Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Redirect Archives/May 2006

< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion‎ | Redirect Archives
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives/May 2006)

May 1 edit

The nominated redirect was deleted, speedily userfied content. — May. 1, '06 [10:55] <freakofnurxture|talk>

User Giano:19th century architecture → User:Giano/19th century architecture edit

Link to userspace, made by move to fix accidental creation of userspace article in main namespace. Tangotango 10:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 05:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bill to slash funds to the UN → H.R.2745 edit

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]

  • Delete. per nom. Mystache 16:03, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: this is nothing more than a redirect created purely for POV purposes. --Hetar 03:52, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 2 edit

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 06:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SVEK → Swedish-Cuban Association edit

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]

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

May 3 edit

The nominated redirect was speedily kept; nominations which contravene Wikipedia:Redirect ought to be closed immediately as keeps. In this case, the capitalisation portion of the policy was contravened by the nomination. Johnleemk | Talk 06:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Butterflies (TV Series) → Butterflies (TV series) edit

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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Superfluous quotation markes is a good place to draw the line. — May. 4, '06 [08:42] <freakofnurxture|talk>

"single-fire process" → Single-fire process edit

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 edit

The nominated redirect was Redirect to Barons' War. -- JLaTondre 20:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barons' Wars → Category:Barons' Wars edit

Redirect from main namespace to category namespace Andre Engels 13:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 10:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Big Brother 777 → Big Brother UK series 7 edit

Unnecessary, term has no relevance to article. Thanks/wangi 10:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Cannot think of any relevance to article.--Jusjih 12:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 10:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

generalize → generalization edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 10:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

generalized → generalization edit

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]

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

May 5 edit

The nominated redirect was Speedy deleted, redirect with no target. Stifle (talk) 01:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UNWDA → Worldwide disaster aid edit

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.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted (all of them) Kusma (討論) 23:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shayn weidner → PUMA AG edit

By 170.76.21.156, same as the one below.Deepak 14:39, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted. Kusma (討論) 23:24, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Corben lowden → genius edit

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]

  • And now it's become gerbil. I sense a pattern. Deepak 14:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete as obvious vandalism. --Hetar 19:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 6 edit

The nominated redirect was redirected to Sunday, Cruddy Sunday. Johnleemk | Talk 13:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citizen relocation code → ZIP Code edit

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. smurrayinchester(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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted kept; RfD obscured discussion at AfD. Johnleemk | Talk 13:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pooma lift → T-bar lift edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 13:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cesium 137 (band) (disambiguation) → Cesium 137 edit

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.
The nominated redirect was speedily kept; contravenes Wikipedia:Redirect regarding capitalisation. Johnleemk | Talk 07:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joey newman → Joey Newman edit

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.
The nominated redirect was moved to the correct title and reverted back to a non-redirect. WP:SPLICE would have been the place for this. — May. 10, '06 [08:33] <freakofnurxture|talk>

Talk:Campus_Crusade_for_Christ-Archive_1 → Talk:Campus_Crusade_for_Christ/Archive-01 edit

Made mistake yesterday writing the title for the first archive of the Campus Crusade talk page. Sixtrojans 13:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • This redirect has a page history. As per policy at the top of this page, keep. Johnleemk | Talk 14:06, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment could the history page not be transfered over to the new page? Cowman109Talk 02:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 7 edit

The nominated redirects were speedily deleted as author request Kusma (討論) 21:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

National Rail route LNE 6 → Network Rail route LNE 6 edit

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 edit

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 edit

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 edit

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.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted. Kusma (討論) 21:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interserivce rivalries → Interservice rivalry edit

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 edit

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 08:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trinity Church, Wilmington → Episcopal Diocese of Delaware#New Castle County edit

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.
The nominated redirect was Converted to disambig. Even skipping Windows XP, there are other SP2 related articles. -- JLaTondre 22:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SP2 → Service pack edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted. —Whouk (talk) 08:08, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merciless death → Merciless Death edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 08:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Directed Studies → Directed Studies at Yale University edit

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.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 08:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CBU → Wikipedia:Requests for comment edit

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]
    • Redirects hurt if they are confusing, which this is. Ardric47 07:12, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • They're not linked from anywhere on Wiki. Therefore, the only place that one could find them from is off-wiki, where they're likely old links referring to the old name. Ral315 (talk) 03:03, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: unless you have someplace more logical that it should point to. --Hetar 19:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Delete What Links Here shows that nothing links to WP:CBU but the link here and a deletion log. Cowman109Talk 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. Cowman109Talk 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. Cowman109Talk 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]
        • By typing "WP:CBU" and hitting "Go", for example. A great example is %s, which has no relevant incoming links, but is still widely used. Kusma (討論) 00:20, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • Whoa, how does that work? Ardric47 01:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • Use Firefox, type "wp" in the URL bar, it uses the redirect %s → Main Page. See Talk:%s for the RfD discussion. Kusma (討論) 01:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
              • That's interesting; it's like a shortcut, except different! Ardric47 01:59, 10 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]
    • No, G4 wouldn't apply here. First of all, it's been too long since recreation; secondly, if that's true, I find it more likely that someone decided it was useful, and created it again. Ral315 (talk) 08:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 08:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Union (disambiguation) → New Union edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 08:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conker live and reloded → Conker: Live & Reloaded edit

unneeded (previously a prod'ed article), unlikely way to spell/capitalize/punctuate Mangojuicetalk 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. Cowman109Talk 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 9 edit

The nominated redirect was speedied by InShaneee (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Arnz/Sandbox/Nambour and Gympie North railway line → User:Arnzy/Sandbox/Nambour and Gympie North railway line edit

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.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of British words not widely used in the U.S. → List of British words not widely used in the United States edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 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 edit

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]
    • Some people (mainly Americans) are taught that proper acronyms have .s between the letters. Johnleemk | Talk 12:29, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 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 edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of words mainly used in Commonwealth English → List of British words not widely used in the United States edit

Poor & 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of words mainly used in British English → List of British words not widely used in the United States edit

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]
  • 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of words mainly used in Australian English → Australian words edit

Never referenced, see also below JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Plausible type-in. We do not delete redirects just because nobody links to them; see the top of this page itself. Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of words mainly used in Canadian English → Canadian words edit

the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, apparently contains page history of a merge performed without an edit summary. Kusma (討論) 20:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Plausible type-in. Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of words mainly used in American English → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom edit

the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, old page move, harmless. Kusma (討論) 20:49, 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept; no consensus to delete. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of words used mainly in American English → List of American words not widely used in the United Kingdom edit

the "mainly used in" conventions were poor, so we better shuck off them all JackLumber 13:03, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, old page move, harmless. Kusma (討論) 20:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - article series being cleaned up; all links to old page checked and updated. -- TrevorD 23:17, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CwE → Commonwealth English edit

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]

  • Delete, all references I can find are Wikipedia mirrors. No incoming links from external sites either. Kusma (討論) 20:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - article series being cleaned up; totally unnecessary. -- TrevorD 23:18, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted. Kusma (討論) 20:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User LittleBro → Template:User LittleBro edit

Cross namespace Midnighttonight 09:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. —Whouk (talk) 09:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross namespace redirect. --Hetar 19:02, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can You Spare a Dime?) → Can You Spare a Dime? edit

Newly created article with grammatical error which is unlikely to be mistyped or searched for. Parasite 07:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete—implausible typo. Ardric47 20:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

$pringfield (or, How I learned to stop worrying and love legalized gambling), → $pringfield edit

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]

  • Keep. Full title of the episode, so plausible type-in. Damn commas. Johnleemk | Talk 15:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete—This is something that is rather implausible to be typed in (note the comma at the end). Ardric47 20:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 05:02, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox and Userboxes → Wikipedia:Userboxes, List of userboxes → Wikipedia:List of userboxes edit

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]
    • These were undeleted just minutes ago following a majority to undelete them at DRV. They should be undeleted while this RFD debate is in progress. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:57, 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. Cowman109Talk 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]
    • I've orphaned every link except for those that I feel refer to the redirects specifically. Ral315 (talk) 06:53, 11 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. Cowman109Talk 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 10 edit

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shanti → Gaia_(mythology) edit

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]

  • Delete I can't find any reason for Shanti redirecting to the Gaia article through a google search. My vote is delete unless a reason is given. Cowman109Talk 20:34, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Expansionism and Ottoman Empire → History of Russo-Turkish wars edit

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]
  • 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Worms/Prod → List of Worms weapons and tools edit

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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive1 → User talk:Unisouth/Archive1 edit

User talk archive moved to user space; redirect redundant. —Whouk (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. Cowman109Talk 20:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Bonifeld → Phil Bonifield edit

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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kobaly → Healthcare traveler edit

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]

  • No decision. This link shows that Kobaly, or Dan Kobaly, is a writer at healthcaretraveler.com. I can't vote either way as I'm completely unfamiliar with the subject, though. Cowman109Talk 22:27, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Creature editor (Spore) → Spore edit

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]

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

May 11 edit

The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hero (Mortal Kombat) → Taven (Mortal Kombat) edit

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)

  • Keep; no harm. If it refers to the same character, it is possible someone may look under the old name. Ral315 (talk) 08:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This may aid in search results. It doesn't do much harm either, as stated by the above comment. Cowman109Talk 22:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, nobody wants it. — May. 17, '06 [07:53] <freak|talk>

May 1, 2006 → Great American Boycott edit

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

May 12 edit

The nominated redirect was turned into a stub. — May. 18, '06 [06:06] <freak|talk>

User page → Wikipedia:User page edit

  • 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. Cowman109Talk 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. Cowman109Talk 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]
  • 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. Cowman109Talk 23:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 13 edit

The nominated redirect was speedied. Johnleemk | Talk 08:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Julie rodriguez edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 11:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian terrorism and Armenian Terrorism edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 11:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Literature of Southeast Asia → Literature about Southeast Asia edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — May. 17, '06 [07:55] <freak|talk>

"Rolllo May" → Rollo May edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted by Ral315. -- JLaTondre 15:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dilupa → User:Dilupa edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — May. 17, '06 [07:56] <freak|talk>

Dictionary of the Catholic Resistance → WikiProject:Dictionary of the Catholic Resistance edit

  • Delete This sends users to the Wikiproject, and it was used as a way to direct people to dissident Catholic groups. Using an NPoV wikiproject as a "see also" link is problematic Dominick (TALK) 18:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 15 edit

The nominated redirect was Deleted by DragonflySixtyseven. -- JLaTondre 15:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agentwormy → User:Agentwormy edit

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]

  • Delete Cross-namespace redirect (user space). Cowman109Talk 02:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 16 edit

The nominated redirect was deleted. — May. 17, '06 [07:55] <freak|talk>

RuneScape Images → Category:RuneScape Images edit

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. DGX 23:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — May. 17, '06 [07:55] <freak|talk>

Obnoxious fad → Crazy Frog edit

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]

  • Sadly, delete but there's certainly a connection :-) BJAODN? —Whouk (talk) 18:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Seems to be a non-npov redirect. Cowman109Talk 20:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 06:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keiser Av En Dimesjon Ukjent → Keiser Av En Dimensjon Ukjent edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 06:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:TOCStatesAndIslands → Template:HSBC States edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 06:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saliyar → Saliya edit

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)

You are free to write an article at Saliyar if this is a different topic. However, Saliyar has an incoming link that apparently means Saliya (and this is the only real incoming link the article has). Is this link wrong? Kusma (討論) 15:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 17 edit

The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 05:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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 edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept as a redirect, please create a stub in its place rather than nominating this for deletion. Just a couple of sentences would be fine, somebody can expand upon it. — May. 18, '06 [06:04] <freak|talk>

Sex on the beach → List of cocktails edit

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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted by Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 00:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heliacal → Wiktionary:Heliacal edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted, misleading, and apparently created by error or accident. — May. 18, '06 [06:09] <freak|talk>

Hillyard, Seattle, Washington → Hillyard, Spokane, Washington edit

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 edit

The nominated redirect was deleted. — May. 25, '06 [09:48] <freak|talk>

Editcountitis → Wikipedia:Editcountitis edit

  • 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was a speedy keep, frivolous nomination. These redirects will surely prevent accidental creation of duplicate articles on the same topic. — May. 18, '06 [05:53] <freak|talk>

Bio-diesel → Biodiesel edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was #redirected to Straight vegetable oil. — May. 24, '06 [17:58] <freak|talk>

Vegoil → Biodiesel edit

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."

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was a speedy keep, frivolous nomination. — May. 18, '06 [05:58] <freak|talk>

Empyrez.com → Empyrez edit

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.
The nominated redirect was redirected to Portal:Republic of Macedonia, yet again. If somebody wants to replace it with a seperate portal, or a disambiguation page in portal space, that's fine by me, but there's no reason to delete this in the meantime. — May. 18, '06 [06:01] <freak|talk>

Portal:Macedonia → Macedonia edit

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.
The nominated redirect was speedily kept; contravenes Wikipedia:Redirect regarding {{R from other capitalisation}}. Johnleemk | Talk 15:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yasar kemal → Yasar Kemal edit

comparatively quickly corrected bad capitalization Malyctenar 14:51, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep; redirects are commonly kept for capitalization. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 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 edit

The nominated redirect was speedy deleted. --kingboyk 10:22, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Dad's Army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Dad's Army edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect Rory096 19:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as self-referential cross-namespace redirect. — TKD::Talk 01:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a cross namespace redirect. --Hetar 05:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 10:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom of Christ → Millennialism edit

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]

  • Delete. Yes it's confusing. ~ Veledan • Talk 21:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I don't see that 'Kingdom of Christ' should inspire an explanation of 'Millennialism'. - Richardcavell 23:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Kukini 04:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, though this should probably be a disambiguation page instead. — May. 24, '06 [17:56] <freak|talk>

disengagement → Israel's unilateral disengagement plan edit

"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. -- Tangotango 07:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. No sillier than New York, New York. — May. 24, '06 [17:55] <freak|talk>

Singapore, Singapore → Singapore edit

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. --Terence 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. -- Tangotango 07:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted, however, I did move the single meaningful entry in the edit history to the correct location, see revision #281037 by KoyaanisQatsi (talk · contribs), which predates the entire History of Singapore article hist. — May. 24, '06 [17:53] <freak|talk>

Singapore/History → History of Singapore edit

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. -- Tangotango 07:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedy keep, valid disambiguation construct. — May. 20, '06 [09:54] <freak|talk>

Woodlands (Singapore) → Woodlands, Singapore edit

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 edit

The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 04:22, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:1FA → User:Mailer diablo/One Featured Article edit

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. joturner 05:36, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Unnecessary. Kilo-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]
    • Technically it's not even in project space, it's a WP: link in main space. I could have speedy deleted it, but out of respect to Mailer Diablo I listed it here instead. --kingboyk 22:24, 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]
  • Point taken. I (perhaps wrongly) assumed it would be on his watchlist and he'd be straight over. I'll drop him a note now. Thanks for the headsup. --kingboyk 19:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: Don't diss the CUNT. That's a piece that should be moved to meta, actually. — May. 23, '06 [13:56] <freak|talk>
  • 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. -- Tangotango 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedied by Freakofnurture (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Johnleemk | Talk 12:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ShootJar → Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/ShootJar edit

This is redirecting from the article space to wikipedia namespace. DarthVader 22:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. --Hetar 05:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 23 edit

The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 07:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza → Saturn Relay edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedily deleted by Drini. — TKD::Talk 03:47, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buick Terraza/Saturn Relay → Buick Terraza edit

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.
The nominated redirect was removed. Talk page redirected during page move. However, talk page should now be for the redirect page. No need to actually delete the redirect page. -- JLaTondre 12:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Buick Terraza/Saturn Relay → Talk:Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza edit

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.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — May. 24, '06 [08:50] <freak|talk>

WikiProject Thelema → Wikipedia:WikiProject Thelema edit

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]
    • WP:ASR. Project material should not be in articlespace. --Rory096 08:03, 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 07:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hocaefendi → Fethullah Gülen edit

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]

  • Weak delete per nom. Weak only because I don't speak the language and am not familiar with the topic. AmiDaniel (talk) 09:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Kukini 14:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 07:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:JIMBO → User talk:Jimbo Wales edit

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]
    • If there was I would have changed the redirect. — Philwelch t 03:32, 24 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]
    • Comment. It doesn't really matter, as it's not articlespace (well, technically it is, but it's not regarded as articlespace). There's no real reason for a soft redirect, since the whole point of it is to be a shortcut. --Rory096 07:27, 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]
    • It's actually for Wikipedia talk redirects, technically, as that's what it stands for (well, technically it's just articlespace, but whatever). It's completely arbitrary what the pseudo-namespace is for. --Rory096 07:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 07:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cross Media Bar (XMB) → Cross Media Bar edit

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]
      • If someone can conceivably consider this to be the correct name for the article, others can. Johnleemk | Talk 05:25, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedied. Page was userfied. Johnleemk | Talk 11:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Micoolio101's Photo Album → User:Micoolio101/Micoolio101's Photo Album edit

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.
The nominated redirect was killed. — May. 24, '06 [17:44] <freak|talk>

Listcruft → Wikipedia:Listcruft edit

Cross-namespace redirect Stifle (talk) 15:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The policy is pretty cut and dry on that, although I don't see the harm in this one myself. -- stubblyhead | T/c 16:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedied under WP:SNOW CSD G7. Johnleemk | Talk 16:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Shujz123/Shuja Ansari → User:Shujz123 edit

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 edit

The nominated redirect was speedily deleted by Alabamaboy. — TKD::Talk 03:43, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Baruffa → Perfect edit

Nonsensical vanity redirect PoptartKing 23:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

May 25 edit

The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 08:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Xfire (computer game) → Xfire edit

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]

  • Delete as misleading, unless there is enough verifiable information about the Xfire game to warrant an article. — TKD::Talk 04:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 08:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WWE Day of Reckoning 3 → American Idol (video game) edit

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]

  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 04:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious delete: very confusing, completely unecessary. --Hetar 18:11, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was altered as per Arthur Rubin. Johnleemk | Talk 08:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quantum_Vacuum_Collapse → String_theory edit

Target page doesn't even talk about the redirect subject. Tmh 14:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted by The JPS. -- Cowman109Talk 19:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actuarial Outpost misspelled archive page redirects edit

Talk:Actuarial outpost/Archive1 → Talk:Actuarial Outpost/Archive 1 edit

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 edit

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]
The nominated redirect was redirected to the article good faith. — May. 25, '06 [09:50] <freak|talk>

assume good faith → Wikipedia:Assume good faith edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept, per WP:SNOW. Johnleemk | Talk 08:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ايرنا → Islamic Republic News Agency edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedied as such. — May. 25, '06 [06:33] <freak|talk>

WikiProject U.S. Cities → Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities edit

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.
The nominated redirect was redirected to House, as a quite plausible misspelling of "Housing" which also redirects to the same article. — May. 26, '06 [05:48] <freak|talk>

Houseing → Grinding (dance) edit

For a foreign-language speaker, it would be too easily confused with Housing. Invitatious 01:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, per nom. Kukini 04:03, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 26 edit

The nominated redirect was speedied; no point keeping it around as per WP:SNOW and Lou franklin's ban (Hernando Cortez, who frivolously moved the article, is a confirmed sock of his). Johnleemk | Talk 11:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Homosexuals attitudes towards homosexuality → Societal attitudes towards homosexuality edit

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.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity and Latter Day Saintism → Mormonism and Christianity edit

Redirect created by a move page which has now been moved back to the original title RelHistBuff 22:39, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as an alternate title. — TKD::Talk 01:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mormonism as a Christian religion → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism edit

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]
  • Fix double redirect and keep per Rory096. — TKD::Talk 01:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slogan:Mormons are not Christians → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism edit

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]
    • Comment—I was wrong about "slogan" ([4])—but still delete as unlikely. Ardric47 21:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The LDS Church and Christianity → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism edit

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]
  • Fix double redirect and keep per Rory096. — TKD::Talk 01:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints → Christianity and Latter Day Saintism edit

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]
  • Fix double redirect and keep per Rory096. — TKD::Talk 01:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept and target changed. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Video game software → Computer software edit

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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept and target changed. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Video game hardware → Computer hardware edit

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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. — May. 26, '06 [05:45] <freak|talk>

Wikiholiday → Wikipedia:Wikiholiday edit

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]

  • Delete as a cross-namespace redirect. --Hetar 03:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Kukini 04:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 04:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, currently orphaning. --Rory096 05:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedied by Fang_Aili (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Johnleemk | Talk 18:00, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Seaman → User:Patrick@patrickseaman.com edit

WP:VAIN, nocrossnamespaceredirects Quentin Smith 14:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, R2. --Rory096 16:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was turned into disambig article. Johnleemk | Talk 12:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship in China → Internet censorship in mainland China edit

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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was redirected to BIOS-3 Dr Zak 02:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

biosphere 3 → biosphere edit

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

May 27 edit

The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alison Machado → Allison Machado edit

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

May 28 edit

The nominated redirect was All deleted as cross-namespace redirects. --Cyde↔Weys 04:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject U.S. Counties → Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. counties edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect, now orphaned. Rory096 03:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Chad → Wikipedia:WikiProject Chad edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:29, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Environment → Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Australian politics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Polish Army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Polish military history task force edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Sports Listing → Wikipedia:WikiProject Sports listing edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject airports → Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject dads army → Wikipedia:WikiProject Dad's Army edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject hip hop → Wikipedia:WikiProject hip hop edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject nascar → Wikipedia:WikiProject NASCAR edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject vancouver → Wikipedia:WikiProject Vancouver edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject trains → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Trains edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject macintosh → Wikipedia:WikiProject Macintosh edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject: Ohio → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ohio edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Years → Wikipedia:WikiProject Years edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject writing captions → Wikipedia:WikiProject Writing Captions edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:Disambiguation → Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:41, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Mathematics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Australian Politics → Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian politics edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:ARC/Project Articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Arab-Israeli conflict/Project articles edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Adelaide → Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject no ads → Wikipedia:WikiProject No ads edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:buddhism → Wikipedia:WikiProject Buddhism edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:Arab-Israeli conflict/Shortcuts → Wikipedia:Wikiproject:Arab-Israeli_conflict/Shortcuts edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:Comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:USSR → Wikipedia:WikiProject Soviet Union edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject: Airports → Wikipedia:WikiProject Airports edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:New Zealand → Wikipedia:WikiProject New Zealand edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Remember to delete the talk. Rory096 03:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:Spoken articles → Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject:Film → Wikipedia: WikiProject Films edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject: Songs → Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Comics → Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics edit

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 edit

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 edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Remember to delete the talk. Rory096 03:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Writing Captions → Wikipedia:WikiProject Writing Captions edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject arthropods → Wikipedia:WikiProject Arthropods edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject isotopes → Wikipedia:WikiProject Isotopes edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect. Rory096 03:56, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikistalking → Wikipedia:Harassment edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect, currently orphaning. Rory096 05:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Practical Joke/practical joke → practical joke edit

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.
The nominated redirect was speedied by Freakofnurture (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Johnleemk | Talk 11:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:T → Travel edit

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]

  • Delete, created by Naconkanteri. (talk · contribs) (note the ending dot), who has since been blocked indefinitely for trying to impersonate Naconkantari. Imroy 09:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. — TKD::Talk 09:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Audrey Datson → Audrey Daston edit

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. Cowman109Talk 01:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Speedily deleted by InShaneee (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). --Rory096 20:15, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Name/to do → User:ChristianEdwardGruber/Greatest Name/to do edit

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]

  • Speedy delete, R2. --Rory096 20:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 12:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudowallerian degeneration → Wallerian degeneration edit

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]

  • Delete per nominator and the AfD. Dr Zak 21:27, 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]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Speedy kept as this is a case for Wikipedia:Requested moves and not RFD. Nomination title is backwards. The nominated redirect is actually Liancourt Rocks & the target is Dokdo. -- JLaTondre 12:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dokdo → Liancourt Rocks edit

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.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 12:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tetraethylborane → Triethylborane edit

  • 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]
    • I'm afraid so. Borane is trivalent, there can be at most three alkyl groups bound to a boron atom. Triethyl borane does exists. Dr Zak 01:30, 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedied by Freakofnurture (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Johnleemk | Talk 11:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New York City infobox → Template:New York City infobox edit

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

May 29 edit

The nominated redirect was changed to target Blair. Johnleemk | Talk 15:13, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bliar → Tony Blair edit

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]
    • 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]
      • WP:SD was wrong. The examples provided did not match the speedy deletion criteria for redirects. -- JLaTondre 14:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also delete. Isopropyl 11:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was zomg, deleted out-out-of process, in that case. — May. 30, '06 [05:32] <freak|talk>

Anti Vandalism Unit → Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit edit

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

May 30 edit

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

WikiLove → Wikipedia:WikiLove edit

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. Cowman109Talk 20:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. DarthVader 06:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedy deleted. — May. 30, '06 [05:55] <freak|talk>

Random page → Special:Randompage edit

Needless cross-namespace redirect that doesn't actually work. Rory096 05:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilove → Wikipedia:WikiLove edit

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.
The nominated redirect was changed to target culture. Johnleemk | Talk 15:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Culture and Development → Maximum Cultural Development edit

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. Mangojuicetalk 12:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was dealt with[7]. — May. 31, '06 [04:43] <freak|talk>

The artist formerly known as God → God edit

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]

  • Delete, great nomination!!! Kukini 04:38, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was speedy kept. — smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 10:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of mit dormitories → List of MIT dormitories edit

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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 15:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sports and Clubs at the University of Sussex → University of Sussex edit

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. DarthVader 06:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

May 31 edit

The nominated redirect was changed to target Year 2038 problem. Johnleemk | Talk 11:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

292,277,026,596 → 11th millennium and beyond edit

random year, not listed in target — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete per nom. Cowman109Talk 01:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • In that case, it may not be a speedy delete, but I feel that it is very unlikely that someone woudl ever type in such a large, hard to remember number unless it was linked from elsewhere. Cowman109Talk 01:26, 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]
    • Neither the words "problem" nor "Year 292..." were mentioned in the article at all. Your link is just a redirect to a year 2038 problem. --Rory096 01:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • (edit conflict) Wait, found the tiny mention. "December 4, 292277026596: 64-bit Unix time resets to zero." Enough for a redirect? Probably not. If anything, the redirect should go to the 2038 thing. --Rory096 01:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It's pretty silly and unnecessary. I doubt that it would be useful to anybody. Mr. Lefty 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Withdrawn by nominator. --Rory096 01:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beeotch → Bitch edit

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. Cowman109Talk 01:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw. Sorry about that. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Withdrawn by nominator. --Rory096 01:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We're Gonna Party Like It's 1999 → 1999 (song) edit

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]
      • It may not have actually been there, but since it's the logical word to be there grammar-wise, people would think it was. --Rory096 01:13, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was changed target to encyclopedia. Johnleemk | Talk 11:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Free Encyclopedia → Wikipedia edit

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]

  • Delete Change 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. Cowman109Talk 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was kept. Johnleemk | Talk 11:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portland Trail Blazers History (1988-present) → Portland Trail Blazers history (1988-present) edit

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]

  • Fixed double redirect, and keep it, no reason to delete. --Rory096 17:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was deleted. Johnleemk | Talk 11:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I → Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents edit

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]
    • Surely you can just add a little WP: to the beginning. Indeed, you can even skip the slash (WP:ANI)! That way we can avoid a self-reference and still have it be rather easy to get there. --Rory096 16:32, 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]
      • Alas, I have never found the name of this particular board to be intuitive. I am living proof that the redirect at AN/I is indeed used.  :) --Elonka 18:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yeah, the name is bad, but there's a redirect at WP:AN/I (and WP:ANI, which is easier IMO) too. Can you adjust yourself to use those? --Rory096 18:38, 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]
  • 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). Cowman109Talk 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) Cowman109Talk 20:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Cross-namespace redirect. DarthVader 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]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The nominated redirect was Deleted by MONGO as db-author. -- JLaTondre 11:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chop Chop (song)q → Chop Chop (song) edit

I accidentally created the redirect when I made a typo. Please speedy delete! Richardcavell 01:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete, G7, tagged as such. --Rory096 05:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Redirect_Archives/May_2006&oldid=1147963432"