a cross namespace redirect. -- Hetar 19:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Barons' War (which I just changed to a disambiguation page). TimBentley (talk) 19:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Big Brother 777 → Big Brother UK series 7
Unnecessary, term has no relevance to article. Thanks/ wangi 10:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.generalize → generalization
Hinders search. I was looking for "generalized hyperbolic distribution" or something like that. I typed "generalize", hoping to then click on Index, but instead got the article on "generalization". I don't see why this redirect is at all helpful. EricK 13:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Someone might want to link this, and this is the page it should lead to in that case. When searching for something, use search rather than go. - Andre Engels 13:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Andre. — TKD:: Talk 12:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
generalized → generalization
Hinders search. I was looking for "generalized hyperbolic distribution" or something like that. I typed "generalized", hoping to then click on Index, but instead got the article on "generalization". I don't see why this redirect is at all helpful. EricK 13:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. As the above. - Andre Engels 13:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Andre. — TKD:: Talk 12:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 5
UNWDA → Worldwide disaster aid
Target already deleted. Organisation was a fake. rxnd ( t | € | c ) 14:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Shayn weidner → PUMA AG
By 170.76.21.156, same as the one below. Deepak 14:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Also bundled:
Amanda Elrod →
Beauty,
Sarah posey →
Goofy,
David burkhalter →
Gambit (comics),
Andrew Cage →
Beard.
Deepak 15:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- And these are by User:Drtburk, probably a sock puppet: Michelle Kristin Williams → Machine, Zach chandler → Pancake, Josh goring → MC Hammer, Debbi blakey → satan, Brett Penshorn → Saxophone. Deepak 15:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Speedy delete all as obvious vandalism. -- Hetar 19:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Corben lowden → genius
Clearly a vanity redirect. Couldn't find anyone notable with that name on google. Should I have speedily deleted this?(It doesnt come under the criteria). Deepak 14:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 6
Citizen relocation code → ZIP Code
This redirect has nothing to do with the target article, and could potentially cause people to believe that ZIP codes do have something to do with forcibly relocating citizens. BOARshevik 01:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — TKD:: Talk 05:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete; joke from
The Simpsons episode
Sunday, Cruddy Sunday. smurrayinch
ester(
User), (
Talk) 10:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment if this Simpson's reference is correct, perhaps the target of the redirect should just be changed to " Sunday, Cruddy Sunday", the reference added to either the Quotes or Trivia section and the redirect tagged with
{{ R to list entry}}. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 12:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- New Redirect to Sunday, Cruddy Sunday per Ceyockey. Cowman109 Talk 19:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Pooma lift → T-bar lift
Was on AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pooma lift, transferring here instead. Stifle ( talk) 01:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Cesium 137 (band) (disambiguation) → Cesium 137
Currently unused, unlikely search target. Originally created by me due to poorly done otheruses template, but that was fixed, so it is now useless. Polonium 01:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Joey newman → Joey Newman
I am trying to get rid of the Joey newman link so that there is only one Joey Newman entry. Obviously, the person who first created the page about me did not capitalize my last name properly 71.106.108.96 07:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Talk:Campus_Crusade_for_Christ-Archive_1 → Talk:Campus_Crusade_for_Christ/Archive-01
Made mistake yesterday writing the title for the first archive of the Campus Crusade talk page. Sixtrojans 13:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 7
National Rail route LNE 6 → Network Rail route LNE 6
Redirect was caused by my own mistake in naming a new article Picapica 14:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
National Rail route LNE 6A → Network Rail route LNE 6A
Redirect was caused by my own mistake in naming a new article Picapica 14:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
National Rail route NW 2023 → Network Rail route NW 2023
Redirect was caused by my own mistake in naming a new article Picapica 14:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
National Rail route SW 110 → Network Rail route SW 110
Redirect was caused by my own mistake in naming a new article Picapica 14:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Interserivce rivalries → Interservice rivalry
I entered a typo when creating this redirect; I will now create the correct redirect so pls. delete this (incorrect) one. Thanks and sorry for the bother. Fairsing 20:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 8
Trinity Church, Wilmington → Episcopal Diocese of Delaware#New Castle County
I originally created this redirect. The correct name for this church is 'Trinity Parish', which is now part of the target page; this redirect is erroneous and potentially misleading. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 00:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.SP2 → Service pack
It doesn't make sense, and is the only one between "SP", "SP1", "SP2", etc. to redirect to Service Pack. Of course we can't have something like "SP11" just because there could be a Service Pack 11 of some odd program :-) BTW, all the pages that currently link to SP2 do that *in error*, 50% of them because they want to link to Windows XP SP2 Gennaro Prota (talk) 23:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Fixed all erroneous links. The only page, besides this one, which links to SP2 now is Wikipedia:TLAs from QA0 to TZ9. -- Gennaro Prota (talk) 00:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Windows XP where there is a section on this. I am actually suprised that service pack 2 doesn't have its own article. It was a pretty significant release for Microsoft and caused/fixed a wide range of issues. -- Hetar 19:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Why? First of all Windows XP is not the only piece of software to have a service pack 2; secondly SP2 doesn't necessarily mean "service pack 2" (at least one user asked me why that wasn't an article about sp2 orbitals). And why we don't have the same for SP1? This is clearly inconsistent and nonsensical to me. At most, SP2 could be a disambiguation page. -- Gennaro Prota (talk) 12:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Merciless death → Merciless Death
Target article has been deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Merciless Death). Visor 20:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Directed Studies → Directed Studies at Yale University
This redirect is a result of a move that I did because other universities appear to have a "Directed Study" program; the original page may become an article or a disambiguation page, but until now it's misleading. - Liberatore( T) 16:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.WP:CBU → Wikipedia:Requests for comment
This is a confusing redirect that might not make sense to newer users (or even users who have been around for over two years like me). I see that it stands for Wikipedia:Conflicts between users, but this has not been in use for a long time. Ardric47 02:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - my attempt to park it for new ideas by blanking it was unfortunately reverted, so now we need this bureaucratic Rfd overhead for a mere obsolete shortcut. -- Omniplex 05:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. There could concievably be external links referring to this. Redirects do not hurt, and if for some reason a Wikipedia page with "CBU" in its initials is created, we can discuss changing the redirect then. Ral315 ( talk) 06:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: unless you have someplace more logical that it should point to. --
Hetar 19:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Keeping it as is makes the maintenance of
WP:WP based on
Category:Redirects from shortcut difficult. Maybe we need something like
{{ tdeprecated}}, which can be used for redirected templates, also for obsolete shortcuts. On Meta m:Category:Shortcuts has a subcategory for cruft like CBU. -- Omniplex 03:51, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keeping it as is makes the maintenance of
WP:WP based on
Category:Redirects from shortcut difficult. Maybe we need something like
- Keep
Delete What Links Here shows that nothing links to WP:CBU but the link here and a deletion log. Cowman109 Talk 19:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC) - If there are no references to such a shortcut, it is very unlikely that it is even used. And, as Ardric47 stated below, this article was voted for deletion in the past and was apparently created without consensus to put it back in. Cowman109 Talk 01:52, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Looking at the deletion log, it seems actually this article was deleted for: 05:20, 23 Nov 2004 SJ deleted WP:CBU (unused redir). It seems like it was deleted without consensus after all, which would make it not a candidate for speedy deletion. And, after reading other comments, I have come to the conclusion that this article doesn't hurt anyone in any way, and as redirects are cheap there is not much reason to remove this, as the fact that it is here shows that someone used it at one point or another. Changing vote to keep. Cowman109 Talk 01:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply- Comment: Please read the policy stated at the top of this page, "We do not delete redirects simply because they do not have any incoming links." Since this is a shortcut, it is entirely possible that it is currently being used, even if no links to it exist. --
Hetar 21:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- How can it be being used if there are no links? Ardric47 23:23, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: Please read the policy stated at the top of this page, "We do not delete redirects simply because they do not have any incoming links." Since this is a shortcut, it is entirely possible that it is currently being used, even if no links to it exist. --
Hetar 21:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment—"Conflicts between users" was last used in March 2004. In November of that year, the redirect WP:CBU was deleted. It was then re-created in December 2005. It is therefore even possible that it should now be speedily deleted per WP:CSD G4. If that somehow doesn't apply, then consider that Wikipedia and its users got by without it for over a year. It is somewhat difficult for me to see how anyone would be using it now. Ardric47 01:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
New Union (disambiguation) → New Union
Nothing links to it, and I can't imagine someone would include "(disambiguation)" in a search. Colm O'Brien 23:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - Nothing is supposed to link to a disabiguation page. If it did, it should be disambiguated, unless someone explicitly links to the xyz (disambiguation) redirect.) --
Petri Krohn 07:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- You misunderstand...New Union is the actual disambiguation page, so there's no reason to have the other one as a redirect. -- Colm O'Brien 02:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Conker live and reloded → Conker: Live & Reloaded
unneeded (previously a prod'ed article), unlikely way to spell/capitalize/punctuate Mango juice talk 12:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Oppose, like all misspellings, the fact that they exist means that at least someone misspelled it like that once. Just tag it with {{ R from misspelling}} and leave it. -- W( t) 12:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong delete. This is a well-meaning eighth-grader's random typo ("reloded" for "Reloaded") combined with several other errors ("and" for "&"; missing colon; missing capitalization). It's highly unlikely that someone would search for this particular combination of mistakes (one of an infinite number of possibilities). Common misspellings are helpful redirects, but one-off flukes only clog the search results, thereby making it more difficult for readers to find their intended articles. — David Levy 07:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: no harm in keeping the redirect, if one person mispelled it, others could potentially do so as well. -- Hetar 19:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Hetar: There is potential for it to be mispelled.
Cowman109
Talk 19:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- How much potential is there for it to misspelled in this precise, unusual manner? Should we also create redirects from every conceivable typo ("Conkr live and reloaded", "Cnker live and reloaded", "Conker live and rloaded", etc)? This particular combination of errors is highly unlikely to ever be searched for again, and I've already noted the harm in keeping it. (Redirects show up in searches, thereby pushing down useful results). — David Levy 05:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as it's a highly unlikely spelling. Ral315 ( talk) 08:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 9
User:Arnz/Sandbox/Nambour and Gympie North railway line → User:Arnzy/Sandbox/Nambour and Gympie North railway line
redirect was caused by a typo of leaving out the "y" in my username. Can the closing admin please delete this redirect as a speedy? thanks and my apologies for the bother. -- Arnzy (whats up?) 13:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of British words not widely used in the U.S. → List of British words not widely used in the United States
ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per nom, old page title, redirects are cheap. Kusma (討論) 20:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - article series being cleaned up; all links to old page checked and updated. --
TrevorD 22:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Also, implausible search term, especially with the .s, as per Stifle's comments below at #List of American words not widely used in the U.K. -- TrevorD 11:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
List of American words not widely used in the U.K. → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom
ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per nom, old page title, redirects are cheap. Kusma (討論) 20:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - article series being cleaned up; all links to old page checked and updated. -- TrevorD 22:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Plausible type-in. Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, implausible search term, especially with the .s Stifle ( talk) 11:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
List of American words not widely used in the UK → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom
ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words mainly used in Commonwealth English → List of British words not widely used in the United States
Poor & ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words mainly used in British English → List of British words not widely used in the United States
Poor & ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Oppose, article should be moved back to its former name and current article name and further redirect deleted. Captain scarlet 15:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC) -- reply
- You gotta be kidding me. I myself invented the "mainly used in British English" title, but we were forced to rename the article again because that title was actually ambiguous out of context, see
Talk:List of British words not widely used in the United States/Archive 1--
JackLumber 20:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- whether you were forced or not doesn't mean I have to accept it. This page redirection is awaiting comments, here they are. the original article was fine where it was, god knows who came up with the idea of moving it in the first place, I think I retired from the original debate as I was sick of seeing idiocies spoken. Here is a secondment of my original vote: Oppose. You may continue discussion of this subject on the redirection proposal page os opposed to my personnal discussion page. Regards,
Captain scarlet 20:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- People who do not understand, or do not want or even try to, or do not respect fellow editors and their opinions are really not worth talking with, are they? On personal pages or proposal pages, whatever. --
JackLumber 20:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I understand but I disagree. If you had any respect for what I had just said, you wouldn't be making a joke of it. More and more Wikipedians seem to htink it is ok to blatantly take the mickaël, even more amazing how it is accepted and not prevented. If you do not want replies, do not ask for them. Since there are currently only two participating in the debate and if no one else does, there will be no concensus and the redirect will remain.
- At the very beginning I had implicitly assumed that we can address each other in a friendly, informal, relaxed way. Apparently it's not like that, but at least it's not my fault. It's frustrating that one must beware of people who regard what others think as "idiocies," walk out, then come back whenever they like and feel they have a right to pontificate. The only reason why I want to delete these redirects is to free resources. -- JackLumber 21:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC) And I sure am not a troll, nor is User:Hardouin. reply
- I understand but I disagree. If you had any respect for what I had just said, you wouldn't be making a joke of it. More and more Wikipedians seem to htink it is ok to blatantly take the mickaël, even more amazing how it is accepted and not prevented. If you do not want replies, do not ask for them. Since there are currently only two participating in the debate and if no one else does, there will be no concensus and the redirect will remain.
- People who do not understand, or do not want or even try to, or do not respect fellow editors and their opinions are really not worth talking with, are they? On personal pages or proposal pages, whatever. --
JackLumber 20:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- whether you were forced or not doesn't mean I have to accept it. This page redirection is awaiting comments, here they are. the original article was fine where it was, god knows who came up with the idea of moving it in the first place, I think I retired from the original debate as I was sick of seeing idiocies spoken. Here is a secondment of my original vote: Oppose. You may continue discussion of this subject on the redirection proposal page os opposed to my personnal discussion page. Regards,
Captain scarlet 20:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Keep per nom, old page title, redirects are cheap. Kusma (討論) 20:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - article series being cleaned up; all links to old page checked and updated. As regards other comments above, this is a proposal for deletion, not for renaming. Current redirect achieves nothing. (If this redirect were maintained and/or the page were moved, that would have a knock-on effect on the immediately preceding pages listed as they follow the same format.) -- TrevorD 22:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
List of words mainly used in Australian English → Australian words
Never referenced, see also below JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words mainly used in Canadian English → Canadian words
the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words mainly used in American English → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom
the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words used mainly in American English → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom
the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.CwE → Commonwealth English
Never referenced, the abbr. itself is nonexistent, never used anywhere on WP let alone in the world JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.User LittleBro → Template:User LittleBro
Cross namespace Midnight tonight 09:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Can You Spare a Dime?) → Can You Spare a Dime?
Newly created article with grammatical error which is unlikely to be mistyped or searched for. Parasite 07:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.$pringfield (or, How I learned to stop worrying and love legalized gambling), → $pringfield
Incorrect grammar convention in the title. Only one article used that link, which I have now altered. Axl 07:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Userbox and Userboxes → Wikipedia:Userboxes, List of userboxes → Wikipedia:List of userboxes
Both cross-namespace redirects restored on DRV by a slight (10u-8kd) majority. Procedural relisting here. No vote. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:32, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, and I've made both {{ deletedpage}} notices until the end of this listing. However, I view the process patently absurd. Does anyone bother to read Wikipedia:Redirect? "When should we delete a redirect? It is a cross-space redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace." Ral315 ( talk) 06:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as cross-namespace redirect. It's a good one for newbies to find out about "Wikipedia:" with (in fact, it was during a debate on deleting this redirect a long time ago that I learned all the nifty shortcuts). This one just never seems to go away for some reason. AmiDaniel ( talk) 07:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. It seems like a natural typing error, and I don't see a pressing need for the redirect to be freed up for an article in the main namespace. I agree about newbies learning about namespaces, but the convenience afforded by the redirect is invaluable - at least for members who spend most of their time on the site filling their user pages with userboxes. -- IntrigueBlue 09:32, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete cross namespace redir/ wangi 09:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. We avoid these for many good reasons, one of which is to avoid the confusion of encyclopedic articles with Wikipedia 'administration' pages. -- Hetar 19:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: Both appear to have already been deleted and protected after they were restored. Cowman109 Talk 19:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Orphan and delete. However, {{ deletedpage}} makes it a blue link without a good explanation (and without the correct link), which I think is not a good idea for a widely-used redirect. However, keep if nobody orphans it, I think having cross-space redirects is preferrable to having lots of broken links, even if they are all in userspace. Kusma (討論) 22:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Soft Redirect useful links, though it should be made clear if they remain that they are cross-namespace so people know not to use that in the future. Userbox is a very common term and I can easily see people looking it up. Cowman109 Talk 02:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment, I already orphaned these redirects by bot two months ago. Apparently somebody has repopulated the Whatlinkshere lists? Soft redirects are about as useful as a screen door on a submarine. Endorse, keep deleted. Oops, wrong page, but I had taken WP:DRV off my watchlist due to the trolling, so I guess I missed out. — May. 10, '06 [08:18] < freakofnurxture | talk>
- Delete. Cross-namespace redirects must go; at best, a soft redirect can be tolerated iff there is actual encyclopedic content that can go on the page as well. Otherwise we're unnecessarily conflating the encyclopaedia with internal stuff. Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment I've added List of userboxes to this RFD; if anyone would like to notify the other voters here, they can, but I don't think that their votes will change any. Ral315 ( talk) 06:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 10
Shanti → Gaia_(mythology)
No indication on the page redirected to what the redirected term has to do with it; none of the links has anything to do with Gaia or with Greek mythology in general. Andre Engels 11:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Russian Expansionism and Ottoman Empire → History of Russo-Turkish wars
The redirect's wording is POV and no one would look for an article under such name anyway. Worse, however, is that the target is a WP:POVFORK as explained at Talk:History of Russo-Turkish wars Irpen 03:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, nominator. -- Irpen 01:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - Russia expanded - that is a fact. Whether one wants to call it "expansionism" is a matter of of opinion. The British certainly did, as evident on the article
Rise of the New Imperialism. Most of the expansion happened at the expence of the
Ottoman Empire and other
Turkish people. This redirect is in fact of vital importance, or at least of substantial effect: searching Google for ""Russian Expansionism"
[2] gives this Wikipedia redirect as the first hit!
The issue here is in fact not the possible POV of the title, but an (unfounded) attempt by Russian enthusiast to delete or "blank" the redirected page History of Russo-Turkish wars. -- Petri Krohn 01:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply- Please avoid throwing labels. This other page is a POV fork as explained at its talk. If you want an article, write it, or at least a stub, instead of pasting together a bunch of articles and call it "A review" of all the events the multitude of articles cover. Anyway, this is discussed at the article talk. The redirect itself is useless in any case. No one would ever enter such exact phrase in the search string. --
Irpen 01:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- A POV fork of what? Please point out the corresponding
NPOV article, so we can point the redirect there. A disambiguation page will not serve the role of the neutral article. --
Petri Krohn 04:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- "corresponding" articles are separate war articles which someone stacked by pasting their entire content into this quasi-"history". This is not a review of wars. Neither the DAB page is. If you want a review of wars, write it, or a stub at least. This here is just a bunch of articles pasted together that underwent some POV editing. -- Irpen 04:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- A POV fork of what? Please point out the corresponding
NPOV article, so we can point the redirect there. A disambiguation page will not serve the role of the neutral article. --
Petri Krohn 04:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Please avoid throwing labels. This other page is a POV fork as explained at its talk. If you want an article, write it, or at least a stub, instead of pasting together a bunch of articles and call it "A review" of all the events the multitude of articles cover. Anyway, this is discussed at the article talk. The redirect itself is useless in any case. No one would ever enter such exact phrase in the search string. --
Irpen 01:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom abakharev 01:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. KNewman 05:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. The Ottomans were the only Imperialists in this conflict. -- Ghirla -трёп- 08:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as per nomination. -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 09:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Worms/Prod → List of Worms weapons and tools
I don't know anything about this except that someone blanked the page and then prodded it as a blank page, rather than sending it through RfD Thatcher131 04:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: See also Special:Prefixindex/Worms/ and the revision histories thereof. — May. 10, '06 [08:26] < freakofnurxture | talk>
- Apparently it contains some ancient history and does no harm, so keep. Kusma (討論) 23:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Template:Archive1 → User talk:Unisouth/Archive1
User talk archive moved to user space; redirect redundant. — Wh o uk ( talk) 13:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Looks to be a remnant from a page-move. No reason for it to redirect to user space. Cowman109 Talk 20:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Phil Bonifeld → Phil Bonifield
Came about after I moved the article because of a typographical error. This redirect is useless. -- D-Day( Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?) 14:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: don't see any harm in keeping it. -- Hetar 17:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep—plausible typo. Ardric47 20:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, tagged as {{ R from misspelling}}. Kusma (討論) 20:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - if it was a typo once... — Wh o uk ( talk) 20:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per above. Cowman109 Talk 22:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Whouk. -- Northenglish 02:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Kobaly → Healthcare traveler
Per
WP:RFD, redirect makes no sense. not a useful redirect. -
AED 21:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC) edited 05:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
Creature editor (Spore) → Spore
No one is going to by trying to get to "Creature editor (Spore)" on their own unless linked from an article. It was originally an odd attempt to branch off of the main Spore article (including a "main article" link), although that article had only a paragraph's worth of content on this part of the game. It was filled with nonsense and redundant information, so another user changed it to a redirect, sending the user back from whence they came. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 03:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- No decision If anything it should redirect to Spore (video game), though I am not sure if the creature editor title is of any use to people. Cowman109 Talk 22:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete No existing links and unlikely to be linked or searched for in the future. - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andre Engels ( talk • contribs) . 10:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per above -- Northenglish 02:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 11
Hero (Mortal Kombat) → Taven (Mortal Kombat)
Transferring from AFD. The discussion from there follows. Stifle ( talk) 11:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Article was created before Hero's name was known (see Taven (Mortal Kombat), and it's unlikely anyone will be searching for this term anymore. Virogtheconq 20:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 1, 2006 → Great American Boycott
Only in exceptional circumstances should individual dates redirect to events that occurred on that day and this is far from one of those cases. Plus this may interfere with some proposed changes to be made over at Current events that involve creating daily pages of this format. — GT 14:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. Kusma (討論) 23:36, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete in agreement with User:GT. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 23:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. I'd never heard of the "Great American Boycott" outside of Wikipedia (still haven't, actually), but I've sure heard of the May 1, 2006 boycotts. Now that the date has passed, it's not such a big deal, but the redirect is still useful to me and probably the readers, too. The argument "we might have a real page there someday" doesn't convince me--if we ever get one, we can replace the redirect. It's a fairly painless process to do so. It's much more painful for someone looking for information on the boycott of May 1, 2006 to have to somehow conjure up in his or her mind the non-intuitive "Great American Boycott". Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 05:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Matt, if you click on Current events and go down to May 1, you'll have no trouble finding it. — GT 05:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 12
User page → Wikipedia:User page
- Delete as a cross namespace redirect. -- Hetar 18:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Weak Delete Cross namespace redirect with less than 500 links that can pretty easily be fixed with a bot, but it seems like the User page article can easily be turned into a full length article explaining the usage of user pages in different settings, and then a soft redirect could be used. Until that article is created though, it should be deleted. Cowman109 Talk 22:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)reply
- I am going to attempt to create this into an encyclopedic article. I also found user pages which also redirects to Wikipedia:User page, so that can be a redirect to User page if the changes are deemed to be encyclopedic. Cowman109 Talk 20:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep Even though its a cross namespace, I found the redirect useful. Navou talk 02:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete unless we can write an encyclopaedia article about userpages in general, as per Cowman109. Johnleemk | Talk 13:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Weak keep. This will at least prevent people from writing a non-encyclopaedic article. Lincher 19:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep The whole no-cross namespace links in totally unnesscary. Beside, there are a whole bunch that have been kept, why not this one?
The
Gerg 23:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- If by kept you mean changed to a soft redirect, then yes. However, I have not seen a cross namespace redirect that survived a nomination here, perhaps you could point me to one? --
Hetar 17:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_deletion/Precedents#Should redirects to other spaces be kept? for a list of precedents. Cowman109 Talk 20:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- If by kept you mean changed to a soft redirect, then yes. However, I have not seen a cross namespace redirect that survived a nomination here, perhaps you could point me to one? --
Hetar 17:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Just wondering, what's the problem with cross namespace redirects? Crobzub 16:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: You can see a similar debate on cross namespace redirect at
this archive. Just to summarize, (1) there has been a clear precedent that we delete these (or change to a soft redirect at the very least), just like there is clear precedent that we keep schools. (2) They cause problems for our mirrors (3) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and when our readers type a term in the search box many of them expect to find encyclopedic articles - not instruction manuals on the inner workings of Wikipedia. --
Hetar 17:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I don't understand (2) at all. Our mirrors can easily avoid reusing cross-namespace redirects if they wish to do so. Has there been any particular complaint from a mirror or other reuser and are there other ways we can address their concerns other than deleting all cross-namespace redirects? (We could tag them with {{ selfref}}, for example). Until now, the "mirror problem" seems to me to be an unproven hypothesis. Kusma (討論) 23:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Orphan, then delete. Or write a "user page" article, I am sure it has non-Wikipedia uses. Kusma (討論) 18:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment I have made... a start to making the article an actual article with a selfref template, though it feels pretty empty. It may be better off left as a redirect unless a stronger page can be created. Cowman109 Talk 23:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 13
Julie rodriguez
Redirects to deleted article. Dark jedi requiem 02:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Armenian terrorism and Armenian Terrorism
They both redirect to ASALA as if this acronym was a metonymy of "Armenian terrorism". Definitely a breach of NPOV. Tazmaniacs 17:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Literature of Southeast Asia → Literature about Southeast Asia
These are not the same. The redirect refers to literature from Southeast Asis but target is external literature about Southeast Asia. -- JLaTondre 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it."Rolllo May" → Rollo May
Not a useful redirect Lincher 03:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment : Maybe a plausible typo like this : Rolllo May but not when you add the quotation marks. Lincher 19:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Dilupa → User:Dilupa
Not a noteworthy wikipedian enough to have a redirect from the mainspace and not useful enough either Lincher 19:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Dictionary of the Catholic Resistance → WikiProject:Dictionary of the Catholic Resistance
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 15
Agentwormy → User:Agentwormy
Cross-namespace artifact from page move. Speedy delete please. - Corbin ∫ 1 ɱ p s ɔ ♫ Rock on, dude! 02:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 16
RuneScape Images → Category:RuneScape Images
When should we delete a redirect reason # 5: It is a cross-space redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. Except in this case it goes to the Category namespace. DG X 23:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Obnoxious fad → Crazy Frog
Seeming attack redirect. Google shows no actual connection [3] and redirected-to article doesn't mention phrase, either. Vslashg ( talk) 18:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Keiser Av En Dimesjon Ukjent → Keiser Av En Dimensjon Ukjent
The misspelled article has been renamed and all links to the incorrect spelling have been corrected accordingly. It is unlikely the same misspelling will be used again, so the redirect is not needed. Aprogas 17:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Template:TOCStatesAndIslands → Template:HSBC States
Nothing links to the template. Only one article links to the target template. — Markles 17:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Saliyar → Saliya
Those two should be different articles, therefore redirect is misleading. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by M arpalmane ( talk • contribs) 10:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 17
US 0 → List of U.S. Routes, U.S. Route 0 → List of U.S. Routes, United States Route 0 → List of U.S. Routes, U.S. Highway 0 → List of U.S. Routes, United States Highway 0 → List of U.S. Routes
U.S. Route 0 has never existed and never will exist as an actual road, making these redirects totally unnecessary. Secondly, the page List of U.S. Routes has been moved to List of United States Numbered Highways, making these all non-functional double redirects. Northenglish 01:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- KEEP harmless redirect, fix double redirection
132.205.94.75 02:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: I agree that it's harmless, but it's also useless, as "U.S. 0" has never existed and thus is likely never to be searched for. There's no reason for a non-existant item on the list to redirect to the list. -- Northenglish 02:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment, if anything, these redirects will impede the creation of hoax road articles. — May. 18, '06 [06:02] < freak| talk>
- Delete as misleading. Ardric47 02:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, harmless. Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 01:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: it is plausable someone may search under these redirects. Jonathunder 01:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Sex on the beach → List of cocktails
It's linked to *from* that article. Would be better as a redlink so someone can make an article. Stevage 14:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment—If you think there should really be a separate article, then there is a template that you can put on the redirect page, Template:R with possibilities. Ardric47 20:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- The more correctly-titled Sex on the Beach has been an article at various times. Sex on the beach should redirect there if Sex on the Beach is turned into an article again (apparently there was never more than a recipe). Perhaps a link to wikibooks:Bartending/Cocktails/Sex on the Beach would be more appropriate than a link to the redirect? Kusma (討論) 20:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep until someone writes a separate article on the drink. It's useful for searches. Someone may want to remove the link from List of cocktails though. -- Northenglish 02:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Heliacal → Wiktionary:Heliacal
An interwiki redirect, which is both unwanted and does not work Andre Engels 09:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Hillyard, Seattle, Washington → Hillyard, Spokane, Washington
Bad geography, Hillyard is not in Seattle KleenupKrew 02:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 18
Editcountitis → Wikipedia:Editcountitis
- Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. -- Hetar 23:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep as a useful tool. Editcountitis has absolutely no meaning outside of Wikipedia, so no one will be searching for for "editcountitis" looking for any meaning other than the Wikipedia one. Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 01:29, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete for exactly the reasons Matt Yeager provides. -- JLaTondre 21:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per Hetar and JLaTondre. — TKD:: Talk 02:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Matt Yeager. Since there's no other definitions, this redirect makes sense. Until there is anther definition, just keep it. It helps more than it hurts. Porphyric Hemophiliac § 20:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)! reply
- Delete Do we have to go through this again? No cross-namespace redirects! ~ Veledan • Talk 21:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: don't cross namespaces. Jonathunder 02:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. However, as the statement "editcountitis has absolutely no meaning outside of Wikipedia" is false. It has meaning in other wikis, the
Open Directory Project, and other "editing" organizations where edits can be counted. It might even deserve a stub :) —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk) 17:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Well, write it then so that people who search for the term don't end up with nothing. - Richardcavell 03:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - 'editcountitis' is pure wikipedia jargon. - Richardcavell 01:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per WP:IAR, there is no need to be so rigid in this case about the no cross space rule. -- rogerd 04:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. feydey 09:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as per the others. Johnleemk | Talk 11:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per WP:ASR. -- Rory096 05:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as cross-namespace redirect, or at the very least convert it into a soft redirect. AmiDaniel ( talk) 09:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Bio-diesel → Biodiesel
Tagged by Rifleman 82 on 04-May, but placed rfd2 tag on article instead of here. Rationale was "It is one of the top searches for biodiesel; it is an uncommon spelling and there is little value in keeping it".
- Rifleman 82 also nominated BioDeisel and BioDiesel with similar rationale.
- Harpalus also commented on BioDiesel article page with "I agree with this. Searching for biodiesel should display Biodiesel as the top result, not a common misspelling."
- Keep all three. Valid possible misspellings. Even if top search results, it stills gets you to the desired page. -- JLaTondre 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per above. -- Northenglish 02:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Vegoil → Biodiesel
Tagged by Rifleman 82 on 04-May, but placed rfd2 tag on article instead of here. Rationale was "It is one of the top searches for biodiesel; it is NOT biodiesel at all, and it is a colloquialism for straight vegetable oil and there is little value in keeping it."
- Redirect to straight vegetable oil. -- JLaTondre 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Agree with JLaTondre -- Northenglish 02:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to straight vegetable oil per JLaTondre Cowman109 Talk 19:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Empyrez.com → Empyrez
Tagged by Skeptical One on 06-May but not listed here. No rationale provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Portal:Macedonia → Macedonia
Tagged by Miskin on 11-May but not listed here. Since nomination, the redirect target has bounced back and forth between Macedonia & Portal:Republic of Macedonia. From the talk page, the objection appears to be that Macedonia & the Republic of Macedonia are not the same thing. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Yasar kemal → Yasar Kemal
comparatively quickly corrected bad capitalization Malyctenar 14:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 20
Wikiproject Dad's Army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Dad's Army
Needless cross-namespace redirect Rory096 19:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Kingdom of Christ → Millennialism
The article space was created as a redirect in the first place, and never had any content. Furthermore, there is nothing that shows that Kingdom of Christ = Millennialism in the first place, and there should in fact be particular material that does not overlap, as Millennialism is a cross-cultural phenomenon. MSJapan 01:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.disengagement → Israel's unilateral disengagement plan
"Disengagement" is a normal word that is used in many different contexts. For example, I also wrote an article disengagement from religion. The redirect should be removed for the same reason that we do not want a redirect from e.g. House to White House. Besides using the word "disegagement" for Israel's unilateral disengagement plan suffers from Wikipedia:recentism. I think the problem with this redirect in the articles Stalin Note and Konrad Adenauer are natural consequences of making a redirect from a very general word to a very specific example of the use of the word. Andries 07:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)(amended for contents) reply
- Delete per nom. Reyk YO! 10:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete — the scope of 'disengagement' is too broad for use in the manner of this redirect. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 23:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per above. — TKD:: Talk 01:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per above, misleading redirect. -- Tangot a ngo 07:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Singapore, Singapore → Singapore
Double entry and redundant redirect -- Fernvale 05:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Since Singapore is a city-state, this could be useful. — TKD:: Talk 02:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per above.-- Jusjih 14:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per TKD. -- Ter e nc e Ong 14:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - Singapore, Singapore is a legitimate name for a place. - Richardcavell 03:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per above. -- Tangot a ngo 07:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Singapore/History → History of Singapore
Redundant redirect -- Fernvale 05:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Singapore/History, Singapore doesn't exist. As Singapore/History is tagged for deletion, I altered the heading to what is presumably correct. Johnleemk | Talk 11:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong keep—This must be kept in order to preserve the edit history (especially to comply with the GFDL). Ardric47 03:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. This format is deprecated.-- Jusjih 14:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. There is almost no history to preserve, page appears to have been moved. -- Tangot a ngo 07:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Woodlands (Singapore) → Woodlands, Singapore
Redundant redirect -- Fernvale 05:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 21
WP:1FA → User:Mailer diablo/One Featured Article
A link from project space to an essay written by a sole editor describing his new personal adminship standards. I don't believe personal essays should get WP: redirects. kingboyk 03:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Just a comment; WP:RAUL is certainly a link to a personal essay. (Although you could argue that it's become a community thing by now and should actually be in Wikipedia: space.) Johnleemk | Talk 05:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete WP:RAUL is one of very few (is it the only?) WP: redirect to a userspace page. However, that page would be of some interest to the average Wikipedian as (s)he is even free to add his/her own rule to the list. On the other hand, Mailer diablo's adminship standards are really not all that important, considering that no other Wikipedian should really be editing them. joturn e r 05:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - Unnecessary. K ilo-Lima| (talk) 10:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - There are very few cases in which I could foresee a project space link tu a userspace article being acceptable to me, this is not one of them. This is a personal treatise which I very much doubt Mailer Diablo would be keen on other users editing too much, as would happen with a prospective policy article for instance. Also this link being in project space might give some new users the impression that Mailer's viewpoint is widely held amongst the community at large, which I am not sure is true to be honest. Rje 14:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete if gives the mistaken impression that this is more that a user's personal statement -- rogerd 01:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as per Joturner. Schutz 14:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: per above. Jonathunder 01:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: a very common piece of RFA reasoning. Perhaps the userpage should be merged with others, such as Jguk's, and moved into the project namespace? Ingoolemo talk 04:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete although I'd have prefered to see some chatter to MD himself first, and his talk looks naked of discussion of this. Perhaps some dialog would have saved us this time. Can we get rid of WP:CUNT -> User:Radman1/CUNT while we are at it? - brenneman {L} 13:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - The concept to which it is linked is Mailer Diablo's private musing and not accepted policy. - Richardcavell 03:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - a bit too similar to WP:3RR and could potentially be misleading for some users. Also, per Richardcavell. -- Tangot a ngo 07:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per above discussion. feydey 09:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete until and unless this becomes a projectspace essay page. Is this an early close candidate yet? + + Lar: t/ c 00:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, per reasons above - unnecessary. PJM 16:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong Keep, no policy or guideline says WP space things can't go to userpages. If you find a better place where that shortcut can go, then change it, but it's not harming anything now. -- Rory096 16:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
ShootJar → Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ShootJar
This is redirecting from the article space to wikipedia namespace. DarthVad e r 22:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 23
Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza → Saturn Relay
Bad article name. Who would enter a search name like that? Article itself is otherwise blank and should be deleted 64.180.26.229 18:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - badly formed article name. - Richardcavell 01:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, it's apparently an alternate name for it, so somebody knowing both names might enter that in. Even if it's not used much, redirects are cheap. -- Rory096 05:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. Unlikely search target. Dr Zak 03:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. I agree with Rory096 --redirects are cheap. Nephron T| C 01:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Buick Terraza/Saturn Relay → Buick Terraza
Bad article name. Who would enter a search name like that? Article itself is otherwise blank and should be deleted 64.180.26.229 18:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Talk:Buick Terraza/Saturn Relay → Talk:Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza
Redirects to obsolete talk page of a different article 64.180.26.229 08:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.WikiProject Thelema → Wikipedia:WikiProject Thelema
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 05:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - what's wrong with crossing namespaces when it helps a person find what they're searching for? - Richardcavell 06:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. There's a reason why we have different namespaces, and I'm not about to reiterate all the other rationales for deleting cross-namespace redirects. Johnleemk | Talk 07:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Hocaefendi → Fethullah Gülen
I'm replacing an existing {{ db}} with an RFD. The nomination by Azate for speedy read: "hocaefendi" means nothing but "dear teacher", as in "Dear teacher Smith,...". 1000s of people are addressed like that. Why should somebody monopolize the term? Interiot 08:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.WP:JIMBO → User talk:Jimbo Wales
We really don't need to make it easier for people to find Jimbo's talk page. The signal to noise ratio on that thing is so high it's useless to Jimbo--no need to encourage more noise. — Philwelch t 12:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Tell me, is there another redirect that could better use this namespace? If not, then what's the point? We should make it easier to find stuff not harder.-- God Ω War 15:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: perhaps a soft redirect to m:Board of Trustees? -- Hetar 04:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per God of War. Redirects are supposed to facilite the finding of pages, and this one does that. -- bcasterline • talk 02:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. I doubt many people find Jimbo's talk page through this redirect. I'd guess that the redirect is used primarily as a shortcut for experienced users who already know where the page is. -- TantalumTelluride 02:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: If not deleted, it should at least be made a soft redirect as it crosses namespaces. Fagstein 03:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per TantalumTelluride. -- Rory096 07:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep Reasonable cross-name space redirects from WP shortcuts to userspace don't bother me--just keep them out of the mainspace (although WP: is technically in the main article namespace). AmiDaniel ( talk) 09:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Move to WT:JIMBO. Ain't WT for talk page redirects? -- Cyde↔Weys 19:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Cross Media Bar (XMB) → Cross Media Bar
Badly named article (with unecessary parentheses) has since been moved and all linking articles now point to the correct name. Imroy 14:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. If someone was confused enough to create the article at that title, it's safe to assume someone else will. This redirect will prevent the creation of redundant articles.
Johnleemk |
Talk 15:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- It wasn't created with that name. From the history, it was originally called Xcross Media Bar and renamed to the version with parentheses, presumebly by a user unfamiliar with the naming rules. That old redirect should certainly be kept for the reason you gave, but not this one. Anyone searching for 'cross media bar' will find the article, I don't see anyone creating another article with the (XMB) part. Imroy 03:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Micoolio101's Photo Album → User:Micoolio101/Micoolio101's Photo Album
Redirect from article space to user space. Weregerbil 09:01, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Listcruft → Wikipedia:Listcruft
Cross-namespace redirect Stifle ( talk) 15:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.User:Shujz123/Shuja Ansari → User:Shujz123
Created in error when userfying Whpq 15:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 24
Jeremy Baruffa → Perfect
Nonsensical vanity redirect PoptartKing 23:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - Richardcavell 00:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 25
Xfire (computer game) → Xfire
Pointless redirect that no one will ever type or link to. The actual computer game called "Xfire" was cancelled (as per List of cancelled video games) but that article should not redirect to the Xfire article. Powers 02:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.WWE Day of Reckoning 3 → American Idol (video game)
A (currently) non-existant professional wrestling game title that redirects to an American Idol game, which makes no sense at all. Oakster (Talk) 20:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Quantum_Vacuum_Collapse → String_theory
Target page doesn't even talk about the redirect subject. Tmh 14:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
-
Quantum decoherence talks about collapses. Would that be a better target? --
JLaTondre 14:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I think not. Perhaps Spontaneous symmetry breaking? — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Actuarial Outpost misspelled archive page redirects
Talk:Actuarial outpost/Archive1 → Talk:Actuarial Outpost/Archive 1
I misspelled the page's name, this redirect is unnecessary. Avi 14:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as nominator -- Avi 14:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Speedy delete you could speedy both these under {{db-author}} ~ Veledan • Talk 14:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Thank you, I did not realize the speedies could be used of redirects. -- Avi 14:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Talk:Actuarial outpost/Archive 1 → Talk:Actuarial Outpost/Archive 1
I misspelled the page's name, this redirect is unnecessary. Avi 14:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
assume good faith → Wikipedia:Assume good faith
A cross-namespace redirect that I recently noticed restored by Piotrus. While it my have a lot of internal links, Wikipedia cetainly did not invent the phrase and it's not novel jargon. This is conceivably confusing to the reader, and not terribly useful. Dmcdevit· t 07:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- It was restored because it created a ton of redlinks; I'll orphan it in the morning (if I won't get blocked for it, which seems to happen a lot when I use AWB...). -- Rory096 08:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Oh, and delete after orphaning it. -- Rory096 08:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, cross-namespace redirect. feydey 09:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as cross-namespace redirect that may well be blocking an actual article. AmiDaniel ( talk) 09:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
ايرنا → Islamic Republic News Agency
This is the English Wikipedia. We do not use Arabic script in English. — GT 04:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, somebody might search for this if they know Arabic and that this is the real name in Arabic. We don't keep titles in Arabic for that reason, but redirects are valid (see the entire category of Category:Redirects from alternate languages) -- Rory096 04:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Rory. Redirects are cheap. AmiDaniel ( talk) 09:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Rory. Kukini 14:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, reasonable redirect. Absolutely no chance of collateral damage. -- Cyde↔Weys 19:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
WikiProject U.S. Cities → Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 04:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Houseing → Grinding (dance)
For a foreign-language speaker, it would be too easily confused with Housing. Invitatious 01:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 26
Homosexuals attitudes towards homosexuality → Societal attitudes towards homosexuality
Article moved from Societal attitudes towards homosexuality to Homosexuals attitudes towards homosexuality to make a point. Homosexuals attitudes towards homosexuality was then made a redirect to Societal attitudes towards homosexuality, when it should probably have been deleted. - Smahoney 20:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Christianity and Latter Day Saintism → Mormonism and Christianity
Redirect created by a move page which has now been moved back to the original title RelHistBuff 22:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Mormonism as a Christian religion → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism
Redirect to a target that is a redirect itself RelHistBuff 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Slogan:Mormons are not Christians → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism
Redirect to a target that is a redirect itself RelHistBuff 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Fix double redirect and keep, unless the current target gets deleted, in which case delete this too. -- Rory096 06:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, as this implies the use of a namespace, which in reality doesn't exist. — TKD:: Talk 01:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, unlikely as a search target Dr Zak 02:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as unlikely search term with unused pseudo-namespace "slogan". Ardric47 21:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The LDS Church and Christianity → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism
Redirect to a target that is a redirect itself RelHistBuff 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Christianity and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism
Redirect to a target that is a redirect itself RelHistBuff 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Video game software → Computer software
Not the same topic. Article that is redirected to offers little to nothing (nothing obvious, at least) about the topic. InShaneee 22:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target → Computer and video games and tag with {{ R from subtopic}} User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 00:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to Computer and video games per Ceyockey. — TKD:: Talk 01:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Video game hardware → Computer hardware
Not the same topic. Article that is redirected to offers little to nothing (nothing obvious, at least) about the topic. -- InShaneee 22:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target → Computer and video games and tag with {{ R from subtopic}}. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 00:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to Computer and video games per Ceyockey. — TKD:: Talk 01:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiholiday → Wikipedia:Wikiholiday
This may be an instance in which a cross-namespace redirect is useful. But, all the same, this redirect violates WP:ASR and really shouldn't be in the main namespace. -- bcasterline • talk 03:44, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Patrick Seaman → User:Patrick@patrickseaman.com
WP:VAIN, nocrossnamespaceredirects Qu e ntin Smith 14:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Censorship in China → Internet censorship in mainland China
Censorship and internet censorship are not the same thing, for instance Censorship is also about books censorship. 81.49.63.110 12:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep and expand into an article, obviously. Why the anon is right that the redirect is from a general term to a much more specific term, it is better for a person searching for censorship in China to find some specific information than none at all.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Redirect to Censorship in the Republic of China. It's been suggested that this article and Internet censorship in mainland China be merged, but until then, this article is a better target as it's more global. -- JLaTondre 20:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply- I don't see a merge notice on those pages. And note that China usually refers to mainland China (People's Republic of China), whole Republic of China means Taiwan: therefore the change you recommed would very likely redirect people to the article about a different country then they intended.--
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
Talk 00:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- An anon redirected
Censorship in the Republic of China to
Censorship in Taiwan after my comment. However, that's irrelevant as I completely missed that the article I was pointing to was Taiwan and not the Mainland. I always get the proper names for those two confused. Given that, I think this should be a disambig between
Internet censorship in mainland China &
Censorship in Taiwan. If an article on general censorship in the People's Republic of China is written, it should be at the country's proper name anyhow and can be added to the disambig. --
JLaTondre 00:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Disambig is a good idea for that article, I agree.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- An anon redirected
Censorship in the Republic of China to
Censorship in Taiwan after my comment. However, that's irrelevant as I completely missed that the article I was pointing to was Taiwan and not the Mainland. I always get the proper names for those two confused. Given that, I think this should be a disambig between
Internet censorship in mainland China &
Censorship in Taiwan. If an article on general censorship in the People's Republic of China is written, it should be at the country's proper name anyhow and can be added to the disambig. --
JLaTondre 00:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I don't see a merge notice on those pages. And note that China usually refers to mainland China (People's Republic of China), whole Republic of China means Taiwan: therefore the change you recommed would very likely redirect people to the article about a different country then they intended.--
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
Talk 00:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Censorship in China should be a disambiguation page with links to articles about (a) censorship in the People's Republic of China, and (b) Censorship in Taiwan. — May. 28, '06 [05:48] < freak| talk>
- Keep for now per Piotr. -- Northenglish 19:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply
biosphere 3 → biosphere
Biosphere 3 is the full name for BIOS-3 but for some reason it is redirected to bioshpere. Biosphere [1] is obviously not bioshpere 3. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by All systems go ( talk • contribs) .
- Redirect to BIOS-3. -- JLaTondre 20:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target → BIOS-3, but tag with {{ R from related word}} rather than the implied {{ R from alternate name}}. Inspection of the references associated with BIOS-3 does not show "biosphere 3" to be a synonym or alternate name for the facility; there is a "biosphere 2" facility and the two references pointedly avoid referring to Bios-3 as "biosphere 3". Further, the article should be moved to Bios-3 based on these same references. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 01:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 27
Alison Machado → Allison Machado
Corrected links pointing to the redirect Brian G 21:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep as plausible misspelling. Links should be corrected, yes, but there's no reason to delete the redirect itself, as a user might make the mistake in spelling. — TKD:: Talk 01:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, to prevent a duplicate article from being created again, at the same wrong title, tag as {{ R from misspelling}}. — May. 29, '06 [10:12] < freak| talk>
- Keep, as per Freakofnurture. Kukini 00:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 28
WikiProject U.S. Counties → Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. counties
Needless cross-namespace redirect, now orphaned. Rory096 03:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Chad → Wikipedia:WikiProject Chad
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:29, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Environment → Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Australian politics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Polish Army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Polish military history task force
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Sports Listing → Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports listing
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject airports → Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject dads army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Dad's Army
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject hip hop → Wikipedia:WikiProject hip hop
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject nascar → Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject vancouver → Wikipedia:WikiProject Vancouver
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject trains → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Trains
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject macintosh → Wikipedia:WikiProject Macintosh
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject: Ohio → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ohio
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Years → Wikipedia:WikiProject Years
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject writing captions → Wikipedia:WikiProject Writing Captions
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Disambiguation → Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Mathematics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Australian Politics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:ARC/Project Articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Arab-Israeli conflict/Project articles
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Adelaide → Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject no ads → Wikipedia:WikiProject No ads
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:buddhism → Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Arab-Israeli conflict/Shortcuts → Wikipedia:Wikiproject:Arab-Israeli_conflict/Shortcuts
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:USSR → Wikipedia:WikiProject Soviet Union
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject: Airports → Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:New Zealand → Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Remember to delete the talk. Rory096 03:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Spoken articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Film → Wikipedia: WikiProject Films
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject: Songs → Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Arab-Israeli conflict/Project articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Arab-Israeli_conflict/Project_articles
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Horror:Collaboration of the month → Wikipedia:Wikiproject Horror/Collaboration of the month
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Remember to delete the talk. Rory096 03:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Writing Captions → Wikipedia:WikiProject Writing Captions
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject arthropods → Wikipedia:WikiProject Arthropods
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject isotopes → Wikipedia:WikiProject Isotopes
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikistalking → Wikipedia:Harassment
Needless cross-namespace redirect, currently orphaning. Rory096 05:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Practical Joke/practical joke → practical joke
Um, what? No point in this redirect. Rory096 05:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Wikipedia:T → Travel
Strange cross-namespace redirect, don't see any reason for it. Goldom 莨夊ｩｱ 謚慕ｨｿ 08:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Audrey Datson → Audrey Daston
This redirect was just created as a result of a page move that I just did. I have corrected all the links and don't see anything outside pointing in to it. Brian G 21:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, clearly not an improbable misspelling if it was created there. -- Rory096 23:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment. If this is deleted, the probability of somebody else creating a needless duplicate article through duplicate effort increases significantly, speedy keep and tag as {{ R from misspelling}}. We have bots that routinely fix any pages which link to such (unambiguous typographical error) redirects. — May. 29, '06 [10:09] < freak| talk>
- Keep, per above. Kukini 04:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, it took me a while to realize what the difference was between the two links, heh, so it would be a plausible mispelling. Cowman109 Talk 01:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Greatest Name/to do → User:ChristianEdwardGruber/Greatest Name/to do
This was a user's list which existed in article space. When I moved the list to his user space, this was the resulting redirect. It should now be deleted. -- DS1953 talk 18:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Pseudowallerian degeneration → Wallerian degeneration
Article was deleted before, with the reason that this is not an accepted technical term in the scientific literature. Virtually all Google hits for the term can be traced back to us; we shouldn't create new terminology. User:SPUI, when asked for a specific reason for the re-creation, says "My specific reason is that it's harmless." I argue it's not: it creates the wrong impression that "pseudowallerian degeneration" is an alternative term for "Wallerian degeneration". AxelBoldt 16:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Since the Google hits are already there, it's conceivable that a user may look for the article under the wrong name. Keep. Loom91 08:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per previous. (Misleading redirect.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. -- Northenglish 19:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Dokdo → Liancourt Rocks
Article Liancourt Rocks moved w/o consensus and disabled to move back by editing redirect page. We will move back after the redirect page deleted. -- Ypacaraí 07:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- It was moved with consensus. Check the talk page.
Janviermichelle 08:22, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- It appears to have been moved on the basis of an improper vote (no notifications made or time limit announced). Such a vote cannot be used as a basis for determining consensus. Thus, the move should be undone. However, I would vote to speedy keep this page because the deletion tag is disabling hundreds of links. In any event, Requested moves, not RfD, is the process that should be followed here. -- Visviva 11:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Speedy keep. This redirect is in use. Why on earth was this thought to be acceptable? This is a thinly veiled demand to move the Dokdo page back to Liancourt Rocks, something which will not take place on the basis of the redirect page being deleted. Rōnin 11:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Tetraethylborane → Triethylborane
- It doesn't make sense. Tetraethylborane does not exist. Dr Zak 02:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Tetraethyl borane (TEB) seems to exist-- according to this NASA quiz. [5] Is the quiz site wrong? Nephron T| C 01:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - 'tetra' means 4 ethyl groups, 'tri' means 3. It's clear that if tetraethylborane exists, it cannot be the same thing as 'triethylborane'. (Unless someone can demonstrate that tetra-EB degrades rapidly into tri-EB). - Richardcavell 02:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Tetraethylborane does not exist, but as the article points out, sometimes triethylborane is called tetraethylborane. That is why there is a redirect. Spacepotato 08:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
New York City infobox → Template:New York City infobox
Appears to be an unsuccessful attempt to create a template. The template that it redirects to is unused. The NYC article uses Infobox City instead. (aeropagitica) (talk) 22:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete Per nom and facilitates the Infobox City clean up going on at WP:CITY
May 29
Bliar → Tony Blair
This redirects to Tony Blair as per the result of an AFD here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bliar, however WP:SD states that redirects such as this should be deleted. They give this very one as an example A second reason to remove a redirect is for instance when this causes a malicious equation between the two topics, eg, Bliar redirecting to Tony Blair. (That wasn't in WP:SD when the AFD was taking place though) So which is right the AFD or WP:SD, either way one is going to have to change. No Vote from me Ydam 10:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Its validity depends on the prevalence of the nickname; even if it's a derogatory, a very common nickname should have a redirect as there is a legitimate chance people won't know the real name. However, Google only turns up 700 hits for "bliar" (surprisingly low for what I thought would be a more common nickname), so delete.
Johnleemk |
Talk 11:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Thats because its far more commonly spelt "B.Liar", which gets 44,300 hits. Not a vote. --
Kiand 12:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I still get ~700 hits.
Johnleemk |
Talk 13:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I think we must be using different Googles — I get 298,000 (which is actually impressively high, but more realistic than 700) compared to 156 million for "blair". Anyway, I agree with the suggestion that it should be redirected to
Blair instead. —
sjorford
++ 16:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- If we go by the number Google gives initially, my Google gets 154,000 hits. But as I said below, there are only about 700 unique pages there; the rest is just fluff that Google incorporates into the total for strange reasons of its own.
Johnleemk |
Talk 16:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Ah I see — you're clicking to the end of the "Gooooooooogle" to see how many there are. I also get 700+ that way, although I think you're misinterpreting Google. It's not that those other 153,000 pages don't exist, or are all exact copies of those 700 pages, they're just insignificant or uninteresting to Google's algorithm and so, in its weird way, it doesn't bother to show them to you. To the best of my knowledge, Google will never offer you every single match as a clickable result — at one time there was a hard maximum of 1,000 links, although I don't know if that still applies. There are most certainly a lot more than 700 uses of the word "bliar" on the web — I would hazard a guess that the "true" total of of non-identical hits is in the order of the high tens of thousands. For consistency in comparing relative numbers of Ghits I've always just used the headline total, and I assume most people do the same. (Also, you seem to be searching English pages only, which explains why you still get 1/2 the number I do.) — sjorford ++ 19:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- If we go by the number Google gives initially, my Google gets 154,000 hits. But as I said below, there are only about 700 unique pages there; the rest is just fluff that Google incorporates into the total for strange reasons of its own.
Johnleemk |
Talk 16:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I think we must be using different Googles — I get 298,000 (which is actually impressively high, but more realistic than 700) compared to 156 million for "blair". Anyway, I agree with the suggestion that it should be redirected to
Blair instead. —
sjorford
++ 16:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I still get ~700 hits.
Johnleemk |
Talk 13:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment so I take it that
WP:SD is wrong in it's assertion then, or am I missing something? Incidently I get 301,000 results
[6]
Ydam 12:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Don't you mean
WP:CSD? And the relevant policy is
Wikipedia:Redirect (and also the stuff at the top of this page documenting our process for deleting redirects.) You need to click through to the last page of the results. Google includes a lot of duplicate pages that vanish when you reach around the thousandth page; I've set my Google preferences to show a hundred pages on each result page, and once you reach the end, there are only 700 unique pages using the phrase.
Johnleemk |
Talk 13:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- He meant WP:SD. Someone added two examples to that page that did not qualify as speedies. I've removed them. See Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletions#Deletion of Redirects for more info. -- JLaTondre 14:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- WP:SD was wrong. The examples provided did not match the speedy deletion criteria for redirects. -- JLaTondre 14:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Don't you mean
WP:CSD? And the relevant policy is
Wikipedia:Redirect (and also the stuff at the top of this page documenting our process for deleting redirects.) You need to click through to the last page of the results. Google includes a lot of duplicate pages that vanish when you reach around the thousandth page; I've set my Google preferences to show a hundred pages on each result page, and once you reach the end, there are only 700 unique pages using the phrase.
Johnleemk |
Talk 13:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Thats because its far more commonly spelt "B.Liar", which gets 44,300 hits. Not a vote. --
Kiand 12:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Also delete. Isopropyl 11:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Why? fuddlemark ( befuddle me!) 13:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Blair; possible mispelling. smurrayinch ester( User), ( Talk) 14:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target per Smurrayinchester. -- JLaTondre 16:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Speedy delete, it's a political epithet and disparages its target. Dr Zak 16:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target per Smurrayinchester. Powers 17:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change – to Blair as a possible typo, per Smurrayinchester – Gurch 18:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Blair as a possible typo. -- HughCharlesParker ( talk - contribs) 19:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Blair per above. Cowman109 Talk 21:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Anti Vandalism Unit → Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit
Cross-namespace redirect, unlikely to be used. Was originally tagged for speedy deletion, but as there's no policy to speedy delete cross-namespace redirects, I'm bringing it here. AmiDaniel ( talk) 05:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- You're right. I happened upon this page a few minutes after it was created, and moved it into the Wikipedia namespace, though perhaps the User namespace would have been better. There's no reason to keep this redirect around. NatusRoma | Talk 05:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong delete, WP:ASR. -- Rory096 05:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 30
WikiLove → Wikipedia:WikiLove
Needless cross-namespace redirect, now orphaned. Rory096 20:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as a cross namespace redirect. -- Hetar 22:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. Kukini 04:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 11:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, thanks for orphaning. Kusma (討論) 18:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. jni 08:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom, and yes, thanks for orphaning. Cowman109 Talk 20:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. DarthVad e r 06:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Random page → Special:Randompage
Needless cross-namespace redirect that doesn't actually work. Rory096 05:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikilove → Wikipedia:WikiLove
Needless cross-namespace redirect, now orphaned (except for a couple protected pages). Rory096 05:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Culture and Development → Maximum Cultural Development
Promotional, orphaned redirect to an essay up for deletion at AfD. Even if Maximum Cultural Development is kept, though, this redirect should be scrapped. I couldn't figure a better target for the redirect; I thought about Culture but the "and development" part makes it strange. Mango juice talk 12:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.The artist formerly known as God → God
Presumably offensive to many, and no incoming links — I can't see that this is a common enough expression to need a redirect. (I'm not offended, I'm just catching this before anybody comes along who is.) — sjorford ++ 16:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of mit dormitories → List of MIT dormitories
Why is there a 'List of mit dormitories' page that redirects to 'List of MIT dormitories'? Can this page be simply removed instead? (it's like randomly creating a page called 'bill gates' that redirects to 'Bill Gates' just for the heck of it) Dheerav 16:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. This is extremely common. It's helpful for searching if user's don't have to have the capitalization exactly correct (see WP:Redirect). Redirects are cheap (see above). Powers 19:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Redirects are cheap. P.S. bill gates redirects to Bill Gates since November 2004. feydey 19:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep and tag with {{ R from other capitalisation}}. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 00:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep as per above. Kukini 00:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Speedy keep simple capitalization redirect. Very useful. Cowman109 Talk 01:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Sports and Clubs at the University of Sussex → University of Sussex
Unlikely search term. Page was created to break out sports and clubs but promptly replaced into the main article. — C.Fred ( talk) 22:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - we don't delete redirects just because they're not used, and this nomination doesn't fit any of the six reasons for deletion at the top of this page. It's a perfectly harmless redirect, it discourages anybody from doing the same split again, and its history is useful to anybody who wants to know exactly what information was split off and when, and when it was merged back in. — sjorford ++ 11:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per sjorford. Pretty unlikely search term though. DarthVad e r 06:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC) reply
May 31
292,277,026,596 → 11th millennium and beyond
random year, not listed in target —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk) 23:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
Speedydelete per nom. Cowman109 Talk 01:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply- Keep. It's the date of the year 292,277,026,596 problem which is mentioned in the article if you look far enough. Hoof38 01:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. It's pretty silly and unnecessary. I doubt that it would be useful to anybody. M r. L e fty Talk to me! 01:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- If we have redirects for year 292,277,026,596 problem and year 292,277,026,596 problem it seems logically to have a plain 292,277,026,596 redirect too. Hoof38 01:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: it's 100% useless. Normally I'm ok with even implausible typo redirects staying around, but this is so far out there it needs to go. -- Hetar 01:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: I found it about the same time as Rory096 did. In fact, I was going to say the same thing, but he got there first with an edit conflict. This is still pretty implausible. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, useless. Kusma (討論) 01:46, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, redirects are cheap, useful due to the date "problem" trivia. Powers 02:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to Year 2038 problem. Lbbzman 14:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Beeotch → Bitch
implausible misspelling, pejorative —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk) 23:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment It's not a misspelling, but a distinct word with the same meaning as bitch. Hoof38 01:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, common slang term. -- Rory096 01:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep redirects are cheap and this is a common slang term from my understanding as well. It may be a supposed internet fad, but it does no harm. Cowman109 Talk 01:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Withdraw. Sorry about that. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
We're Gonna Party Like It's 1999 → 1999 (song)
implausible phrase — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. It's the main line from the song so it's possible somebody could search for it not realizing the proper name. While I wouldn't encourage the creation of this type of redirect, I see no reason to delete it once created. Redirects are cheap. --
JLaTondre 00:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment I didn't think "We" was in the line. (I never liked the song, anyway.) If accurate, withdraw. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The Free Encyclopedia → Wikipedia
This is a biased redirect. Even though it is the slogan of Wikipedia, the words are general (i.e., not very distinctive) and there are other free encyclopedias that people may consider better than Wikipedia. SCHZMO ✍ 23:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
DeleteChange target per Cowman109 below (opinion altered User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 22:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)). Misleading, per the recognition that there is no single one free encyclopedia. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 23:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply- Delete: I agree, in the interest of neutrality, this should redirect to a list of free encyclopedias. Barring the existance of such a list, then deletion would be appropriate. -- Hetar 00:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect instead to Encyclopedia. This is a plausible search term so it shouldn't be deleted necessarily, but redirecting to Wikipedia would not be proper. There are other free encyclopedias, so perhaps a redirect to Encyclopedia would be best. Cowman109 Talk 01:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target per Cowman. Free encyclopedia redirects there, so this probably should too. -- Rory096 03:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change Target per above Eluchil404 08:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Portland Trail Blazers History (1988-present) → Portland Trail Blazers history (1988-present)
Deletion requested by page creator. Latter page no longer exists (having been split and renamed), this is a double redirect. -- EngineerScotty 17:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.AN/I → Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 05:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong keep - I find it very useful to be able to type "AN/I" into the search box on the left. -- Hyperbole 07:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Stronger delete - WP:ASR. Johnleemk | Talk 09:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete to keep namespaces separate — it's no harder to type WP:AN/I or WP:ANI. — sjorford ++ 10:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete cross-namespace redirect. feydey 10:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per Sjorford. -- JLaTondre 11:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per sjorford++ Waggers 11:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong keep. I rarely visit the noticeboard, but when I do, I usually have trouble remembering the exact name of it and have to stumble through with trial and error a few times before I can get the name right. Being able to type AN/I is one of the few shorthand methods that I can remember. --
Elonka 17:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Surely you can just add a WP: before it? Nearly every other shortcut on Wikipedia uses WP, it shouldn't be too hard to remember. -- Rory096 17:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to ANI, which has a hatnote for Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Kusma (討論) 18:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to
ANI in agreement with Kusma; tag with {{
R from related word}} ... I thought that maybe {{
R from alternate spelling}} would be ok, but that implies semantic equivalence, which isn't assured. User:Ceyockey (
talk to me) 23:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- {{ R for convenience}} would do, I suppose, though it doesn't categorize the redirect. -- Rory096 01:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: We have been over this before, cross namespace redirects are bad. At the very most, a soft redirect should be used. -- Hetar 00:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. The wiki shortcut WP:ANI is just as easy to use, and cross-namespace redirects should be avoided if possible. There wouldn't be much harm in removing this redirect as people would likely use the WP shortcut if they knew what ANI stood food in the first place, if that makes any sense. Also, there are only around 5 or 10 pages linking to it, so the damage on other articles were minimal (even though we don't delete pages just because they have few or no links). Cowman109 Talk 01:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete all cross-namespace redirects. This one is relatively new that should have never been created in the first place so no reason to store it as a historical curiosity dating from the early days of Wikipedia.
jni 10:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Note that there is no set-in-stone rule for deleting all cross-namespace redirects. See the precedents list for examples of past cross-namespace redirect cases that were kept (though I did vote delete for this one, just stating a fact) Cowman109 Talk 20:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. Cross-namespace redirect. DarthVad e r 06:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to ANI. That'll still be useful without being cross-namespace. - GTBacchus( talk) 03:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Chop Chop (song)q → Chop Chop (song)
I accidentally created the redirect when I made a typo. Please speedy delete! Richardcavell 01:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 1
User Giano:19th century architecture → User:Giano/19th century architecture
Link to userspace, made by move to fix accidental creation of userspace article in main namespace. Tangot a ngo 10:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Bill to slash funds to the UN → H.R.2745
Name is inherently PoV (Possibly "offensive" as per reasons above) and is highly unlikely to be linked to or used by anyone. 68.39.174.238 14:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 2
SVEK → Swedish-Cuban Association
Derogatory naming, used solely by political opponents of the Association. 'svek' is Swedish for 'betrayal'. Not aiding accidental linking in any meaningful matter. Soman 07:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Accidental linking from what? (Nothing links to it now...) If it's a term used by political opponents it should probably be kept.
Grand
master
ka 07:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment- Is the word "svek" used in any other context? If so, delete. If not, keep per Grandmasterka. Reyk YO! 09:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- It is used in Sweden, probably by the political opponents. http://search.yahoo.com/search?_adv_prop=web&x=op&ei=UTF-8&fr=fp-top&fr2=op&va=svensk+kuba+SVEK&va_vt=any&vp_vt=any&vo_vt=any&ve_vt=any&vd=all&vst=0&vf=all&vm=i&vc=countrySE&fl=0&n=10 -- Advocatus diaboli 10:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. Not the actual abbreviation; furthermore, I can't find Google hits for SVEK used this way, but quite a number for the recording company Svek records, so it does not seem to be the most common meaning. - Andre Engels 13:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 3
Butterflies (TV Series) → Butterflies (TV series)
prodded as unnecessary redirect after editor changed all the article links to the correct title. I removed the prod tag and am posting it here as a courtesy Thatcher131 15:29, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Valid redirect as per policy. Johnleemk | Talk 16:03, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep Highly plausible as a search or as being used by someone else later. Redirects are cheap. JoshuaZ 16:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per naming conventions. -- Slgrandson 19:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep; {{ R from other capitalisation}}. — TKD:: Talk 12:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Obvious keep, common capitalization error. Grand master ka 02:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
"single-fire process" → Single-fire process
Result of a move, simply has extra quote marks Tango 16:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 4
Barons' Wars → Category:Barons' Wars
Redirect from main namespace to category namespace Andre Engels 13:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as a cross namespace redirect. -- Hetar 19:29, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Barons' War (which I just changed to a disambiguation page). TimBentley (talk) 19:38, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Big Brother 777 → Big Brother UK series 7
Unnecessary, term has no relevance to article. Thanks/ wangi 10:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.generalize → generalization
Hinders search. I was looking for "generalized hyperbolic distribution" or something like that. I typed "generalize", hoping to then click on Index, but instead got the article on "generalization". I don't see why this redirect is at all helpful. EricK 13:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Someone might want to link this, and this is the page it should lead to in that case. When searching for something, use search rather than go. - Andre Engels 13:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Andre. — TKD:: Talk 12:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
generalized → generalization
Hinders search. I was looking for "generalized hyperbolic distribution" or something like that. I typed "generalized", hoping to then click on Index, but instead got the article on "generalization". I don't see why this redirect is at all helpful. EricK 13:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. As the above. - Andre Engels 13:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Andre. — TKD:: Talk 12:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 5
UNWDA → Worldwide disaster aid
Target already deleted. Organisation was a fake. rxnd ( t | € | c ) 14:41, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Shayn weidner → PUMA AG
By 170.76.21.156, same as the one below. Deepak 14:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Also bundled:
Amanda Elrod →
Beauty,
Sarah posey →
Goofy,
David burkhalter →
Gambit (comics),
Andrew Cage →
Beard.
Deepak 15:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- And these are by User:Drtburk, probably a sock puppet: Michelle Kristin Williams → Machine, Zach chandler → Pancake, Josh goring → MC Hammer, Debbi blakey → satan, Brett Penshorn → Saxophone. Deepak 15:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Speedy delete all as obvious vandalism. -- Hetar 19:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Corben lowden → genius
Clearly a vanity redirect. Couldn't find anyone notable with that name on google. Should I have speedily deleted this?(It doesnt come under the criteria). Deepak 14:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 6
Citizen relocation code → ZIP Code
This redirect has nothing to do with the target article, and could potentially cause people to believe that ZIP codes do have something to do with forcibly relocating citizens. BOARshevik 01:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. — TKD:: Talk 05:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete; joke from
The Simpsons episode
Sunday, Cruddy Sunday. smurrayinch
ester(
User), (
Talk) 10:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment if this Simpson's reference is correct, perhaps the target of the redirect should just be changed to " Sunday, Cruddy Sunday", the reference added to either the Quotes or Trivia section and the redirect tagged with
{{ R to list entry}}. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 12:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- New Redirect to Sunday, Cruddy Sunday per Ceyockey. Cowman109 Talk 19:31, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Pooma lift → T-bar lift
Was on AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pooma lift, transferring here instead. Stifle ( talk) 01:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Cesium 137 (band) (disambiguation) → Cesium 137
Currently unused, unlikely search target. Originally created by me due to poorly done otheruses template, but that was fixed, so it is now useless. Polonium 01:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Joey newman → Joey Newman
I am trying to get rid of the Joey newman link so that there is only one Joey Newman entry. Obviously, the person who first created the page about me did not capitalize my last name properly 71.106.108.96 07:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Talk:Campus_Crusade_for_Christ-Archive_1 → Talk:Campus_Crusade_for_Christ/Archive-01
Made mistake yesterday writing the title for the first archive of the Campus Crusade talk page. Sixtrojans 13:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 7
National Rail route LNE 6 → Network Rail route LNE 6
Redirect was caused by my own mistake in naming a new article Picapica 14:51, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
National Rail route LNE 6A → Network Rail route LNE 6A
Redirect was caused by my own mistake in naming a new article Picapica 14:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
National Rail route NW 2023 → Network Rail route NW 2023
Redirect was caused by my own mistake in naming a new article Picapica 14:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
National Rail route SW 110 → Network Rail route SW 110
Redirect was caused by my own mistake in naming a new article Picapica 14:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Interserivce rivalries → Interservice rivalry
I entered a typo when creating this redirect; I will now create the correct redirect so pls. delete this (incorrect) one. Thanks and sorry for the bother. Fairsing 20:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 8
Trinity Church, Wilmington → Episcopal Diocese of Delaware#New Castle County
I originally created this redirect. The correct name for this church is 'Trinity Parish', which is now part of the target page; this redirect is erroneous and potentially misleading. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 00:54, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.SP2 → Service pack
It doesn't make sense, and is the only one between "SP", "SP1", "SP2", etc. to redirect to Service Pack. Of course we can't have something like "SP11" just because there could be a Service Pack 11 of some odd program :-) BTW, all the pages that currently link to SP2 do that *in error*, 50% of them because they want to link to Windows XP SP2 Gennaro Prota (talk) 23:54, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Fixed all erroneous links. The only page, besides this one, which links to SP2 now is Wikipedia:TLAs from QA0 to TZ9. -- Gennaro Prota (talk) 00:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Windows XP where there is a section on this. I am actually suprised that service pack 2 doesn't have its own article. It was a pretty significant release for Microsoft and caused/fixed a wide range of issues. -- Hetar 19:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Why? First of all Windows XP is not the only piece of software to have a service pack 2; secondly SP2 doesn't necessarily mean "service pack 2" (at least one user asked me why that wasn't an article about sp2 orbitals). And why we don't have the same for SP1? This is clearly inconsistent and nonsensical to me. At most, SP2 could be a disambiguation page. -- Gennaro Prota (talk) 12:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Merciless death → Merciless Death
Target article has been deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Merciless Death). Visor 20:38, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Directed Studies → Directed Studies at Yale University
This redirect is a result of a move that I did because other universities appear to have a "Directed Study" program; the original page may become an article or a disambiguation page, but until now it's misleading. - Liberatore( T) 16:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.WP:CBU → Wikipedia:Requests for comment
This is a confusing redirect that might not make sense to newer users (or even users who have been around for over two years like me). I see that it stands for Wikipedia:Conflicts between users, but this has not been in use for a long time. Ardric47 02:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - my attempt to park it for new ideas by blanking it was unfortunately reverted, so now we need this bureaucratic Rfd overhead for a mere obsolete shortcut. -- Omniplex 05:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. There could concievably be external links referring to this. Redirects do not hurt, and if for some reason a Wikipedia page with "CBU" in its initials is created, we can discuss changing the redirect then. Ral315 ( talk) 06:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: unless you have someplace more logical that it should point to. --
Hetar 19:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Keeping it as is makes the maintenance of
WP:WP based on
Category:Redirects from shortcut difficult. Maybe we need something like
{{ tdeprecated}}, which can be used for redirected templates, also for obsolete shortcuts. On Meta m:Category:Shortcuts has a subcategory for cruft like CBU. -- Omniplex 03:51, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keeping it as is makes the maintenance of
WP:WP based on
Category:Redirects from shortcut difficult. Maybe we need something like
- Keep
Delete What Links Here shows that nothing links to WP:CBU but the link here and a deletion log. Cowman109 Talk 19:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC) - If there are no references to such a shortcut, it is very unlikely that it is even used. And, as Ardric47 stated below, this article was voted for deletion in the past and was apparently created without consensus to put it back in. Cowman109 Talk 01:52, 10 May 2006 (UTC)Looking at the deletion log, it seems actually this article was deleted for: 05:20, 23 Nov 2004 SJ deleted WP:CBU (unused redir). It seems like it was deleted without consensus after all, which would make it not a candidate for speedy deletion. And, after reading other comments, I have come to the conclusion that this article doesn't hurt anyone in any way, and as redirects are cheap there is not much reason to remove this, as the fact that it is here shows that someone used it at one point or another. Changing vote to keep. Cowman109 Talk 01:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply- Comment: Please read the policy stated at the top of this page, "We do not delete redirects simply because they do not have any incoming links." Since this is a shortcut, it is entirely possible that it is currently being used, even if no links to it exist. --
Hetar 21:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- How can it be being used if there are no links? Ardric47 23:23, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: Please read the policy stated at the top of this page, "We do not delete redirects simply because they do not have any incoming links." Since this is a shortcut, it is entirely possible that it is currently being used, even if no links to it exist. --
Hetar 21:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment—"Conflicts between users" was last used in March 2004. In November of that year, the redirect WP:CBU was deleted. It was then re-created in December 2005. It is therefore even possible that it should now be speedily deleted per WP:CSD G4. If that somehow doesn't apply, then consider that Wikipedia and its users got by without it for over a year. It is somewhat difficult for me to see how anyone would be using it now. Ardric47 01:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
New Union (disambiguation) → New Union
Nothing links to it, and I can't imagine someone would include "(disambiguation)" in a search. Colm O'Brien 23:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - Nothing is supposed to link to a disabiguation page. If it did, it should be disambiguated, unless someone explicitly links to the xyz (disambiguation) redirect.) --
Petri Krohn 07:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- You misunderstand...New Union is the actual disambiguation page, so there's no reason to have the other one as a redirect. -- Colm O'Brien 02:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Conker live and reloded → Conker: Live & Reloaded
unneeded (previously a prod'ed article), unlikely way to spell/capitalize/punctuate Mango juice talk 12:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Oppose, like all misspellings, the fact that they exist means that at least someone misspelled it like that once. Just tag it with {{ R from misspelling}} and leave it. -- W( t) 12:09, 8 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong delete. This is a well-meaning eighth-grader's random typo ("reloded" for "Reloaded") combined with several other errors ("and" for "&"; missing colon; missing capitalization). It's highly unlikely that someone would search for this particular combination of mistakes (one of an infinite number of possibilities). Common misspellings are helpful redirects, but one-off flukes only clog the search results, thereby making it more difficult for readers to find their intended articles. — David Levy 07:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: no harm in keeping the redirect, if one person mispelled it, others could potentially do so as well. -- Hetar 19:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Hetar: There is potential for it to be mispelled.
Cowman109
Talk 19:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- How much potential is there for it to misspelled in this precise, unusual manner? Should we also create redirects from every conceivable typo ("Conkr live and reloaded", "Cnker live and reloaded", "Conker live and rloaded", etc)? This particular combination of errors is highly unlikely to ever be searched for again, and I've already noted the harm in keeping it. (Redirects show up in searches, thereby pushing down useful results). — David Levy 05:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as it's a highly unlikely spelling. Ral315 ( talk) 08:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 9
User:Arnz/Sandbox/Nambour and Gympie North railway line → User:Arnzy/Sandbox/Nambour and Gympie North railway line
redirect was caused by a typo of leaving out the "y" in my username. Can the closing admin please delete this redirect as a speedy? thanks and my apologies for the bother. -- Arnzy (whats up?) 13:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of British words not widely used in the U.S. → List of British words not widely used in the United States
ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per nom, old page title, redirects are cheap. Kusma (討論) 20:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - article series being cleaned up; all links to old page checked and updated. --
TrevorD 22:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Also, implausible search term, especially with the .s, as per Stifle's comments below at #List of American words not widely used in the U.K. -- TrevorD 11:53, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
List of American words not widely used in the U.K. → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom
ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per nom, old page title, redirects are cheap. Kusma (討論) 20:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - article series being cleaned up; all links to old page checked and updated. -- TrevorD 22:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Plausible type-in. Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, implausible search term, especially with the .s Stifle ( talk) 11:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
List of American words not widely used in the UK → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom
ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words mainly used in Commonwealth English → List of British words not widely used in the United States
Poor & ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words mainly used in British English → List of British words not widely used in the United States
Poor & ephemeral old name of this page JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Oppose, article should be moved back to its former name and current article name and further redirect deleted. Captain scarlet 15:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC) -- reply
- You gotta be kidding me. I myself invented the "mainly used in British English" title, but we were forced to rename the article again because that title was actually ambiguous out of context, see
Talk:List of British words not widely used in the United States/Archive 1--
JackLumber 20:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- whether you were forced or not doesn't mean I have to accept it. This page redirection is awaiting comments, here they are. the original article was fine where it was, god knows who came up with the idea of moving it in the first place, I think I retired from the original debate as I was sick of seeing idiocies spoken. Here is a secondment of my original vote: Oppose. You may continue discussion of this subject on the redirection proposal page os opposed to my personnal discussion page. Regards,
Captain scarlet 20:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- People who do not understand, or do not want or even try to, or do not respect fellow editors and their opinions are really not worth talking with, are they? On personal pages or proposal pages, whatever. --
JackLumber 20:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I understand but I disagree. If you had any respect for what I had just said, you wouldn't be making a joke of it. More and more Wikipedians seem to htink it is ok to blatantly take the mickaël, even more amazing how it is accepted and not prevented. If you do not want replies, do not ask for them. Since there are currently only two participating in the debate and if no one else does, there will be no concensus and the redirect will remain.
- At the very beginning I had implicitly assumed that we can address each other in a friendly, informal, relaxed way. Apparently it's not like that, but at least it's not my fault. It's frustrating that one must beware of people who regard what others think as "idiocies," walk out, then come back whenever they like and feel they have a right to pontificate. The only reason why I want to delete these redirects is to free resources. -- JackLumber 21:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC) And I sure am not a troll, nor is User:Hardouin. reply
- I understand but I disagree. If you had any respect for what I had just said, you wouldn't be making a joke of it. More and more Wikipedians seem to htink it is ok to blatantly take the mickaël, even more amazing how it is accepted and not prevented. If you do not want replies, do not ask for them. Since there are currently only two participating in the debate and if no one else does, there will be no concensus and the redirect will remain.
- People who do not understand, or do not want or even try to, or do not respect fellow editors and their opinions are really not worth talking with, are they? On personal pages or proposal pages, whatever. --
JackLumber 20:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- whether you were forced or not doesn't mean I have to accept it. This page redirection is awaiting comments, here they are. the original article was fine where it was, god knows who came up with the idea of moving it in the first place, I think I retired from the original debate as I was sick of seeing idiocies spoken. Here is a secondment of my original vote: Oppose. You may continue discussion of this subject on the redirection proposal page os opposed to my personnal discussion page. Regards,
Captain scarlet 20:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Keep per nom, old page title, redirects are cheap. Kusma (討論) 20:45, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - article series being cleaned up; all links to old page checked and updated. As regards other comments above, this is a proposal for deletion, not for renaming. Current redirect achieves nothing. (If this redirect were maintained and/or the page were moved, that would have a knock-on effect on the immediately preceding pages listed as they follow the same format.) -- TrevorD 22:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
List of words mainly used in Australian English → Australian words
Never referenced, see also below JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words mainly used in Canadian English → Canadian words
the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words mainly used in American English → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom
the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of words used mainly in American English → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom
the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.CwE → Commonwealth English
Never referenced, the abbr. itself is nonexistent, never used anywhere on WP let alone in the world JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.User LittleBro → Template:User LittleBro
Cross namespace Midnight tonight 09:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Can You Spare a Dime?) → Can You Spare a Dime?
Newly created article with grammatical error which is unlikely to be mistyped or searched for. Parasite 07:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.$pringfield (or, How I learned to stop worrying and love legalized gambling), → $pringfield
Incorrect grammar convention in the title. Only one article used that link, which I have now altered. Axl 07:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Userbox and Userboxes → Wikipedia:Userboxes, List of userboxes → Wikipedia:List of userboxes
Both cross-namespace redirects restored on DRV by a slight (10u-8kd) majority. Procedural relisting here. No vote. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:32, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, and I've made both {{ deletedpage}} notices until the end of this listing. However, I view the process patently absurd. Does anyone bother to read Wikipedia:Redirect? "When should we delete a redirect? It is a cross-space redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace." Ral315 ( talk) 06:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as cross-namespace redirect. It's a good one for newbies to find out about "Wikipedia:" with (in fact, it was during a debate on deleting this redirect a long time ago that I learned all the nifty shortcuts). This one just never seems to go away for some reason. AmiDaniel ( talk) 07:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. It seems like a natural typing error, and I don't see a pressing need for the redirect to be freed up for an article in the main namespace. I agree about newbies learning about namespaces, but the convenience afforded by the redirect is invaluable - at least for members who spend most of their time on the site filling their user pages with userboxes. -- IntrigueBlue 09:32, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete cross namespace redir/ wangi 09:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. We avoid these for many good reasons, one of which is to avoid the confusion of encyclopedic articles with Wikipedia 'administration' pages. -- Hetar 19:05, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: Both appear to have already been deleted and protected after they were restored. Cowman109 Talk 19:21, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Orphan and delete. However, {{ deletedpage}} makes it a blue link without a good explanation (and without the correct link), which I think is not a good idea for a widely-used redirect. However, keep if nobody orphans it, I think having cross-space redirects is preferrable to having lots of broken links, even if they are all in userspace. Kusma (討論) 22:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Soft Redirect useful links, though it should be made clear if they remain that they are cross-namespace so people know not to use that in the future. Userbox is a very common term and I can easily see people looking it up. Cowman109 Talk 02:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment, I already orphaned these redirects by bot two months ago. Apparently somebody has repopulated the Whatlinkshere lists? Soft redirects are about as useful as a screen door on a submarine. Endorse, keep deleted. Oops, wrong page, but I had taken WP:DRV off my watchlist due to the trolling, so I guess I missed out. — May. 10, '06 [08:18] < freakofnurxture | talk>
- Delete. Cross-namespace redirects must go; at best, a soft redirect can be tolerated iff there is actual encyclopedic content that can go on the page as well. Otherwise we're unnecessarily conflating the encyclopaedia with internal stuff. Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment I've added List of userboxes to this RFD; if anyone would like to notify the other voters here, they can, but I don't think that their votes will change any. Ral315 ( talk) 06:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 10
Shanti → Gaia_(mythology)
No indication on the page redirected to what the redirected term has to do with it; none of the links has anything to do with Gaia or with Greek mythology in general. Andre Engels 11:04, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Russian Expansionism and Ottoman Empire → History of Russo-Turkish wars
The redirect's wording is POV and no one would look for an article under such name anyway. Worse, however, is that the target is a WP:POVFORK as explained at Talk:History of Russo-Turkish wars Irpen 03:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, nominator. -- Irpen 01:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - Russia expanded - that is a fact. Whether one wants to call it "expansionism" is a matter of of opinion. The British certainly did, as evident on the article
Rise of the New Imperialism. Most of the expansion happened at the expence of the
Ottoman Empire and other
Turkish people. This redirect is in fact of vital importance, or at least of substantial effect: searching Google for ""Russian Expansionism"
[2] gives this Wikipedia redirect as the first hit!
The issue here is in fact not the possible POV of the title, but an (unfounded) attempt by Russian enthusiast to delete or "blank" the redirected page History of Russo-Turkish wars. -- Petri Krohn 01:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply- Please avoid throwing labels. This other page is a POV fork as explained at its talk. If you want an article, write it, or at least a stub, instead of pasting together a bunch of articles and call it "A review" of all the events the multitude of articles cover. Anyway, this is discussed at the article talk. The redirect itself is useless in any case. No one would ever enter such exact phrase in the search string. --
Irpen 01:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- A POV fork of what? Please point out the corresponding
NPOV article, so we can point the redirect there. A disambiguation page will not serve the role of the neutral article. --
Petri Krohn 04:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- "corresponding" articles are separate war articles which someone stacked by pasting their entire content into this quasi-"history". This is not a review of wars. Neither the DAB page is. If you want a review of wars, write it, or a stub at least. This here is just a bunch of articles pasted together that underwent some POV editing. -- Irpen 04:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- A POV fork of what? Please point out the corresponding
NPOV article, so we can point the redirect there. A disambiguation page will not serve the role of the neutral article. --
Petri Krohn 04:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Please avoid throwing labels. This other page is a POV fork as explained at its talk. If you want an article, write it, or at least a stub, instead of pasting together a bunch of articles and call it "A review" of all the events the multitude of articles cover. Anyway, this is discussed at the article talk. The redirect itself is useless in any case. No one would ever enter such exact phrase in the search string. --
Irpen 01:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom abakharev 01:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. KNewman 05:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. The Ottomans were the only Imperialists in this conflict. -- Ghirla -трёп- 08:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as per nomination. -- Grafikm (AutoGRAF) 09:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Worms/Prod → List of Worms weapons and tools
I don't know anything about this except that someone blanked the page and then prodded it as a blank page, rather than sending it through RfD Thatcher131 04:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: See also Special:Prefixindex/Worms/ and the revision histories thereof. — May. 10, '06 [08:26] < freakofnurxture | talk>
- Apparently it contains some ancient history and does no harm, so keep. Kusma (討論) 23:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Template:Archive1 → User talk:Unisouth/Archive1
User talk archive moved to user space; redirect redundant. — Wh o uk ( talk) 13:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Delete Looks to be a remnant from a page-move. No reason for it to redirect to user space. Cowman109 Talk 20:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Phil Bonifeld → Phil Bonifield
Came about after I moved the article because of a typographical error. This redirect is useless. -- D-Day( Wouldn't you like to be a pepper too?) 14:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: don't see any harm in keeping it. -- Hetar 17:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep—plausible typo. Ardric47 20:37, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, tagged as {{ R from misspelling}}. Kusma (討論) 20:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - if it was a typo once... — Wh o uk ( talk) 20:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per above. Cowman109 Talk 22:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Whouk. -- Northenglish 02:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Kobaly → Healthcare traveler
Per
WP:RFD, redirect makes no sense. not a useful redirect. -
AED 21:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC) edited 05:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
Creature editor (Spore) → Spore
No one is going to by trying to get to "Creature editor (Spore)" on their own unless linked from an article. It was originally an odd attempt to branch off of the main Spore article (including a "main article" link), although that article had only a paragraph's worth of content on this part of the game. It was filled with nonsense and redundant information, so another user changed it to a redirect, sending the user back from whence they came. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 03:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- No decision If anything it should redirect to Spore (video game), though I am not sure if the creature editor title is of any use to people. Cowman109 Talk 22:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete No existing links and unlikely to be linked or searched for in the future. - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andre Engels ( talk • contribs) . 10:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per above -- Northenglish 02:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 11
Hero (Mortal Kombat) → Taven (Mortal Kombat)
Transferring from AFD. The discussion from there follows. Stifle ( talk) 11:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Article was created before Hero's name was known (see Taven (Mortal Kombat), and it's unlikely anyone will be searching for this term anymore. Virogtheconq 20:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 1, 2006 → Great American Boycott
Only in exceptional circumstances should individual dates redirect to events that occurred on that day and this is far from one of those cases. Plus this may interfere with some proposed changes to be made over at Current events that involve creating daily pages of this format. — GT 14:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. Kusma (討論) 23:36, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete in agreement with User:GT. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 23:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. I'd never heard of the "Great American Boycott" outside of Wikipedia (still haven't, actually), but I've sure heard of the May 1, 2006 boycotts. Now that the date has passed, it's not such a big deal, but the redirect is still useful to me and probably the readers, too. The argument "we might have a real page there someday" doesn't convince me--if we ever get one, we can replace the redirect. It's a fairly painless process to do so. It's much more painful for someone looking for information on the boycott of May 1, 2006 to have to somehow conjure up in his or her mind the non-intuitive "Great American Boycott". Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 05:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Matt, if you click on Current events and go down to May 1, you'll have no trouble finding it. — GT 05:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 12
User page → Wikipedia:User page
- Delete as a cross namespace redirect. -- Hetar 18:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Weak Delete Cross namespace redirect with less than 500 links that can pretty easily be fixed with a bot, but it seems like the User page article can easily be turned into a full length article explaining the usage of user pages in different settings, and then a soft redirect could be used. Until that article is created though, it should be deleted. Cowman109 Talk 22:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)reply
- I am going to attempt to create this into an encyclopedic article. I also found user pages which also redirects to Wikipedia:User page, so that can be a redirect to User page if the changes are deemed to be encyclopedic. Cowman109 Talk 20:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep Even though its a cross namespace, I found the redirect useful. Navou talk 02:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete unless we can write an encyclopaedia article about userpages in general, as per Cowman109. Johnleemk | Talk 13:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Weak keep. This will at least prevent people from writing a non-encyclopaedic article. Lincher 19:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep The whole no-cross namespace links in totally unnesscary. Beside, there are a whole bunch that have been kept, why not this one?
The
Gerg 23:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- If by kept you mean changed to a soft redirect, then yes. However, I have not seen a cross namespace redirect that survived a nomination here, perhaps you could point me to one? --
Hetar 17:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_deletion/Precedents#Should redirects to other spaces be kept? for a list of precedents. Cowman109 Talk 20:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- If by kept you mean changed to a soft redirect, then yes. However, I have not seen a cross namespace redirect that survived a nomination here, perhaps you could point me to one? --
Hetar 17:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Just wondering, what's the problem with cross namespace redirects? Crobzub 16:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: You can see a similar debate on cross namespace redirect at
this archive. Just to summarize, (1) there has been a clear precedent that we delete these (or change to a soft redirect at the very least), just like there is clear precedent that we keep schools. (2) They cause problems for our mirrors (3) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and when our readers type a term in the search box many of them expect to find encyclopedic articles - not instruction manuals on the inner workings of Wikipedia. --
Hetar 17:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I don't understand (2) at all. Our mirrors can easily avoid reusing cross-namespace redirects if they wish to do so. Has there been any particular complaint from a mirror or other reuser and are there other ways we can address their concerns other than deleting all cross-namespace redirects? (We could tag them with {{ selfref}}, for example). Until now, the "mirror problem" seems to me to be an unproven hypothesis. Kusma (討論) 23:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Orphan, then delete. Or write a "user page" article, I am sure it has non-Wikipedia uses. Kusma (討論) 18:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment I have made... a start to making the article an actual article with a selfref template, though it feels pretty empty. It may be better off left as a redirect unless a stronger page can be created. Cowman109 Talk 23:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 13
Julie rodriguez
Redirects to deleted article. Dark jedi requiem 02:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Armenian terrorism and Armenian Terrorism
They both redirect to ASALA as if this acronym was a metonymy of "Armenian terrorism". Definitely a breach of NPOV. Tazmaniacs 17:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Literature of Southeast Asia → Literature about Southeast Asia
These are not the same. The redirect refers to literature from Southeast Asis but target is external literature about Southeast Asia. -- JLaTondre 20:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it."Rolllo May" → Rollo May
Not a useful redirect Lincher 03:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment : Maybe a plausible typo like this : Rolllo May but not when you add the quotation marks. Lincher 19:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Dilupa → User:Dilupa
Not a noteworthy wikipedian enough to have a redirect from the mainspace and not useful enough either Lincher 19:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Dictionary of the Catholic Resistance → WikiProject:Dictionary of the Catholic Resistance
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 15
Agentwormy → User:Agentwormy
Cross-namespace artifact from page move. Speedy delete please. - Corbin ∫ 1 ɱ p s ɔ ♫ Rock on, dude! 02:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 16
RuneScape Images → Category:RuneScape Images
When should we delete a redirect reason # 5: It is a cross-space redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. Except in this case it goes to the Category namespace. DG X 23:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Obnoxious fad → Crazy Frog
Seeming attack redirect. Google shows no actual connection [3] and redirected-to article doesn't mention phrase, either. Vslashg ( talk) 18:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Keiser Av En Dimesjon Ukjent → Keiser Av En Dimensjon Ukjent
The misspelled article has been renamed and all links to the incorrect spelling have been corrected accordingly. It is unlikely the same misspelling will be used again, so the redirect is not needed. Aprogas 17:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Template:TOCStatesAndIslands → Template:HSBC States
Nothing links to the template. Only one article links to the target template. — Markles 17:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Saliyar → Saliya
Those two should be different articles, therefore redirect is misleading. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by M arpalmane ( talk • contribs) 10:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 17
US 0 → List of U.S. Routes, U.S. Route 0 → List of U.S. Routes, United States Route 0 → List of U.S. Routes, U.S. Highway 0 → List of U.S. Routes, United States Highway 0 → List of U.S. Routes
U.S. Route 0 has never existed and never will exist as an actual road, making these redirects totally unnecessary. Secondly, the page List of U.S. Routes has been moved to List of United States Numbered Highways, making these all non-functional double redirects. Northenglish 01:01, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- KEEP harmless redirect, fix double redirection
132.205.94.75 02:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: I agree that it's harmless, but it's also useless, as "U.S. 0" has never existed and thus is likely never to be searched for. There's no reason for a non-existant item on the list to redirect to the list. -- Northenglish 02:24, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment, if anything, these redirects will impede the creation of hoax road articles. — May. 18, '06 [06:02] < freak| talk>
- Delete as misleading. Ardric47 02:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, harmless. Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 01:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: it is plausable someone may search under these redirects. Jonathunder 01:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Sex on the beach → List of cocktails
It's linked to *from* that article. Would be better as a redlink so someone can make an article. Stevage 14:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment—If you think there should really be a separate article, then there is a template that you can put on the redirect page, Template:R with possibilities. Ardric47 20:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- The more correctly-titled Sex on the Beach has been an article at various times. Sex on the beach should redirect there if Sex on the Beach is turned into an article again (apparently there was never more than a recipe). Perhaps a link to wikibooks:Bartending/Cocktails/Sex on the Beach would be more appropriate than a link to the redirect? Kusma (討論) 20:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep until someone writes a separate article on the drink. It's useful for searches. Someone may want to remove the link from List of cocktails though. -- Northenglish 02:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Heliacal → Wiktionary:Heliacal
An interwiki redirect, which is both unwanted and does not work Andre Engels 09:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Hillyard, Seattle, Washington → Hillyard, Spokane, Washington
Bad geography, Hillyard is not in Seattle KleenupKrew 02:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 18
Editcountitis → Wikipedia:Editcountitis
- Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. -- Hetar 23:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep as a useful tool. Editcountitis has absolutely no meaning outside of Wikipedia, so no one will be searching for for "editcountitis" looking for any meaning other than the Wikipedia one. Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk?) 01:29, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete for exactly the reasons Matt Yeager provides. -- JLaTondre 21:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per Hetar and JLaTondre. — TKD:: Talk 02:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Matt Yeager. Since there's no other definitions, this redirect makes sense. Until there is anther definition, just keep it. It helps more than it hurts. Porphyric Hemophiliac § 20:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)! reply
- Delete Do we have to go through this again? No cross-namespace redirects! ~ Veledan • Talk 21:05, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: don't cross namespaces. Jonathunder 02:00, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. However, as the statement "editcountitis has absolutely no meaning outside of Wikipedia" is false. It has meaning in other wikis, the
Open Directory Project, and other "editing" organizations where edits can be counted. It might even deserve a stub :) —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk) 17:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Well, write it then so that people who search for the term don't end up with nothing. - Richardcavell 03:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - 'editcountitis' is pure wikipedia jargon. - Richardcavell 01:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per WP:IAR, there is no need to be so rigid in this case about the no cross space rule. -- rogerd 04:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. feydey 09:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as per the others. Johnleemk | Talk 11:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per WP:ASR. -- Rory096 05:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as cross-namespace redirect, or at the very least convert it into a soft redirect. AmiDaniel ( talk) 09:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Bio-diesel → Biodiesel
Tagged by Rifleman 82 on 04-May, but placed rfd2 tag on article instead of here. Rationale was "It is one of the top searches for biodiesel; it is an uncommon spelling and there is little value in keeping it".
- Rifleman 82 also nominated BioDeisel and BioDiesel with similar rationale.
- Harpalus also commented on BioDiesel article page with "I agree with this. Searching for biodiesel should display Biodiesel as the top result, not a common misspelling."
- Keep all three. Valid possible misspellings. Even if top search results, it stills gets you to the desired page. -- JLaTondre 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per above. -- Northenglish 02:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Vegoil → Biodiesel
Tagged by Rifleman 82 on 04-May, but placed rfd2 tag on article instead of here. Rationale was "It is one of the top searches for biodiesel; it is NOT biodiesel at all, and it is a colloquialism for straight vegetable oil and there is little value in keeping it."
- Redirect to straight vegetable oil. -- JLaTondre 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Agree with JLaTondre -- Northenglish 02:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to straight vegetable oil per JLaTondre Cowman109 Talk 19:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Empyrez.com → Empyrez
Tagged by Skeptical One on 06-May but not listed here. No rationale provided. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Portal:Macedonia → Macedonia
Tagged by Miskin on 11-May but not listed here. Since nomination, the redirect target has bounced back and forth between Macedonia & Portal:Republic of Macedonia. From the talk page, the objection appears to be that Macedonia & the Republic of Macedonia are not the same thing. No vote on my part. -- JLaTondre 01:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Yasar kemal → Yasar Kemal
comparatively quickly corrected bad capitalization Malyctenar 14:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 20
Wikiproject Dad's Army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Dad's Army
Needless cross-namespace redirect Rory096 19:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Kingdom of Christ → Millennialism
The article space was created as a redirect in the first place, and never had any content. Furthermore, there is nothing that shows that Kingdom of Christ = Millennialism in the first place, and there should in fact be particular material that does not overlap, as Millennialism is a cross-cultural phenomenon. MSJapan 01:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.disengagement → Israel's unilateral disengagement plan
"Disengagement" is a normal word that is used in many different contexts. For example, I also wrote an article disengagement from religion. The redirect should be removed for the same reason that we do not want a redirect from e.g. House to White House. Besides using the word "disegagement" for Israel's unilateral disengagement plan suffers from Wikipedia:recentism. I think the problem with this redirect in the articles Stalin Note and Konrad Adenauer are natural consequences of making a redirect from a very general word to a very specific example of the use of the word. Andries 07:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)(amended for contents) reply
- Delete per nom. Reyk YO! 10:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete — the scope of 'disengagement' is too broad for use in the manner of this redirect. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 23:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per above. — TKD:: Talk 01:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per above, misleading redirect. -- Tangot a ngo 07:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Singapore, Singapore → Singapore
Double entry and redundant redirect -- Fernvale 05:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Since Singapore is a city-state, this could be useful. — TKD:: Talk 02:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per above.-- Jusjih 14:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per TKD. -- Ter e nc e Ong 14:13, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - Singapore, Singapore is a legitimate name for a place. - Richardcavell 03:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per above. -- Tangot a ngo 07:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Singapore/History → History of Singapore
Redundant redirect -- Fernvale 05:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Singapore/History, Singapore doesn't exist. As Singapore/History is tagged for deletion, I altered the heading to what is presumably correct. Johnleemk | Talk 11:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong keep—This must be kept in order to preserve the edit history (especially to comply with the GFDL). Ardric47 03:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. This format is deprecated.-- Jusjih 14:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. There is almost no history to preserve, page appears to have been moved. -- Tangot a ngo 07:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Woodlands (Singapore) → Woodlands, Singapore
Redundant redirect -- Fernvale 05:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 21
WP:1FA → User:Mailer diablo/One Featured Article
A link from project space to an essay written by a sole editor describing his new personal adminship standards. I don't believe personal essays should get WP: redirects. kingboyk 03:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Just a comment; WP:RAUL is certainly a link to a personal essay. (Although you could argue that it's become a community thing by now and should actually be in Wikipedia: space.) Johnleemk | Talk 05:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete WP:RAUL is one of very few (is it the only?) WP: redirect to a userspace page. However, that page would be of some interest to the average Wikipedian as (s)he is even free to add his/her own rule to the list. On the other hand, Mailer diablo's adminship standards are really not all that important, considering that no other Wikipedian should really be editing them. joturn e r 05:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - Unnecessary. K ilo-Lima| (talk) 10:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - There are very few cases in which I could foresee a project space link tu a userspace article being acceptable to me, this is not one of them. This is a personal treatise which I very much doubt Mailer Diablo would be keen on other users editing too much, as would happen with a prospective policy article for instance. Also this link being in project space might give some new users the impression that Mailer's viewpoint is widely held amongst the community at large, which I am not sure is true to be honest. Rje 14:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete if gives the mistaken impression that this is more that a user's personal statement -- rogerd 01:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as per Joturner. Schutz 14:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: per above. Jonathunder 01:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep: a very common piece of RFA reasoning. Perhaps the userpage should be merged with others, such as Jguk's, and moved into the project namespace? Ingoolemo talk 04:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete although I'd have prefered to see some chatter to MD himself first, and his talk looks naked of discussion of this. Perhaps some dialog would have saved us this time. Can we get rid of WP:CUNT -> User:Radman1/CUNT while we are at it? - brenneman {L} 13:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - The concept to which it is linked is Mailer Diablo's private musing and not accepted policy. - Richardcavell 03:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - a bit too similar to WP:3RR and could potentially be misleading for some users. Also, per Richardcavell. -- Tangot a ngo 07:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per above discussion. feydey 09:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete until and unless this becomes a projectspace essay page. Is this an early close candidate yet? + + Lar: t/ c 00:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, per reasons above - unnecessary. PJM 16:41, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong Keep, no policy or guideline says WP space things can't go to userpages. If you find a better place where that shortcut can go, then change it, but it's not harming anything now. -- Rory096 16:42, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
ShootJar → Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ShootJar
This is redirecting from the article space to wikipedia namespace. DarthVad e r 22:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 23
Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza → Saturn Relay
Bad article name. Who would enter a search name like that? Article itself is otherwise blank and should be deleted 64.180.26.229 18:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - badly formed article name. - Richardcavell 01:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, it's apparently an alternate name for it, so somebody knowing both names might enter that in. Even if it's not used much, redirects are cheap. -- Rory096 05:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. Unlikely search target. Dr Zak 03:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. I agree with Rory096 --redirects are cheap. Nephron T| C 01:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Buick Terraza/Saturn Relay → Buick Terraza
Bad article name. Who would enter a search name like that? Article itself is otherwise blank and should be deleted 64.180.26.229 18:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Talk:Buick Terraza/Saturn Relay → Talk:Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza
Redirects to obsolete talk page of a different article 64.180.26.229 08:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.WikiProject Thelema → Wikipedia:WikiProject Thelema
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 05:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - what's wrong with crossing namespaces when it helps a person find what they're searching for? - Richardcavell 06:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. There's a reason why we have different namespaces, and I'm not about to reiterate all the other rationales for deleting cross-namespace redirects. Johnleemk | Talk 07:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Hocaefendi → Fethullah Gülen
I'm replacing an existing {{ db}} with an RFD. The nomination by Azate for speedy read: "hocaefendi" means nothing but "dear teacher", as in "Dear teacher Smith,...". 1000s of people are addressed like that. Why should somebody monopolize the term? Interiot 08:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.WP:JIMBO → User talk:Jimbo Wales
We really don't need to make it easier for people to find Jimbo's talk page. The signal to noise ratio on that thing is so high it's useless to Jimbo--no need to encourage more noise. — Philwelch t 12:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Tell me, is there another redirect that could better use this namespace? If not, then what's the point? We should make it easier to find stuff not harder.-- God Ω War 15:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: perhaps a soft redirect to m:Board of Trustees? -- Hetar 04:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per God of War. Redirects are supposed to facilite the finding of pages, and this one does that. -- bcasterline • talk 02:54, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. I doubt many people find Jimbo's talk page through this redirect. I'd guess that the redirect is used primarily as a shortcut for experienced users who already know where the page is. -- TantalumTelluride 02:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment: If not deleted, it should at least be made a soft redirect as it crosses namespaces. Fagstein 03:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per TantalumTelluride. -- Rory096 07:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep Reasonable cross-name space redirects from WP shortcuts to userspace don't bother me--just keep them out of the mainspace (although WP: is technically in the main article namespace). AmiDaniel ( talk) 09:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Move to WT:JIMBO. Ain't WT for talk page redirects? -- Cyde↔Weys 19:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Cross Media Bar (XMB) → Cross Media Bar
Badly named article (with unecessary parentheses) has since been moved and all linking articles now point to the correct name. Imroy 14:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. If someone was confused enough to create the article at that title, it's safe to assume someone else will. This redirect will prevent the creation of redundant articles.
Johnleemk |
Talk 15:34, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- It wasn't created with that name. From the history, it was originally called Xcross Media Bar and renamed to the version with parentheses, presumebly by a user unfamiliar with the naming rules. That old redirect should certainly be kept for the reason you gave, but not this one. Anyone searching for 'cross media bar' will find the article, I don't see anyone creating another article with the (XMB) part. Imroy 03:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Micoolio101's Photo Album → User:Micoolio101/Micoolio101's Photo Album
Redirect from article space to user space. Weregerbil 09:01, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Listcruft → Wikipedia:Listcruft
Cross-namespace redirect Stifle ( talk) 15:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.User:Shujz123/Shuja Ansari → User:Shujz123
Created in error when userfying Whpq 15:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 24
Jeremy Baruffa → Perfect
Nonsensical vanity redirect PoptartKing 23:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - Richardcavell 00:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 25
Xfire (computer game) → Xfire
Pointless redirect that no one will ever type or link to. The actual computer game called "Xfire" was cancelled (as per List of cancelled video games) but that article should not redirect to the Xfire article. Powers 02:25, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.WWE Day of Reckoning 3 → American Idol (video game)
A (currently) non-existant professional wrestling game title that redirects to an American Idol game, which makes no sense at all. Oakster (Talk) 20:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Quantum_Vacuum_Collapse → String_theory
Target page doesn't even talk about the redirect subject. Tmh 14:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
-
Quantum decoherence talks about collapses. Would that be a better target? --
JLaTondre 14:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I think not. Perhaps Spontaneous symmetry breaking? — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Actuarial Outpost misspelled archive page redirects
Talk:Actuarial outpost/Archive1 → Talk:Actuarial Outpost/Archive 1
I misspelled the page's name, this redirect is unnecessary. Avi 14:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as nominator -- Avi 14:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Speedy delete you could speedy both these under {{db-author}} ~ Veledan • Talk 14:15, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Thank you, I did not realize the speedies could be used of redirects. -- Avi 14:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Talk:Actuarial outpost/Archive 1 → Talk:Actuarial Outpost/Archive 1
I misspelled the page's name, this redirect is unnecessary. Avi 14:07, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
assume good faith → Wikipedia:Assume good faith
A cross-namespace redirect that I recently noticed restored by Piotrus. While it my have a lot of internal links, Wikipedia cetainly did not invent the phrase and it's not novel jargon. This is conceivably confusing to the reader, and not terribly useful. Dmcdevit· t 07:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- It was restored because it created a ton of redlinks; I'll orphan it in the morning (if I won't get blocked for it, which seems to happen a lot when I use AWB...). -- Rory096 08:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Oh, and delete after orphaning it. -- Rory096 08:01, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, cross-namespace redirect. feydey 09:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as cross-namespace redirect that may well be blocking an actual article. AmiDaniel ( talk) 09:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
ايرنا → Islamic Republic News Agency
This is the English Wikipedia. We do not use Arabic script in English. — GT 04:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, somebody might search for this if they know Arabic and that this is the real name in Arabic. We don't keep titles in Arabic for that reason, but redirects are valid (see the entire category of Category:Redirects from alternate languages) -- Rory096 04:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Rory. Redirects are cheap. AmiDaniel ( talk) 09:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per Rory. Kukini 14:55, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, reasonable redirect. Absolutely no chance of collateral damage. -- Cyde↔Weys 19:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
WikiProject U.S. Cities → Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 04:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Houseing → Grinding (dance)
For a foreign-language speaker, it would be too easily confused with Housing. Invitatious 01:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.May 26
Homosexuals attitudes towards homosexuality → Societal attitudes towards homosexuality
Article moved from Societal attitudes towards homosexuality to Homosexuals attitudes towards homosexuality to make a point. Homosexuals attitudes towards homosexuality was then made a redirect to Societal attitudes towards homosexuality, when it should probably have been deleted. - Smahoney 20:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Christianity and Latter Day Saintism → Mormonism and Christianity
Redirect created by a move page which has now been moved back to the original title RelHistBuff 22:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Mormonism as a Christian religion → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism
Redirect to a target that is a redirect itself RelHistBuff 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Slogan:Mormons are not Christians → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism
Redirect to a target that is a redirect itself RelHistBuff 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Fix double redirect and keep, unless the current target gets deleted, in which case delete this too. -- Rory096 06:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, as this implies the use of a namespace, which in reality doesn't exist. — TKD:: Talk 01:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, unlikely as a search target Dr Zak 02:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as unlikely search term with unused pseudo-namespace "slogan". Ardric47 21:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The LDS Church and Christianity → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism
Redirect to a target that is a redirect itself RelHistBuff 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Christianity and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism
Redirect to a target that is a redirect itself RelHistBuff 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Video game software → Computer software
Not the same topic. Article that is redirected to offers little to nothing (nothing obvious, at least) about the topic. InShaneee 22:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target → Computer and video games and tag with {{ R from subtopic}} User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 00:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to Computer and video games per Ceyockey. — TKD:: Talk 01:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Video game hardware → Computer hardware
Not the same topic. Article that is redirected to offers little to nothing (nothing obvious, at least) about the topic. -- InShaneee 22:18, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target → Computer and video games and tag with {{ R from subtopic}}. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 00:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to Computer and video games per Ceyockey. — TKD:: Talk 01:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiholiday → Wikipedia:Wikiholiday
This may be an instance in which a cross-namespace redirect is useful. But, all the same, this redirect violates WP:ASR and really shouldn't be in the main namespace. -- bcasterline • talk 03:44, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Patrick Seaman → User:Patrick@patrickseaman.com
WP:VAIN, nocrossnamespaceredirects Qu e ntin Smith 14:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Censorship in China → Internet censorship in mainland China
Censorship and internet censorship are not the same thing, for instance Censorship is also about books censorship. 81.49.63.110 12:55, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep and expand into an article, obviously. Why the anon is right that the redirect is from a general term to a much more specific term, it is better for a person searching for censorship in China to find some specific information than none at all.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Redirect to Censorship in the Republic of China. It's been suggested that this article and Internet censorship in mainland China be merged, but until then, this article is a better target as it's more global. -- JLaTondre 20:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply- I don't see a merge notice on those pages. And note that China usually refers to mainland China (People's Republic of China), whole Republic of China means Taiwan: therefore the change you recommed would very likely redirect people to the article about a different country then they intended.--
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
Talk 00:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- An anon redirected
Censorship in the Republic of China to
Censorship in Taiwan after my comment. However, that's irrelevant as I completely missed that the article I was pointing to was Taiwan and not the Mainland. I always get the proper names for those two confused. Given that, I think this should be a disambig between
Internet censorship in mainland China &
Censorship in Taiwan. If an article on general censorship in the People's Republic of China is written, it should be at the country's proper name anyhow and can be added to the disambig. --
JLaTondre 00:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Disambig is a good idea for that article, I agree.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- An anon redirected
Censorship in the Republic of China to
Censorship in Taiwan after my comment. However, that's irrelevant as I completely missed that the article I was pointing to was Taiwan and not the Mainland. I always get the proper names for those two confused. Given that, I think this should be a disambig between
Internet censorship in mainland China &
Censorship in Taiwan. If an article on general censorship in the People's Republic of China is written, it should be at the country's proper name anyhow and can be added to the disambig. --
JLaTondre 00:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I don't see a merge notice on those pages. And note that China usually refers to mainland China (People's Republic of China), whole Republic of China means Taiwan: therefore the change you recommed would very likely redirect people to the article about a different country then they intended.--
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
Talk 00:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Censorship in China should be a disambiguation page with links to articles about (a) censorship in the People's Republic of China, and (b) Censorship in Taiwan. — May. 28, '06 [05:48] < freak| talk>
- Keep for now per Piotr. -- Northenglish 19:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply
biosphere 3 → biosphere
Biosphere 3 is the full name for BIOS-3 but for some reason it is redirected to bioshpere. Biosphere [1] is obviously not bioshpere 3. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by All systems go ( talk • contribs) .
- Redirect to BIOS-3. -- JLaTondre 20:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target → BIOS-3, but tag with {{ R from related word}} rather than the implied {{ R from alternate name}}. Inspection of the references associated with BIOS-3 does not show "biosphere 3" to be a synonym or alternate name for the facility; there is a "biosphere 2" facility and the two references pointedly avoid referring to Bios-3 as "biosphere 3". Further, the article should be moved to Bios-3 based on these same references. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 01:06, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 27
Alison Machado → Allison Machado
Corrected links pointing to the redirect Brian G 21:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep as plausible misspelling. Links should be corrected, yes, but there's no reason to delete the redirect itself, as a user might make the mistake in spelling. — TKD:: Talk 01:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, to prevent a duplicate article from being created again, at the same wrong title, tag as {{ R from misspelling}}. — May. 29, '06 [10:12] < freak| talk>
- Keep, as per Freakofnurture. Kukini 00:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 28
WikiProject U.S. Counties → Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. counties
Needless cross-namespace redirect, now orphaned. Rory096 03:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Chad → Wikipedia:WikiProject Chad
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:29, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Environment → Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Australian politics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Polish Army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Polish military history task force
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Sports Listing → Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports listing
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject airports → Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject dads army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Dad's Army
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject hip hop → Wikipedia:WikiProject hip hop
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject nascar → Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject vancouver → Wikipedia:WikiProject Vancouver
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject trains → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Trains
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject macintosh → Wikipedia:WikiProject Macintosh
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject: Ohio → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ohio
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Years → Wikipedia:WikiProject Years
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject writing captions → Wikipedia:WikiProject Writing Captions
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Disambiguation → Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Mathematics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Australian Politics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:ARC/Project Articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Arab-Israeli conflict/Project articles
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Adelaide → Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject no ads → Wikipedia:WikiProject No ads
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:buddhism → Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Arab-Israeli conflict/Shortcuts → Wikipedia:Wikiproject:Arab-Israeli_conflict/Shortcuts
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:USSR → Wikipedia:WikiProject Soviet Union
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject: Airports → Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:New Zealand → Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Remember to delete the talk. Rory096 03:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Spoken articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Film → Wikipedia: WikiProject Films
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject: Songs → Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject:Arab-Israeli conflict/Project articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Arab-Israeli_conflict/Project_articles
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Horror:Collaboration of the month → Wikipedia:Wikiproject Horror/Collaboration of the month
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Remember to delete the talk. Rory096 03:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject Writing Captions → Wikipedia:WikiProject Writing Captions
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject arthropods → Wikipedia:WikiProject Arthropods
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikiproject isotopes → Wikipedia:WikiProject Isotopes
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikistalking → Wikipedia:Harassment
Needless cross-namespace redirect, currently orphaning. Rory096 05:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Practical Joke/practical joke → practical joke
Um, what? No point in this redirect. Rory096 05:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Wikipedia:T → Travel
Strange cross-namespace redirect, don't see any reason for it. Goldom 莨夊ｩｱ 謚慕ｨｿ 08:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Audrey Datson → Audrey Daston
This redirect was just created as a result of a page move that I just did. I have corrected all the links and don't see anything outside pointing in to it. Brian G 21:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, clearly not an improbable misspelling if it was created there. -- Rory096 23:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Comment. If this is deleted, the probability of somebody else creating a needless duplicate article through duplicate effort increases significantly, speedy keep and tag as {{ R from misspelling}}. We have bots that routinely fix any pages which link to such (unambiguous typographical error) redirects. — May. 29, '06 [10:09] < freak| talk>
- Keep, per above. Kukini 04:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, it took me a while to realize what the difference was between the two links, heh, so it would be a plausible mispelling. Cowman109 Talk 01:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Greatest Name/to do → User:ChristianEdwardGruber/Greatest Name/to do
This was a user's list which existed in article space. When I moved the list to his user space, this was the resulting redirect. It should now be deleted. -- DS1953 talk 18:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Pseudowallerian degeneration → Wallerian degeneration
Article was deleted before, with the reason that this is not an accepted technical term in the scientific literature. Virtually all Google hits for the term can be traced back to us; we shouldn't create new terminology. User:SPUI, when asked for a specific reason for the re-creation, says "My specific reason is that it's harmless." I argue it's not: it creates the wrong impression that "pseudowallerian degeneration" is an alternative term for "Wallerian degeneration". AxelBoldt 16:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Since the Google hits are already there, it's conceivable that a user may look for the article under the wrong name. Keep. Loom91 08:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per previous. (Misleading redirect.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. -- Northenglish 19:04, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Dokdo → Liancourt Rocks
Article Liancourt Rocks moved w/o consensus and disabled to move back by editing redirect page. We will move back after the redirect page deleted. -- Ypacaraí 07:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- It was moved with consensus. Check the talk page.
Janviermichelle 08:22, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- It appears to have been moved on the basis of an improper vote (no notifications made or time limit announced). Such a vote cannot be used as a basis for determining consensus. Thus, the move should be undone. However, I would vote to speedy keep this page because the deletion tag is disabling hundreds of links. In any event, Requested moves, not RfD, is the process that should be followed here. -- Visviva 11:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Speedy keep. This redirect is in use. Why on earth was this thought to be acceptable? This is a thinly veiled demand to move the Dokdo page back to Liancourt Rocks, something which will not take place on the basis of the redirect page being deleted. Rōnin 11:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Tetraethylborane → Triethylborane
- It doesn't make sense. Tetraethylborane does not exist. Dr Zak 02:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Tetraethyl borane (TEB) seems to exist-- according to this NASA quiz. [5] Is the quiz site wrong? Nephron T| C 01:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete - 'tetra' means 4 ethyl groups, 'tri' means 3. It's clear that if tetraethylborane exists, it cannot be the same thing as 'triethylborane'. (Unless someone can demonstrate that tetra-EB degrades rapidly into tri-EB). - Richardcavell 02:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Tetraethylborane does not exist, but as the article points out, sometimes triethylborane is called tetraethylborane. That is why there is a redirect. Spacepotato 08:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
New York City infobox → Template:New York City infobox
Appears to be an unsuccessful attempt to create a template. The template that it redirects to is unused. The NYC article uses Infobox City instead. (aeropagitica) (talk) 22:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete Per nom and facilitates the Infobox City clean up going on at WP:CITY
May 29
Bliar → Tony Blair
This redirects to Tony Blair as per the result of an AFD here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bliar, however WP:SD states that redirects such as this should be deleted. They give this very one as an example A second reason to remove a redirect is for instance when this causes a malicious equation between the two topics, eg, Bliar redirecting to Tony Blair. (That wasn't in WP:SD when the AFD was taking place though) So which is right the AFD or WP:SD, either way one is going to have to change. No Vote from me Ydam 10:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Its validity depends on the prevalence of the nickname; even if it's a derogatory, a very common nickname should have a redirect as there is a legitimate chance people won't know the real name. However, Google only turns up 700 hits for "bliar" (surprisingly low for what I thought would be a more common nickname), so delete.
Johnleemk |
Talk 11:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Thats because its far more commonly spelt "B.Liar", which gets 44,300 hits. Not a vote. --
Kiand 12:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I still get ~700 hits.
Johnleemk |
Talk 13:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I think we must be using different Googles — I get 298,000 (which is actually impressively high, but more realistic than 700) compared to 156 million for "blair". Anyway, I agree with the suggestion that it should be redirected to
Blair instead. —
sjorford
++ 16:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- If we go by the number Google gives initially, my Google gets 154,000 hits. But as I said below, there are only about 700 unique pages there; the rest is just fluff that Google incorporates into the total for strange reasons of its own.
Johnleemk |
Talk 16:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Ah I see — you're clicking to the end of the "Gooooooooogle" to see how many there are. I also get 700+ that way, although I think you're misinterpreting Google. It's not that those other 153,000 pages don't exist, or are all exact copies of those 700 pages, they're just insignificant or uninteresting to Google's algorithm and so, in its weird way, it doesn't bother to show them to you. To the best of my knowledge, Google will never offer you every single match as a clickable result — at one time there was a hard maximum of 1,000 links, although I don't know if that still applies. There are most certainly a lot more than 700 uses of the word "bliar" on the web — I would hazard a guess that the "true" total of of non-identical hits is in the order of the high tens of thousands. For consistency in comparing relative numbers of Ghits I've always just used the headline total, and I assume most people do the same. (Also, you seem to be searching English pages only, which explains why you still get 1/2 the number I do.) — sjorford ++ 19:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- If we go by the number Google gives initially, my Google gets 154,000 hits. But as I said below, there are only about 700 unique pages there; the rest is just fluff that Google incorporates into the total for strange reasons of its own.
Johnleemk |
Talk 16:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I think we must be using different Googles — I get 298,000 (which is actually impressively high, but more realistic than 700) compared to 156 million for "blair". Anyway, I agree with the suggestion that it should be redirected to
Blair instead. —
sjorford
++ 16:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- I still get ~700 hits.
Johnleemk |
Talk 13:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment so I take it that
WP:SD is wrong in it's assertion then, or am I missing something? Incidently I get 301,000 results
[6]
Ydam 12:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Don't you mean
WP:CSD? And the relevant policy is
Wikipedia:Redirect (and also the stuff at the top of this page documenting our process for deleting redirects.) You need to click through to the last page of the results. Google includes a lot of duplicate pages that vanish when you reach around the thousandth page; I've set my Google preferences to show a hundred pages on each result page, and once you reach the end, there are only 700 unique pages using the phrase.
Johnleemk |
Talk 13:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- He meant WP:SD. Someone added two examples to that page that did not qualify as speedies. I've removed them. See Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletions#Deletion of Redirects for more info. -- JLaTondre 14:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- WP:SD was wrong. The examples provided did not match the speedy deletion criteria for redirects. -- JLaTondre 14:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Don't you mean
WP:CSD? And the relevant policy is
Wikipedia:Redirect (and also the stuff at the top of this page documenting our process for deleting redirects.) You need to click through to the last page of the results. Google includes a lot of duplicate pages that vanish when you reach around the thousandth page; I've set my Google preferences to show a hundred pages on each result page, and once you reach the end, there are only 700 unique pages using the phrase.
Johnleemk |
Talk 13:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Thats because its far more commonly spelt "B.Liar", which gets 44,300 hits. Not a vote. --
Kiand 12:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Also delete. Isopropyl 11:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Why? fuddlemark ( befuddle me!) 13:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Blair; possible mispelling. smurrayinch ester( User), ( Talk) 14:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target per Smurrayinchester. -- JLaTondre 16:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Speedy delete, it's a political epithet and disparages its target. Dr Zak 16:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target per Smurrayinchester. Powers 17:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change – to Blair as a possible typo, per Smurrayinchester – Gurch 18:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Blair as a possible typo. -- HughCharlesParker ( talk - contribs) 19:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to Blair per above. Cowman109 Talk 21:59, 3 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Anti Vandalism Unit → Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit
Cross-namespace redirect, unlikely to be used. Was originally tagged for speedy deletion, but as there's no policy to speedy delete cross-namespace redirects, I'm bringing it here. AmiDaniel ( talk) 05:15, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- You're right. I happened upon this page a few minutes after it was created, and moved it into the Wikipedia namespace, though perhaps the User namespace would have been better. There's no reason to keep this redirect around. NatusRoma | Talk 05:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong delete, WP:ASR. -- Rory096 05:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
May 30
WikiLove → Wikipedia:WikiLove
Needless cross-namespace redirect, now orphaned. Rory096 20:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete as a cross namespace redirect. -- Hetar 22:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. Kukini 04:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 11:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, thanks for orphaning. Kusma (討論) 18:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. jni 08:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom, and yes, thanks for orphaning. Cowman109 Talk 20:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per nom. DarthVad e r 06:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Random page → Special:Randompage
Needless cross-namespace redirect that doesn't actually work. Rory096 05:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
Wikilove → Wikipedia:WikiLove
Needless cross-namespace redirect, now orphaned (except for a couple protected pages). Rory096 05:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.Culture and Development → Maximum Cultural Development
Promotional, orphaned redirect to an essay up for deletion at AfD. Even if Maximum Cultural Development is kept, though, this redirect should be scrapped. I couldn't figure a better target for the redirect; I thought about Culture but the "and development" part makes it strange. Mango juice talk 12:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.The artist formerly known as God → God
Presumably offensive to many, and no incoming links — I can't see that this is a common enough expression to need a redirect. (I'm not offended, I'm just catching this before anybody comes along who is.) — sjorford ++ 16:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.List of mit dormitories → List of MIT dormitories
Why is there a 'List of mit dormitories' page that redirects to 'List of MIT dormitories'? Can this page be simply removed instead? (it's like randomly creating a page called 'bill gates' that redirects to 'Bill Gates' just for the heck of it) Dheerav 16:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. This is extremely common. It's helpful for searching if user's don't have to have the capitalization exactly correct (see WP:Redirect). Redirects are cheap (see above). Powers 19:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. Redirects are cheap. P.S. bill gates redirects to Bill Gates since November 2004. feydey 19:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep and tag with {{ R from other capitalisation}}. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 00:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep as per above. Kukini 00:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Speedy keep simple capitalization redirect. Very useful. Cowman109 Talk 01:23, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Sports and Clubs at the University of Sussex → University of Sussex
Unlikely search term. Page was created to break out sports and clubs but promptly replaced into the main article. — C.Fred ( talk) 22:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep - we don't delete redirects just because they're not used, and this nomination doesn't fit any of the six reasons for deletion at the top of this page. It's a perfectly harmless redirect, it discourages anybody from doing the same split again, and its history is useful to anybody who wants to know exactly what information was split off and when, and when it was merged back in. — sjorford ++ 11:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep per sjorford. Pretty unlikely search term though. DarthVad e r 06:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC) reply
May 31
292,277,026,596 → 11th millennium and beyond
random year, not listed in target —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk) 23:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
Speedydelete per nom. Cowman109 Talk 01:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply- Keep. It's the date of the year 292,277,026,596 problem which is mentioned in the article if you look far enough. Hoof38 01:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. It's pretty silly and unnecessary. I doubt that it would be useful to anybody. M r. L e fty Talk to me! 01:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- If we have redirects for year 292,277,026,596 problem and year 292,277,026,596 problem it seems logically to have a plain 292,277,026,596 redirect too. Hoof38 01:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: it's 100% useless. Normally I'm ok with even implausible typo redirects staying around, but this is so far out there it needs to go. -- Hetar 01:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: I found it about the same time as Rory096 did. In fact, I was going to say the same thing, but he got there first with an edit conflict. This is still pretty implausible. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete, useless. Kusma (討論) 01:46, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, redirects are cheap, useful due to the date "problem" trivia. Powers 02:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to Year 2038 problem. Lbbzman 14:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Beeotch → Bitch
implausible misspelling, pejorative —
Arthur Rubin |
(talk) 23:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment It's not a misspelling, but a distinct word with the same meaning as bitch. Hoof38 01:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep, common slang term. -- Rory096 01:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep redirects are cheap and this is a common slang term from my understanding as well. It may be a supposed internet fad, but it does no harm. Cowman109 Talk 01:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Withdraw. Sorry about that. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
We're Gonna Party Like It's 1999 → 1999 (song)
implausible phrase — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Keep. It's the main line from the song so it's possible somebody could search for it not realizing the proper name. While I wouldn't encourage the creation of this type of redirect, I see no reason to delete it once created. Redirects are cheap. --
JLaTondre 00:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Comment I didn't think "We" was in the line. (I never liked the song, anyway.) If accurate, withdraw. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
The Free Encyclopedia → Wikipedia
This is a biased redirect. Even though it is the slogan of Wikipedia, the words are general (i.e., not very distinctive) and there are other free encyclopedias that people may consider better than Wikipedia. SCHZMO ✍ 23:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
DeleteChange target per Cowman109 below (opinion altered User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 22:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)). Misleading, per the recognition that there is no single one free encyclopedia. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me) 23:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply- Delete: I agree, in the interest of neutrality, this should redirect to a list of free encyclopedias. Barring the existance of such a list, then deletion would be appropriate. -- Hetar 00:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect instead to Encyclopedia. This is a plausible search term so it shouldn't be deleted necessarily, but redirecting to Wikipedia would not be proper. There are other free encyclopedias, so perhaps a redirect to Encyclopedia would be best. Cowman109 Talk 01:29, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target per Cowman. Free encyclopedia redirects there, so this probably should too. -- Rory096 03:18, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change Target per above Eluchil404 08:52, 9 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Portland Trail Blazers History (1988-present) → Portland Trail Blazers history (1988-present)
Deletion requested by page creator. Latter page no longer exists (having been split and renamed), this is a double redirect. -- EngineerScotty 17:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.AN/I → Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 05:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong keep - I find it very useful to be able to type "AN/I" into the search box on the left. -- Hyperbole 07:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Stronger delete - WP:ASR. Johnleemk | Talk 09:33, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete to keep namespaces separate — it's no harder to type WP:AN/I or WP:ANI. — sjorford ++ 10:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete cross-namespace redirect. feydey 10:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per Sjorford. -- JLaTondre 11:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete per sjorford++ Waggers 11:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Strong keep. I rarely visit the noticeboard, but when I do, I usually have trouble remembering the exact name of it and have to stumble through with trial and error a few times before I can get the name right. Being able to type AN/I is one of the few shorthand methods that I can remember. --
Elonka 17:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Surely you can just add a WP: before it? Nearly every other shortcut on Wikipedia uses WP, it shouldn't be too hard to remember. -- Rory096 17:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Redirect to ANI, which has a hatnote for Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Kusma (討論) 18:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to
ANI in agreement with Kusma; tag with {{
R from related word}} ... I thought that maybe {{
R from alternate spelling}} would be ok, but that implies semantic equivalence, which isn't assured. User:Ceyockey (
talk to me) 23:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
reply
- {{ R for convenience}} would do, I suppose, though it doesn't categorize the redirect. -- Rory096 01:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete: We have been over this before, cross namespace redirects are bad. At the very most, a soft redirect should be used. -- Hetar 00:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. The wiki shortcut WP:ANI is just as easy to use, and cross-namespace redirects should be avoided if possible. There wouldn't be much harm in removing this redirect as people would likely use the WP shortcut if they knew what ANI stood food in the first place, if that makes any sense. Also, there are only around 5 or 10 pages linking to it, so the damage on other articles were minimal (even though we don't delete pages just because they have few or no links). Cowman109 Talk 01:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete all cross-namespace redirects. This one is relatively new that should have never been created in the first place so no reason to store it as a historical curiosity dating from the early days of Wikipedia.
jni 10:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
reply
- Note that there is no set-in-stone rule for deleting all cross-namespace redirects. See the precedents list for examples of past cross-namespace redirect cases that were kept (though I did vote delete for this one, just stating a fact) Cowman109 Talk 20:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Delete. Cross-namespace redirect. DarthVad e r 06:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC) reply
- Change target to ANI. That'll still be useful without being cross-namespace. - GTBacchus( talk) 03:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Chop Chop (song)q → Chop Chop (song)
I accidentally created the redirect when I made a typo. Please speedy delete! Richardcavell 01:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.