Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

XFD backlog

V	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Total
CfD	0	0	0	26	26
TfD	0	0	0	5	5
MfD	0	0	2	5	7
FfD	0	0	1	1	2
RfD	0	0	0	0	0
AfD	0	0	0	0	0

Redirects for discussion (RfD) is the place where potentially problematic redirects are discussed. Items usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted, kept, or retargeted.

• If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, do not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!
• If you want to move a page but a redirect is in the way, do not list it here. For non-controversial cases, place a technical request; if a discussion is required, then start a requested move.
• If you think a redirect points to the wrong target article, this is a good place to discuss the proper target.
• Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping. (See § When should we delete a redirect? for more information.)

Please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for participants and closers.

Before listing a redirect for discussion

Please be aware of these general policies, which apply here as elsewhere:

• Wikipedia:Redirect – what redirects are, why they exist, and how they are used.
• Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – which pages can be deleted without discussion; in particular the "General" and "Redirects" sections.
• Wikipedia:Deletion policy – how we delete things by consensus.
• Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – guidelines on discussion format and shorthand.

The guiding principles of RfD

• The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that readers will find themselves staring blankly at "Search results 1–10 out of 378" instead of the article they were looking for. If someone could plausibly enter the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.
• Redirects are cheap. They take up little storage space and use very little bandwidth. It doesn't really hurt things if there are a few of them scattered around. On the flip side, deleting redirects is also cheap because recording the deletion takes up little storage space and uses very little bandwidth. There is no harm in deleting problematic redirects.
• If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete.
• Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept.
• RfD can also serve as a central discussion forum for debates about which page a redirect should target. In cases where retargeting the redirect could be considered controversial, it is advisable to leave a notice on the talk page of the redirect's current target page or the proposed target page to refer readers to the redirect's nomination to allow input and help form consensus for the redirect's target.
• Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another's do not need to be listed here. Anyone can remove the redirect by blanking the page. The G6 criterion for speedy deletion may be appropriate.
• In discussions, always ask yourself whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader.

When should we delete a redirect?

Further information: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes and Wikipedia:Moving a page § Moving over a redirect

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

• a redirect may contain non-trivial edit history;
• if a redirect is reasonably old (or is the result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is possible that its deletion will break incoming links (such links coming from older revisions of Wikipedia pages, from edit summaries, from other Wikimedia projects or from elsewhere on the internet, do not show up in "What links here").

Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones.

Reasons for deleting

See also: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Redirects

You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):

1. The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles", it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
2. The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
3. The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
4. The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
5. The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
6. It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, were an exception to this rule until they became their own namespace in 2024. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
7. If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first and that it has not become broken through vandalism.
8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
9. If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the suppressredirect user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves.
10. If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.

Reasons for not deleting

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

1. They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge (see Wikipedia:Merge and delete). On the other hand, if the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
2. They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in article text because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
3. They aid searches on certain terms. For example, users who might see the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but do not know what that refers to will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
4. Deleting redirects runs the risk of breaking incoming or internal links. For example, redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted without good reason. Links that have existed for a significant length of time, including CamelCase links (e.g. WolVes) and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. See also Wikipedia:Link rot § Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites.
5. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. Evidence of usage can be gauged by using the wikishark or pageviews tool on the redirect to see the number of views it gets.
6. The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.

Neutrality of redirects

Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are such redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names, therefore perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}.

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

1. Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
2. Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
3. The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "Attorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy. The article in question has never used that title, but the redirect was created to provide an alternative means of reaching it because a number of press reports use the term.

The exceptions to this rule would be redirects that are not established terms and are unlikely to be useful, and therefore may be nominated for deletion, perhaps under deletion reason #3. However, if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, as it will facilitate searches on such terms. Please keep in mind that RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes.

Closing notes

Details at Administrator instructions for RfD

Nominations should remain open, per policy, about a week before they are closed, unless they meet the general criteria for speedy deletion, the criteria for speedy deletion of a redirect, or are not valid redirect discussion requests (e.g. are actually move requests).

How to list a redirect for discussion

STEP I.	Tag the redirect(s).   Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion and enter }} at the very end of the page. Please do not mark the edit as minor (m). Please include in the edit summary the phrase: Nominated for RfD: see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]. Save the page ("Publish changes"). If you are unable to edit the redirect page because of protection, this step can be omitted, and after step 2 is completed, a request to add the RFD template can be put on the redirect's talk page. If the redirect you are nominating is in template namespace, consider adding |showontransclusion=1 to the RfD tag so that people using the template redirect are aware of the nomination. If you are nominating multiple redirects as a group, repeat all the above steps for each redirect being nominated.
STEP II.	List the entry on RfD.  Click here to edit the section of RfD for today's entries. Enter this text below the date heading: {{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName|target=TargetArticle|text=The action you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for that action.}} ~~~~ For this template: Put the redirect's name in place of RedirectName, put the target article's name in place of TargetArticle, and include a reason after text=. Note that, for this step, the "target article" is the current target of the redirect (if you have a suggestion for a better target, include this in the text that you insert after text=). Please use an edit summary such as: Nominating [[RedirectName]] (replacing RedirectName with the name of the redirect you are nominating). To list multiple related redirects for discussion, use the following syntax. Repeat line 2 for N number of redirects: {{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName1|target=TargetArticle1}} {{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}} {{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectNameN|target=TargetArticleN|text=The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.}} ~~~~ If the redirect has had previous RfDs, you can add {{Oldrfdlist|previous RfD without brackets|result of previous RfD}} directly after the rfd2 template. If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
STEP III.	Notify users.   It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors of the redirect(s) that you nominate. To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the respective redirect(s). For convenience, the template {{subst:Rfd notice|RedirectName}} ~~~~ may be placed on the creator/main contributors' user talk page to provide notice of the discussion. Please replace RedirectName with the name of the respective creator/main contributors' redirect and use an edit summary such as: Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]] Notices about the RfD discussion may also be left on relevant talk pages.

• Please consider using What links here to locate other redirects that may be related to the one you are nominating. After going to the redirect target page and selecting "What links here" in the toolbox on the left side of your computer screen, select both "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links" filters to display the redirects to the redirect target page.

Current list

July 7

National Christian Forensics and Communications Association/Clubs → List of National Christian Forensics and Communications Association clubs

List was cut-pasted from main article to a subarticle because article was getting long. Then the subarticle was moved to regular article space "per style guide" No reason the redirect should remain, nothing links to the redirect. I doubt the mover has any objection; this is close to a speedy by G7 Gimmetrow 01:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Delete - Sorry, my fault. I moved the page, but didn't think to delete the redirect. - pm_shef 02:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The Dupe → Christopher Hitchens

Sophomoric personal attack; see WP:BLP. (No links, BTW) CWC(talk) 09:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

July 6

Template:Interstate 95 in Virginia exit list → Interstate 95/Virginia exit list

Cross-namespace redirect created when moving a transclusion page improperly created in the Template namespace. Northenglish (talk) -- 19:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Al-Masri→Abu Hamza al-Masri and Masri→Egyptian Arabic

"al-Masri" could equally well apply to Abu Ayyub al-Masri, and "Masri" could equally well apply to either man or the Egyptian arabic language. Can we delete the redirects and do a disambiguation page that includes all three? Jessesamuel 18:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. I just saw this nomination after I had already created Masri (disambiguation). Masri should remain a redirect to Egyptian Arabic because it is more commonly a native reference to the language. You may want however to create a disambiguation page for al-Masri since it applies to two different persons. — [zɪʔɾɪdəʰ] · t 19:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep the latter per Zerida. Delete the first, possibly converting to a dismabiguation page (also somewhat per Zerida). -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Mazda Mazda2 → Mazda Demio

Malformed article name. Redirects that don't say Mazda twice already exist. Page has long since moved. 198.103.172.9 17:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - The name of the car is the "Mazda2", the manufacturer's name is "Mazda". It isn't inconceivable to think that someone might type in "Mazda Mazda2". Besides, redirects are dirt cheap. I see no reason to delete this. --Cyde↔Weys 00:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Mazda Mazda3 → Mazda Axela

Malformed article name. Redirects that don't say Mazda twice already exist. Page has long since moved. 198.103.172.9 17:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - The name of the car is the "Mazda3", the manufacturer's name is "Mazda". It isn't inconceivable to think that someone might type in "Mazda Mazda3". Besides, redirects are dirt cheap. I see no reason to delete this. --Cyde↔Weys 00:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Mazda Mazda5 → Mazda Premacy

Malformed article name. Redirects that don't say Mazda twice already exist. Page has long since moved. 198.103.172.9 17:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - The name of the car is the "Mazda5", the manufacturer's name is "Mazda". It isn't inconceivable to think that someone might type in "Mazda Mazda5". Besides, redirects are dirt cheap. I see no reason to delete this. --Cyde↔Weys 00:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Mazda Mazda6 → Mazda Atenza

Malformed article name. Redirects that don't say Mazda twice already exist. Page has long since moved. 198.103.172.9 17:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - The name of the car is the "Mazda6", the manufacturer's name is "Mazda". It isn't inconceivable to think that someone might type in "Mazda Mazda6". Besides, redirects are dirt cheap. I see no reason to delete this. --Cyde↔Weys 00:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Saturn Relay/Buick Terraza → Saturn Relay

Malformed article name. Page has long since moved. 198.103.172.9 17:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was Deleted Viridae^Talk 12:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Mongolia on Wheels! → Mongolia

Patent nonsense -- created as the result of a page move of Mongolia by a vandal. Zonath 08:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

List of sexual slurs/old → Talk:List of sexual slurs/unverified

This article survived two AfDs in march and april Then it was moved in June. The resulting redirect is now cross namespace, and particularly odd as a subarticle. I thought subarticles were not allowed in the main namespace? Gimmetrow 23:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah, the redirect is unused and redundant now. Its target gets visited periodically, but I reckon that's as a result of a Google hit here and there. Given the very well referenced state of the non /old article, the target of this should not have been met with such weak will by AfD twice, either. Delete. -Splash - tk 02:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• The target is linked from various places including the talk page of the article, so it's rather actively edited. This redirect involves a curious conflict between delete reason #5 and keep reason #4 - there are about 15 pages that link to the redirect including the AfDs, a few archives, and WP:Long term abuse. These should all be edited if the redirect is deleted. Gimmetrow 04:23, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete very odd redirect. Viridae^Talk 12:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Splash. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

July 5

---

SurpriseRoyals → Arizona Royals

Some sort of a fork. Not clear if useful. Also Surprise Royals - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Seems useful to me. Someone might look up the team this way.

Oh yeah, I didn't notice the lack of space. Delete.

Rbraunwa 04:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Considering no Google hits for "SurpriseRoyals", the lack of space must not be a common typo, such that even if the other should remain, this one should not. —Centrx→talk • 03:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:Burmesestatedivision → Template:Infobox Burmesestatedivision

The redirect should be deleted because it was created after the template was moved, and is no longer used. Hintha 22:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Patch (emo) → Emo (slang)

I merged and redirected Patch (emo) a couple of days ago. Now I find out it was a neologism, created by the author of the article. Since it isn't a real term, delete -- Chuq 07:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

July 4

Reverend Edward Nelson → Edward Nelson

There is no Reverend Edward Nelson that I can find. Superwad 04:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment this is a strange redirect, maybe it could be changed to Edmund Nelson. Yanksox 04:28, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment You mean change the redirect to Edmund Nelson? Having a typo from Edward to Edmund is pretty far-fetched, don't you think? Also, there is a Reverend Edmund Nelson redirect already Superwad 04:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
    • CommentMaybe a mis-hearing redirect? Ie they misheard the name. That would be possible/proboble. Viridae^Talk 12:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, nonsensical and useless. The guy's a mathematician. Grandmasterka 23:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Edward Nelson (priest) → Edmund Nelson

There is no Edward Nelson who is a priest that I can find Superwad 04:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete I doubt there are many people whom would use that term in a search or at all. Doesn't connect all that well with the subject. Yanksox 04:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

List of Xiaolin Showdown episodes 101 → The Journey of a Thousand Miles

unlikely search term, may cause confusion Jay32183 17:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, and I believe there are lots more out there. Google points out 102, 103, 106, 111, 202, 208, List of Xiaolin Showdown episodes 210, 220, on the first page of results alone. Kimchi.sg 00:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Lost books of the Tanakh → Lost books of the Old Testament

The proposition "of" presumes that there were books that went missing from the Jewish canon. Not only is this factually incorrect, it also asserts a POV, namely that any works did get lost. See Talk:Lost books of the Old Testament for a detailed reasoning. Dr Zak 15:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. I agree that the article Lost books of the Old Testament is rather dubious, but why not edit that article to make it better (or lobby to delete it if it is hopelessly original research). But as long as the article exists, somebody who types "Lost books of the Tanakh" into the search box ought to be taken to that article, since "Tanakh" and "Old Testament" are both terms referring to the Hebrew Bible. I don't agree that the redirect itself is POV. For example, Wikipedia has an article Life on Mars; the title of the article is not an assertion that there exists life on Mars. Similar for articles like unicorn and centaur. --Mathew5000 22:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Crystal Analysis → Crystallography

Crystal Analysis is an OLAP tool, whilst crystal anaylsis is a description of Crystallography Ratarsed 12:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Roads in Germany → Autobahns of Germany

Pretty obvious bad redirect. --SPUI (T - C) 09:43, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nominator Dr Zak 15:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Forgive me for being dense, but why is this an obviously bad redirect? If I type "Germany Roads" in the search box, this is probably what I want. Gimmetrow 21:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• An Autobahn is a motorway, there are many other types of road in Germany other than autobahns, it does not make sense to redirect a generic term to one possible specific meaning of it (count this as a delete). Thanks/wangi 21:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Then this should redirect to Transport in Germany or a better article if it exists. I've made that change. Gimmetrow 02:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• Good call. Dr Zak 02:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep redirected to Transport in Germany, seems like a good choice to me. --Cyde↔Weys 03:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep redirect with new target. Good idea. Grandmasterka 23:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep redirected per above. --Zoz (t) 11:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

KDTP → KTAZ

KDTP redirects to KTAZ, but should not, as KDTP is a separate station. -- dhett 08:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information → WP:NOT

Double redirect to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, plus cross-namespace. -- ADNghiem501 06:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Cross-namespace redirects are bad because they result in a person (reader) walking around a building (encyclopedia) and falling into the pipework (project space) because the builders (editors) thought cracks in the walls and floors would be useful for them to get around. Also gives mirrors a no-win choice, leaving them in will create redlinks, but mirrors removing them is "legally questionable" as per Wikipedia:Verbatim_copying Delete as per WP:ASR, as unneeded (numerous WP: style shortcuts) and a minor convenience for a sub set of editors does not outweigh creating a standalone encyclopedia for readers. If people do not specify "wikipedia:" in a search, we should remember that, first, and foremost, we are an encyclopedia, and return encyclopedic results by default. Regards, MartinRe 12:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per MartinRe. -- JLaTondre 14:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• delete per WP:ASR guideline/wangi 21:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This comment by MartinRe on another page is very instructive: "See Wikipedia:Verbatim copying where the rules for mirrors are laid out. The main text section explains that for a CNR, the mirror has a choice - either leave it in, which will be a red link, or remove it as a link to a non-copied document, which is 'legally questionable'. Putting mirrors in a situation where they need to to choose between those two options is the main difficulty, in my view." --Cyde↔Weys 03:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 11:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - I agree. Fresheneesz 04:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was redirected to Citation. — Jul. 6, '06 [03:06] <freak|talk>

Citing sources → Wikipedia:Citing sources

Cross-namespace redirect. -- ADNghiem501 06:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Cross-namespace redirects are bad because they result in a person (reader) walking around a building (encyclopedia) and falling into the pipework (project space) because the builders (editors) thought cracks in the walls and floors would be useful for them to get around. Also gives mirrors a no-win choice, leaving them in will create redlinks, but mirrors removing them is "legally questionable" as per Wikipedia:Verbatim_copying Delete as per WP:ASR, as unneeded (numerous WP: style shortcuts) and a minor convenience for a sub set of editors does not outweigh creating a standalone encyclopedia for readers. If people do not specify "wikipedia:" in a search, we should remember that, first, and foremost, we are an encyclopedia, and return encyclopedic results by default. Regards, MartinRe 12:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete Not specific to Wikipedia Invitatious 13:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete crossnamespace redirect. Yanksox 13:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Invitatious and MartinRe. -- JLaTondre 14:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• delete, this one should be a no-brainer for WP:ASR, given it's a fairly generic term/wangi 21:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Change target to citation. --Mathew5000 02:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and then link to citation. This comment by MartinRe on another page is very instructive: "See Wikipedia:Verbatim copying where the rules for mirrors are laid out. The main text section explains that for a CNR, the mirror has a choice - either leave it in, which will be a red link, or remove it as a link to a non-copied document, which is 'legally questionable'. Putting mirrors in a situation where they need to to choose between those two options is the main difficulty, in my view." --Cyde↔Weys 03:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

July 3

The nominated redirect was delete. – Will (message me!) 19:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Article size → Wikipedia:Article size

Cross namespace redirect. Gimmetrow 23:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Cross-namespace redirects are bad because they result in a person (reader) walking around a building (encyclopedia) and falling into the pipework (project space) because the builders (editors) thought cracks in the walls and floors would be useful for them to get around. Delete as per WP:ASR, as unneeded (numerous WP: style shortcuts) and a minor convenience for a sub set of editors does not outweigh creating a standalone encyclopedia for readers. If people do not specify "wikipedia:" in a search, we should remember that, first, and foremost, we are an encyclopedia, and return encyclopedic results by default. Regards, MartinRe 00:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above and as a crossnamespace redirect. Yanksox 03:23, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Good explanation, MartinRe. jni 05:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per MartinRe. -- JLaTondre 14:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This comment by MartinRe on another page is very instructive: "See Wikipedia:Verbatim copying where the rules for mirrors are laid out. The main text section explains that for a CNR, the mirror has a choice - either leave it in, which will be a red link, or remove it as a link to a non-copied document, which is 'legally questionable'. Putting mirrors in a situation where they need to to choose between those two options is the main difficulty, in my view." --Cyde↔Weys 03:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 11:58, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

Page titles to be deleted → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

Cross-namespace redirect, and also very unlikely search term (borderline CSD R3) (does not contain any notable history, it's used to be a redirect to the historic Wikipedia utilities/Page titles to be deleted (which would need to be kept, and is fascinating reading!) Regards, MartinRe 23:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Cross-namespace redirect. jni 05:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per MartinRe (see above / below). -- JLaTondre 14:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This comment by MartinRe on another page is very instructive: "See Wikipedia:Verbatim copying where the rules for mirrors are laid out. The main text section explains that for a CNR, the mirror has a choice - either leave it in, which will be a red link, or remove it as a link to a non-copied document, which is 'legally questionable'. Putting mirrors in a situation where they need to to choose between those two options is the main difficulty, in my view." --Cyde↔Weys 03:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 11:58, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was delete. – Will (message me!) 19:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Request for page protection → Wikipedia:Requests for page protection

I'd rather not delete this redirect because it is a cross-article namespace, but would like to see what other users think of this. Iolakana|^T 20:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Cross-namespace redirects are bad because they result in a person (reader) walking around a building (encyclopedia) and falling into the pipework (project space) because the builders (editors) thought cracks in the walls and floors would be useful for them to get around. Delete as per WP:ASR, as a unneeded (numerous WP: style shortcuts) minor convenience for a sub set of editors does not outweigh creating a standalone encyclopedia for readers. If people do not specify "wikipedia:" in a search, we should remember that, first, and foremost, we are an encyclopedia, and return encyclopedic results by default. Regards, MartinRe 22:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Cross-namespace redirect. jni 05:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. As an RfPP regular I still feel that this is just search clutter.Voice-of-All 05:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per MartinRe. -- JLaTondre 14:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete crossnamespace redirect. Yanksox 19:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. This comment by MartinRe on another page is very instructive: "See Wikipedia:Verbatim copying where the rules for mirrors are laid out. The main text section explains that for a CNR, the mirror has a choice - either leave it in, which will be a red link, or remove it as a link to a non-copied document, which is 'legally questionable'. Putting mirrors in a situation where they need to to choose between those two options is the main difficulty, in my view." --Cyde↔Weys 03:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as cross-namespace redirect. --Zoz (t) 11:58, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

Fingerprintz → The Silencers (band)

The redirect goes to The Silencers the movie instead of The Silencers (band). Maybe there's a redirect from "The Silencers (band)" to "The Silencers" that needs to be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessesamuel (talk • contribs)

• Comment - It appears, but I may be wrong, that the nominator fixed the redirect target. The redirect doesn't even have an RfD tag. Timrem 15:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

July 6, 2002, July 7, 2002, July 8, 2002, July 9, 2002, July 11, 2002, July 12, 2002, July 13, 2002, July 14, 2002, July 15, 2002, July 16, 2002, July 17, 2002, July 18, 2002, July 19, 2002, July 20, 2002 → July 2002

Do we really want redirects from specific dates in specific years? I mean, we have these but we don't have July 1, 2006, July 2, 2006, July 23, 2006 etc. Why then do we have these? Either we should delete these, or have some bot create all the redirects. Helicoptor 15:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

A whole lot easier to delete. Are there any others? Iolakana|^T 20:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there are any others. Voortle 18:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Both July 10, 2002 and July 15, 2006 do not exist, I removed them from the section above. But I changed 2006 to 2002 (after July 15), since there is a redirect link that exists (see the section above). I mean this: July 15, 2002. -- ADNghiem501 05:20, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

July 12, 2002 added to the header. -- ADNghiem501 05:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - Especially entire dates in article title should not redirect to titles including months and years, and seems worthless. -- ADNghiem501 04:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - These purposefully need to be left as redlinks so people realize they've made an error when they try to link everything altogether in an article. --Cyde↔Weys 04:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Cyde. --Zoz (t) 11:58, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Cyde. -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was changed to a real article in article namespace. -- ADNghiem501 01:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Emma E. Booker Elementary School → September 11, 2001 attacks

Subject deserves its own separate article. -- Dissident (Talk) 14:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Be bold! Remove the redirect and create it! Iolakana|^T 20:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Tadaaa the school website courtesy of a google search. I would add something myself but it's 1:40 in the morning and I really should sleep. Cowman109^Talk 05:41, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was deleted. Kimchi.sg 00:45, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipe-tan → Wikipedia:Wikipe-tan

Cross-namespace redirect created by a move (by me) on notability and self-reference grounds. I'm not blamming it myself because that would amount to unilateral speedy deletion of a mainspace article. The redirect is only in articlespace use once (on OS-tan), where I suggest to simply unlink the word, and the two other links to it should be diverted to the new location. -- grm_wnr Esc 14:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy delete as CSD G7 - author requests deletion. (grm_wnr, feel free to delete it yourself, as you're also the only author, I doubt you'd complain to yourself! :) MartinRe 22:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. -- JLaTondre 14:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

July 2

The nominated redirect was Closing all three as deleted by JoJan, Freakofnurture, & Kilo-Lima respectively. -- JLaTondre 14:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Uesr:Waitak/Articles → User:Waitak/Articles

Misspelled original name, will never be searched on (cross-namespace?) Fram 12:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The German Solution → Wikipedia:German userbox solution

Cross-space redirect, only one use. —Shayl^talk 22:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Delete: No cross namespace redirects. Netscott 08:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Delete -- Omniplex 13:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Wayne Rumney → Wayne Rooney

"Wayne Rumney" turns up a total of 9 google hits, 7 of which are mirrors of the Rooney article from wiki probably based on the redirect. The word "Rumney" is not mentioned in the Rooney article, and the redirect is not used by any other page. Gimmetrow 19:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Speedily deleted as an unlikely redirect. Iolakana|^T 13:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

List of channel 13 TV stations in the United States → Category:Channel 13 TV stations in the United States

This article was deleted, and it has now been set up to redirect to a category. I was under the impressions that article namespace should not redirect to categories. If this is to go, there are many others of a similar format for different channel numbers. I'm not sure how to list them all at once. GassyGuy 07:10, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as misleading. A "list" shouldn't redirect to a category. --Zoz (t) 20:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Also delete List of channel 2 TV stations in the United States, List of channel 3 TV stations in the United States, List of channel 4 TV stations in the United States, List of channel 6 TV stations in the United States, etc. up to List of channel 20 TV stations in the United States. --Mathew5000 20:02, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was Redirected to The Walt Disney Company --Cyde↔Weys 17:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Disney' → Disney's Blizzard Beach

If "Disney'" is entered in the search bar, It's probably a typo and they are probably looking for the The Walt Disney Company article or something. So, delete. Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 14:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Change target to The Walt Disney Company. It's definitely not worth creating these redirects systematically, but, as this one has existed for a while, I don't think that there's a real reason to delete it. On US keyboard layouts, the apostrophe is next to the Enter key, so at least it might save someone the frustration of having to corect a mistake in the search box. — TKD::Talk 15:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

• Change target per TKD. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 16:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Change target to The Walt Disney Company. --Zoz (t) 20:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The nominated redirect was speedily deleted by Royboycrashfan (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). — TKD::Talk 11:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Irish Toothache → User:Glaze/Irishtoothache

This is a cross-space redirect out of article space into user space. Takeel 21:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy delete - R2 (I already changed the tag from {{rfd}} to {{db-r2}}) Timrem 21:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

July 1

The nominated redirect was Deleted by Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 14:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hotshot crew delete me → Hotshot Crew

Result of failed attempt at a redirect move, can probably be speedied KleenupKrew 13:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was Deleted, funny but unneeded attack (diving in football could be attributed to Mexico, Arjen Robben, Ronaldo, to name a few) 12:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Italian Diving Team → Italy_national_football_team

Makes no sense. Zoz (t) 10:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was Deleted by Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 14:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hany Ramzy Actor → Hany Ramzy

Hany Ramzy actor shouldn't redirect to Hany Ramzy footballer. Zoz (t) 10:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete While it might be worthwhile to have an article on Hany Ramzy (actor) redirecting to an article on a different guy with the same name just breeds confusion. Dgies 18:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

Ronaldo Luíz Nazário de Lima → Ronaldo Luiz Nazário de Lima

The redirect page mispells the name. The mispelling is unlikely to be used by regular users. HYC 09:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• What about irregular users? There's no harm in having misspelled redirects, and at least one person already made this spelling mistake, which is why they created this redirect in the first place. So keep as redirect to Ronaldo, obviously. — sjorford++ 10:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  • The two common, acceptable variations for the Portuguese name are Luiz and Luís, but in this case the legal name is the first one, with a "z". The mispelling Ronaldo Luíz was an artifact that happened when a well-intentioned editor tried to correct back Luís to Luiz without paying attention to the accent, but it is itself very unlikely to be used. There is no need to multiply redirects for every possible combination of mispellings for all kinds of irregular users, just keep the mispellings and variants most likely to be used. (Besides, multiplying mispellings also pollutes the Google results with false spellings.) --HYC 13:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was speedy deleted as CSD R3 - implausible typo. Kimchi.sg 00:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

World of Starcraft → April 1, 2006

Admittedly a joke. Zoz (t) 09:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Joke or not (and I don't find it at all funny). Viridae^Talk 14:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete No information, not a real topic. No such thing exists. It's an April Fool's joke, anyway. --Irayo 21:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Possible confusion with rumored MMORPG under development. Dgies 00:37, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete No-brainer here. -- Scientizzle 23:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

June 30

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

Cum whore → Kim Kelly (actress)

Seems like an attack, although it is a pornographic actress. But surely there are other pornographic actresses that fulfill that criteria. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 03:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was Deleted as vandalism, and this is a speedy deletion criteria. Shouldn't have been brought here. --Cyde↔Weys 18:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

2006 Duke University lacrosse team rape hoax → 2006 Duke University lacrosse team scandal

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

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was Converted to disambig. -- JLaTondre 19:12, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

TISD → Tomball Independent School District

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

• I've made it a disambig page. Please add anything else that TISD might stand for... -- Scientizzle 18:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was Speedy deleted --Cyde↔Weys 14:05, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

FelineFanatic13 → Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/FelineFanatic13

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

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

---

Antarticopelta → Antarctopelta

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

• Keep. I thought this was a plausible typo. I am not at all surprised that the typo returns few ghits. To me, it's plausible, because of the "artic"/"arctic" confusion. Plus, redirects are cheap. Mangojuice^talk 14:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

But if it's a plausible mispelling, wouldn't it show up somewhere else on the internet? But it hasn't. Only on Wikipedia would there be votes to keep a misspelling that no one's ever misspelled before. :/--Firsfron of Ronchester 19:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Anyone might easily type "antarticopelta" into the search box when looking for "antarctopelta". Nothing implausible at all about that. Misspellings are far more likely to occur in a search than in a web page which shows up on Google. I also don't understand why the WikiProject Dinosaurs team would need to "keep an eye out for" redirects like this. --Mathew5000 19:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Because we get lots of vandalism from the kiddies, who like to add info on "Bonersaurus" or add lots of zeros to sizes. I'm a member of three wikiprojects, and I guarantee the dinosaur articles get more vandalism than the other projects on which I work. I've currently got 1,400 pages on my watchlist, and judging from the rest of the dinosaur crew, they have similarly large amounts of pages on their watchlists, too (User:Ballista's page says he's got 1,200 on his watchlist). We spend part of each day just cleaning up bad info that's been added by (presumably) young writers. Anything that helps us clean house, like deleting misspelled articles and being able to then remove them from our extensive watchlists, is a good thing.--Firsfron of Ronchester 20:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

If the redirect is deleted, then it might be re-created in future by a well-meaning but inexperienced editor (as happened originally [1]). If left as a redirect, it should in theory save you work for that reason. I understand your point about dinosaur pages being subject to more vandalism than average, but is that true for dinosaur pages that are mere redirects? Pages that are redirects get hardly any edits, so they should not be much of a burden on your watchlist. --Mathew5000 21:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - as outlined above, no hits on google Cas Liber 00:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Not an asset to WP and anything to reduce my watchlist (currently 1,443) would be welcome - if it were a plausible mis-spelling, Google would surely come up with something other than this WP page? - Ballista 04:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep: No harm in keeping this, if one editor created it, it's more than plausible that it could be useful to someone else out there. --Hetar 21:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Surely we're not resorting to the Google test to find out how people misspell words? -- Northenglish (talk) -- 21:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was (deleted). — Jul. 1, '06 [14:29] <freak|talk>

(Spongebob) → SpongeBob SquarePants

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

• Delete Not useful. -- Scientizzle 05:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. f(x)=ax²+bx+c 05:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, and unlikely search term. --Firsfron of Ronchester 08:08, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Useless. --Zoz (t) 13:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was deleted. — Jul. 1, '06 [14:39] <freak|talk>

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

The excessive caps make this redirect useless. NatusRoma | Talk 05:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Ugh. jni 06:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per whatever policy ALLCAPS falls under. I'll see your "Ugh" and raise you one "Ack!"--Firsfron of Ronchester 08:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep it's an acronym! Delete. :) Mangojuice^talk 14:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Change redirect to CAPS LOCK. Delete. --Zoz (t) 13:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was Deleted by Freakofnurture. -- JLaTondre 22:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Daimler → Talk:Daimler Motor Company

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

• Delete. ~ PseudoSudo 17:55, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

Brandy Alexander (wrestler) → Brandi Alexander

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

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

Raja Sundernath → Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath

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

• Delete per nom. ---Baba Louis 20:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Oliver Knox → Chronicles of America

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

• Delete per nom. (I was the one who changed it to a redirect a few days ago.)--Kchase02 T 21:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom since nom info verified by Kchase02. Herostratus 05:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

June 29

LUE Trinity → Shock site

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

• Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 13:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Besides, it's the Unholy Trinity Will (message me!) 19:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Adorable Bunnies → Shock site

Adorable bunnies is a minor shock site that has long been removed from the shock site article. Mangojuice^talk 18:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 20:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Redcoat.net/pics/tubgirl.jpg → Shock site

A very specific, but not commonly referred to, web address for a specific shock site. Mangojuice^talk 17:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete way too specific. Viridae^Talk 14:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. —Centrx→talk • 03:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Zoz (t) 20:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Bakla.net → Shock site

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

Delete per nom. —Centrx→talk • 03:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was deleted. If somebody wants to write neutral, third-person prose about editing disputes on Wikipedia, this can be redirected to it. I don't see that happening, but I won't slam the door on it. — Jul. 3, '06 [16:05] <freak|talk>

Wikilawyering → Wikipedia:Wikilawyering

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

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was deleted by Freakofnurture – Gurch 21:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletions → Wikipedia:Speedy deletions

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

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

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

---

Requests for arbitration → Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration

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

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

The nominated redirect was Speedy deleted, CSD R2 --Cyde↔Weys 16:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Dariush tahririhah → User:Boregard6

cross-space redirect Fram 09:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

Fancruft → Wikipedia:Fancruft

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

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

June 28

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

Speedy delete → Wikipedia:Speedy deletions

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

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

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

---

Porte d'Orléans → List of stations of the Paris Métro

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

• Change target to Porte d'Orléans (Paris Metro). --Mathew5000 00:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't think your understand - this is a city square like Central Square, not just a metro station. It is named after a gate in the old fortification for the route to Orléans (N20). --SPUI (T - C) 11:16, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, I understand that; that should be explained at the article Porte d'Orléans (Paris Metro) which is where the redirect should go (absent an article on Porte d'Orléans itself).--Mathew5000 08:40, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom.--Kchase02 T 22:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Or maybe change it to redirect to Paris if no article exists on the neighborhood. Herostratus 06:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Infobox → Wikipedia:List of infoboxes

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

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

The nominated redirect was This belongs at Wikipedia:Requested moves. -- JLaTondre 13:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Letchworth Garden City → Letchworth

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was deleted. — Jul. 1, '06 [14:38] <freak|talk>

"Rapator" → Rapator

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

• Delete as typo, and an unlikely search term. feydey 07:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete this is not controversial, as the 1,000 other dinosaur genera articles on Wikipedia do not have quotes in their title. Since no one will search for "Rapator" (with quotes), it's an unlikely search term, and it's the only article (of 1,000) with quotation marks in the title, which is why I prodded it in the first place. If there has to be a vote, I will certainly vote for delete.--Firsfron of Ronchester 09:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, obviously. Possible speedy as R3. --Zoz (t) 13:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Obviously delete. These should be speedy deletion candidates. jni 05:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was kept, perfectly reasonable redirect. — Jun. 28, '06 [00:19] <freak|talk>

Rap (disambiguation) → Rap

This appears to be a redirect of one unused disambig page for Rap to another disambig page for Rap. (Redundant Rap Redirect, so to speak). Dreadlocke 00:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was redirected to List of sovereign states, with no objection to changing to a better topic if need be. — Jul. 3, '06 [16:07] <freak|talk>

Independent States → Latin America

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

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

• Change target to List of sovereign states. That's probably what somebody's looking for who types "Independent States", plural, into the search box. Other possibilities might be State or Commonwealth of Independent States. --Mathew5000 01:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Change target to List of sovereign states per above. That seems to make the most sense for such a redirect. Cowman109^Talk 18:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was speedy deleted (technical cleanup, author requested deletion) jni 07:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

‎User:AnnaKucsma/Geography/United States → User:AnnaKucsma/Geography/United States

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

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

---

June 27

Rational Anarchist → Bernardo de la Paz

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

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

Rational Anarchism → Bernardo de la Paz

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

• Keep per above. --JJay 23:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as re-redirected to The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. No harm, and it's more appropriate pointing to the novel than to Bernardo, as there may have been others. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 00:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was cleaned up accordingly. — Jun. 28, '06 [00:21] <freak|talk>

Gregory Helms → Gregory Shane Helms and I hate him → Gregory Helms

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 11:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Editcountitis → Wikipedia:Editcountitis

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

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was Closed as converted to disambig. -- JLaTondre 19:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Michael Kahn → Michael Kahn (film editor)

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

• Comment Michael Kahn (film editor) was created by a page move, and therefore the only history on Michael Kahn was it being moved and a redirect being created in it's place. I've created a disambiguation page in it's place and added cross-linking at the top of the two articles. TheJC ^Talk_{Contributions} 18:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The Camel → Camel

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

• Delete. I agree with Kjkolb.

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

• Delete. I also agree with Kjkolb.

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

• Comment: the page has non-trivial edit history. --Mathew5000 01:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment the non-trivial edit history appears to be a nihilartikel, at least that was claimed here. Kusma (討論) 01:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The nominated redirect was Speedy Delete, created in error. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

"Pedro Garibay" → Pedro Garibay

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

• Delete per nom. jni 07:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete - CSD G7 (the only author requests deletion) Timrem 21:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

June 26

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

Wiki fairy → Wikipedia:WikiFairy

Cross-namespace redirect. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 19:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

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

Wikignome → Wikipedia:WikiGnome

Cross-namespace redirect. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 19:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was speedily deleted per CSD R2. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 20:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Kris Craig Interview → User:Pub biographer/Kris Craig Interview

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was kept – Gurch 10:58, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

C:WPCVG → CAT:WPCVG

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

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was speedily deleted as attack. Kusma (討論) 05:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Giant douche → George W. Bush

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was kept – Gurch 10:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

C:UBT → CAT:UBT

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

• Sorry for being dense, but what exactly in m:Help:Namespace manager says that we shouldn't have C: shortcuts? Why do we even use CAT: instead of the shorter C:? Kusma (討論) 05:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

  I think it says that "pseudo-namespaces" (like WP: or WM:) might be transformed into real namespaces. I can't tell you more about it, all I know is that help page, and from my POV Special:Namespaces is either invisible, or not (yet) enabled. No idea who invented CAT:CAT, check the history. It got some traction, see the "Prefixindex" link. Belatedly adding C: would only confuse it more than necessary, one vs. three characters is no huge gain. CAT for category could be also slightly more obvious than C for somebody who doesn't know it. -- Omniplex 05:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

  Question forwarded to the Pump. -- Omniplex 04:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep as per below (C:CSD). Proto///type 11:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per below (C:CSD). - CrazyRussian talk/email 15:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Harmless and the reasoning put forward is of no value. Chicheley 00:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Reasonable "pseudo-namespace" like WP:. -- JLaTondre 14:01, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was deleted – Gurch 12:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not paper → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not

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

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

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

---

June 22

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

Aetherometry → Aether theories

Aetherometry isn't mentioned at all on the Aether theories page, and it is very different from the theories discussed there. It doesn't really have too much in common with aether theories at all, concentrating more on things like leukemia early warning kits and measurements with no uncertainty. Philosophus ^T 21:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

• turn in to stub article perhaps the best thing is to make this a short stub article with a definition of what the term does mean. --Salix alba (talk) 10:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, do not create article unless citing reliable sources as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aetherometry (second nomination). Kusma (討論) 14:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was Speedy deleted.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91^{(review me!)} 10:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Pearland JROTC → George W. Bush

No apparent connection, former target was deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pearland Army JROTC. Rory096 08:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was Speedy deleted R1 by InShaneee (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves). --Rory096 05:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Warren wickman → Warren Wickman

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was speedy delete as G6, although it doesn't matter either way. Kusma (討論) 00:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Path integral → Talk:Line integral

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

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

---

June 21

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

Swirl → Swirl (band)

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

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

---

The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde↔Weys 17:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright tags → Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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

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

Image tags → Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

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

• Delete per nom. feydey 07:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. — TKD::Talk 03:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - non-encyclopedic main namespace pollution. -- Omniplex 20:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was kept. Don't be a schlong. — Jun. 26, '06 [17:30] <freak|talk>

Schlong → Penis

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

• Keep. I didn't know what a penis was, but I now know it is a schlong. Wikipedia's so damned useful. Seriously, though, keep. Seems an obvious redirect. David L Rattigan 20:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep; common slang term, and deters duplicate article creation. — TKD::Talk 03:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was already deleted by somebody else. — Jun. 21, '06 [17:11] <freak|talk>

A VC → Fred Wilson (venture capitalist)

Redirect to deleted article Bugwit grunt / scribbles 10:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was speedy deleted because I saw no mention of "shain" on the latter page. If I'm missing something, let me know. — Jun. 21, '06 [17:11] <freak|talk>

Shain → Babe: Pig in the City

Makes no sense. ^L_Wizard @ 08:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was speedy deleted, cross-namespace redirect, malformed, made no sense. — Jun. 21, '06 [17:11] <freak|talk>

Sqwirl → Image:Manet,_Edouard_-_The_Absinthe_Drinker.jpg

Makes no sense. ^L_Wizard @ 07:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was deleted, phrase is not mentioned in target article. — Jun. 21, '06 [17:11] <freak|talk>

Fuck Wikipedia → Criticism of Wikipedia

Pretentious, useless. Kookykman|(t)e 15:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was kept as a redirect to Carmelita Spats – Gurch 10:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Cake Sniffer → Lemony Snicket

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

• Keep, but change target to Carmelita Spats, the character who actually uses the (fictional) insult. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 20:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

• Done. This seems appropriate, since the term is discussed on that page. Keep --Philosophus ^T 00:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep as redirect to C. Spats .--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91^{(review me!)} 10:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

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

---

The nominated redirect was kept. Please take your request to Wikipedia:Requested moves – Gurch 12:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Twentysomething → Twentysomething (disambig)

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

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

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

---