Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion Information & Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion Links at HealthHaven.com

Skip to table of contents · Skip to current discussions · Purge this page

Shortcut: WP:RFD

Deletion discussions

Deletion today AfD yesterday Articles (by category) Templates Files Categories (active) Stub types Redirects Miscellany Undeletion Deletion review
Wikipedia deletion policy
Attack page Criteria for speedy deletion Deletion policy Proposed deletion Wikipedia is not a dictionary
Tools
Process – Log – Guide – Images – Admins

Redirects for discussion (RfD) is the place where Wikipedians decide what should be done with problematic redirects. Items sent here usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted by an administrator, kept, or retargeted.

Note: If all you want to do is replace a currently existing, unprotected redirect with an actual article, you do not need to list it here. Turning redirects into fleshed-out encyclopedic articles is wholly encouraged at Wikipedia. Be bold.

Note: Redirects should not be deleted simply because they do not have any incoming links. Please do not list this as a reason to delete a redirect. Redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted as well, so it's not a necessary condition either. See When should we delete a redirect?

Old discussions are archived at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log.

Centralized discussion

Proposals	Discussions	Recurring proposals
Discussion on retaining the restriction against using the string "bot" in usernames. Discussion on promoting Wikipedia:Notability (law) to guideline status Discussion on CfD speedy renaming criteria 6 (disambiguation fixes from an unqualified name). Discussion on refining Community de-adminship (aka Admin Recall) to formalize a RfC. Proposal for achieving infobox-template coherence of properties in Wikipedia(s) Discussion on promoting Wikipedia:Notability (academic journals) to guideline status Voting is now open to elect new members of the Arbitration Committee. Note: inactive discussions, closed or not, should be archived.
archive • talk • edit • history • watch

[edit] Before you list a redirect for discussion...

...please familiarize yourself with the following:

Wikipedia:Redirect – our general policy on what redirects are, why they exist, and how they are used.
Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – our policy on which pages can be deleted without discussion. The "General" and "Redirects" section apply here.
Wikipedia:Deletion policy – our deletion policy that describes how we delete things by consensus
Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – guidelines on discussion format and shorthands that also apply here

[edit] The guiding principles of RfD

The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that an average user will wind up staring blankly at a "Search results 1-10 out of 378" search page instead of the article they were looking for. If someone could plausibly type in the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.
Redirects are cheap. Redirects take up minimal disk space and use very little bandwidth. Thus, it doesn't really hurt things much if there are a few of them scattered around. On the flip side, deleting redirects is cheap since the deletion coding takes up minimal disk space and use very little bandwidth. In general, there is no harm in deleting problematic redirects that do not contribute to improving the encyclopedia.
The default result of any RfD nomination which receives no other discussion is delete. Thus, a redirect nominated in good faith and in accordance with RfD policy will be deleted, even if there is no discussion surrounding that nomination.
Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept.
RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes. If you think a redirect should be targeted at a different article, discuss it on the talk pages of the current target article and/or the proposed target article. However, for more difficult cases, this page can be a centralized discussion place for resolving tough debates about where redirects point.
Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another page's talk page don't need to be listed here, as anyone can simply remove the redirect by blanking the page.
Try to consider whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader when discussing.

[edit] When should we delete a redirect?

Shortcut: WP:RFD#HARMFUL

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

a redirect may contain nontrivial edit history;
if a redirect is reasonably old, then it is quite possible that its deletion will break links in old, historical versions of some other articles—such an event is very difficult to envision and even detect.

Note that there could exist (for example), links to the URL "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorneygate" anywhere on the internet. If so, then those links might not show up by checking for (clicking on) "WhatLinksHere" for "Attorneygate"—since those links might "come from" somewhere outside Wikipedia.

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

Shortcut: WP:RFD#DELETE

[edit] Reasons for deleting

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):

The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine.
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 it should be deleted.
The redirect is offensive, such as "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs", unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is discussed in the article.
The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting Apple to Orange.
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 is the "CAT:" shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space but in practice form their own "pseudo-namespaces". (Note "WP:" redirects are in the Wikipedia namespace, WP: being an alias for Wikipedia.)
If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist or itself, it can be deleted immediately, though you should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first.
If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful. Implausible typos or misnomers are potential candidates for speedy deletion, if recently created.
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 it needs to be deleted to make way for move.
If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains little information on the subject. In these cases, it is better that the target article contain a redlink pointing back to the redirect.

Shortcut: WP:RFD#KEEP

[edit] Reasons for not deleting

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

They have a potentially useful page history. 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.
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 the article texts because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links.
They aid searches on certain terms.
You risk breaking incoming or internal links by deleting the redirect. Old CamelCase links and old subpage links should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them.
Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is a liar, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways.
The redirect is to a plural form or to a singular form, or to some other grammatical form.

[edit] Neutrality of redirects

Note that redirects are not covered by Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. This covers only article titles, which are required to be neutral (see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Article naming). Perceived lack of neutrality in redirects is therefore not a valid reason for deletion. Non-neutral redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term.

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

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. Dalmatian Kristallnacht → Dalmatian anti-Serb riots of May 1991).
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 redirected to Barack Obama presidential primary campaign, 2008).
The subject matter of articles may be commonly represented outside Wikipedia by non-neutral terms. Such terms cannot be used as Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance, the widely used but 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.

If a redirect is not an established term and is unlikely to be used by searchers, it is unlikely to be useful and may be nominated for deletion. However, if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources (as defined by Wikipedia:Verifiability#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.

See also: Policy on which redirects can be deleted immediately.

[edit] 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).

[edit] How to list a redirect for discussion

To list a redirect for discussion, follow this two-step process:

I.

Flag the redirect.

Enter {{rfd}} above the #REDIRECT on the redirect page you are listing for discussion. Example:

{{rfd}}

#REDIRECT [[Foo]]

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.

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 the template in the previous step:
- 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:
- {{subst:rfd2|redirect=RedirectName1|target=TargetArticle1}}
- {{subst:rfd2m|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}}
- .
- .
- .
- {{subst:rfd2m|redirect=RedirectNameN|target=TargetArticleN|text=The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.}} ~~~~

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.
It is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the redirect that you are nominating the redirect. To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the redirect. For convenience, the template

{{subst:RFDNote|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 redirect and use an edit summary such as:
Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]

Administrator instructions

[edit] Current list

[edit] December 7

[edit] Dubbiya

Dubbiya → George W. Bush (links to redirect • history • stats)

Duhbbya → George W. Bush (links to redirect • history • stats)

Dubya B → George W. Bush (links to redirect • history • stats)

Ridiculous spellings. Dubya, Doubya, and Dubbya already exist as redirects to List of United States presidential nicknames#George_Walker_Bush. 7, 10, and 4 pageviews in November, respectively. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 10:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete as implausibly bad spellings of a mangling of a pronunciation of a letter. Josh Parris 10:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] G Dubya B

G Dubya B → George W. Bush (links to redirect • history • stats)

George Dubya B → George W. Bush (links to redirect • history • stats)

Not something anyone would look up. 12 and 11 pageviews this November, respectively. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 10:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bush jnr

Bush jnr → George W. Bush (links to redirect • history • stats)

Highly improbable. "Jnr"? 12 pageviews this November. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 10:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep outside of the USA we're not all that familiar with this "Jr" stuff, so "Jnr" is plausible -- but the all lower case explains the low hit count. Josh Parris 10:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. President 43

Mr. President 43 → George W. Bush (links to redirect • history • stats)

Nonsense. 3 pageviews this November. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 10:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete Many countries have had/will have 43 presidents. GWB is just one of them. Josh Parris 10:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Barakc Obama

Barakc Obama → Barack Obama (links to redirect • history • stats)

Possible typo, but not a plausible mistaken spelling. Redirects like Crhistopher Columbus don't exist, and neither should this. 27 pageviews in November. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 10:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep it hurts not, and one a day is not shabby. Josh Parris 10:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] OBAMA!

OBAMA! → Barack Obama (links to redirect • history • stats)

Not a plausible redirect, contrary to creator's peculiar claim. 13 pageviews in November. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 10:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ob ama

Ob ama → Barack Obama (links to redirect • history • stats)

Doesn't seem plausible. 12 pageviews in November. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 10:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete I think we decided that additional spaces were an implausible typo Josh Parris 10:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Shit (euphemism)

Shit (euphemism) → Shit (links to redirect • history • stats)

Euphemism of what? — The Man in Question (gesprec) 08:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete, no history, no links, no traffic, history indicates it was intended for use in a dab page, but currently isn't. Josh Parris 09:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Muda fooka

Muda fooka → Fuck (links to redirect • history • stats)

116 hits on Google. Five pageviews in November. Worthless redirect. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 08:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment I'd really like to hear why the original author (who is still active and contributing) added this, they seem focused on Rap articles. Josh Parris 09:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fûck

Fûck → Fuck (links to redirect • history • stats)

No one will ever type this in search. Three hits this November. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 08:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete, no history, no links, no traffic. Josh Parris 09:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fuck.

Fuck. → Fuck (links to redirect • history • stats)

Pointless period. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 08:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment This is why the redirect was created in the first place, so a German biologist is needed to help us tell if this is a hoax, as the current version of Karl Wilhelm Gottlieb Leopold Fuckel insists today it isn't the case (but the version I cited said it was a transcultural problem back in the day). The only reason I think it might not be a hoax is that the redirect gets decent traffic. Josh Parris 09:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment I don't know if the abbreviation "caused trouble", but it does seem to have been used fairly widely. A search for "Aleuria" (a genus described by Fuckel) with the abbreviated form of his surname comes up with several dozen perfectly decent biological hits. You get considerably more using the "standard form" ("Fuckel", according to the authoritative ipni.org), but that's only to be expected. It would be perfectly understandable for someone to write an article based on sources that give a nomenclatural authority as "Fuck.", and expect that to redirect to Karl Wilhelm Gottlieb Leopold Fuckel. This 1920s flora deliberately uses "Fuck." as an abbreviation for Fuckel, and lists it in the table of abbreviations (p. 18); it was merely the first work I came across when looking. Whether Fuck. should lead to a disambiguation page, or to Fuckel's article, or somewhere else, I don't know, but there has to be some clear route to Karl Wilhelm Gottlieb Leopold Fuckel. In short: this isn't a hoax; some sources do use "Fuck." to refer to Fuckel. I would expect this to work like Hook., which redirects to the botanist William Jackson Hooker, while Hook deals with meanings of "hook" (without the dot). --Stemonitis (talk) 17:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] FUDIE

FUDIE → Fuck (links to redirect • history • stats)

Supposedly acronym for "Fuck U and DIE". Not mentioned in target article. Not even to be found on Urban Dictionary ([1]). Not a popular Wikipedia search [2]. If not delete, then retarget to Internet slang. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 08:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete, no useful history, no links, no traffic. It was very kind of you to notify the IP that created this five years ago of this discussion! Josh Parris 09:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Glaciers of Gabon

Glaciers of Gabon → Retreat of glaciers since 1850 (links to redirect • history • stats)

Did Gabon ever have glaciers? I have serious doubts about the usefulness of this and the other similar redirects just created by this user. Drmies (talk) 05:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep - It's a redirect, supporting an entry in the Outline of Gabon, by pointing to the relevant information. Gabon has no glaciers. Readers researching countries may wish to know which ones do and which ones don't. If the outline entry is left out, that creates an ambiguity in which the reader may not be able to tell if the country has no glaciers or if the outline just isn't completed yet. We ran into a similar problem with countries with no navies (due to being landlocked, etc.). The decision of the RfD was to keep the redirects, because they pointed to where on Wikipedia it was explained that each particular country had no navy. Useful and relevant, especially to young readers. But I didn't know which countries in Africa had no glaciers either, and I'm not all that young - and the info wasn't very easy to track down, but now it is due to redirection. The Transhumanist 05:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure I understand the rationale here. Because your (standard?) list of features in this outline contains an entry for glaciers, which there aren't, there should be a redirect for young readers pointing them to an article on the disappearance of glaciers, which is irrelevant here because there are/were no glaciers that can disappear? Young readers will be very confused, as I am. That some countries in Africa, but not Gabon, have glaciers strikes me as entirely irrelevant. What's next, a redirect for Fjords of Gabon? And where will that lead? Are there any fjords in Africa in the first place? Drmies (talk) 06:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

There's no redirect for Navy of Gabon either. Decstop (talk) 06:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Strong Delete Having this redirect is unprofessional, and the reason given by TT is poor - it should be removed from his "outline". I see no sensible reason to keep this redirect (not a typo, or something people would realistically be looking for). Verbal chat 08:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Additionally, the other over-30 new redirects created by this user, to the same subsection, should also be deleted. Unfortunately this unilateral large scale editing seems to suggest a return to problematic editing for this user. Verbal chat 08:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Verbal, I was not trying to make a more general point extending outside the discussion of this and similar redirects--but I am feeling you. Drmies (talk) 15:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Portal:Scientific method

Portal:Scientific method → Portal:Philosophy of science (links to redirect • history • stats)

This portal was deleted here [3], then recreated as a redirect. Decstop (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment it was recreated as a redirect a week after deletion. That's what happens when someone deletes something that's getting over a hundred hits a day without cleaning up enough of the internal links. Remove the (viable, non-talk) internal links, wait a month so we can see the traffic die off, and then bring it back here for deletion. In the meantime, there may be a more appropriate portal to point to. Josh Parris 04:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

...Remove the (viable, non-talk) internal links, ... Done Decstop (talk) 05:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

The number of page hits has been falling off over time, but it's still getting 10-20 a day, which in my opinion is too high to kill the redirect; I think it will keep falling to the point where deleting the redirect won't break anything much. I hope when we close this we can see a sudden fall-off and can delete, but I doubt it. Josh Parris 09:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Just keep it. It is perfectly reasonable. Redirects do no harm. --Bduke (Discussion) 10:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Guydo Baggins

Guydo Baggins → Dungeons & Dragons (links to redirect • history • stats)

Delete; nonsense redirect; "Guydo Baggins" not mentioned in article -- JHunterJ (talk) 01:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

"Guydo" is a likely hoax, I would say. BOZ (talk) 03:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment the history is of a vandal created article that was WP:ZAPped; but interestingly enough there are many hits on the article, so I'm torn. Where should we send the external visitors? Josh Parris 04:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment. I'm fishing in unfamiliar waters when it comes to D&D, but this here seems to suggest "Guido Baggins" was simply made up by some game player. Also, note this. The use of "likely" here pushes me to a Delete. "Guydo Baggins"/"Guido Baggins" seems to be somebody's username, and therefore A7 or something like it. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete [links:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guydo_Baggins no external links] Josh Parris 10:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] MAYORS OF AGRA

MAYORS OF AGRA → Kalyan Dass Jain (links to redirect • history • stats)

The redirect is in ALL CAPS and as such is unlikely to aid navigation. In addition, redirecting "Mayors of Agra" to a single mayor is probably misleading and not a good idea. Tim Song (talk) 00:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete: no meaningful views other than NPP, no history, nothing to be lost and: not helpful. Josh Parris 04:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete per nom and Parris. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete, obviously. I should have put a {{db-redirmisnomer}} tag on this after moving it. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 6

[edit] Gallery of Pompeii and Herculaneum

Gallery of Pompeii and Herculaneum → Pompeii (links to redirect • history • stats)

There isn't a gallery on this article, so the redirect isn't correct or needed. Tavix | Talk 22:46, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment. Here's that same phrase, though. Anyway, history shows it was, indeed, a gallery eventually moved to Commons. Linked articles indicate an article that should be named Art in Pompeii and Herculaneum. Compare Erotic art in Pompeii and Herculaneum, which is discussed in the external link above. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lake of Venezuela

Lake of Venezuela → Lake Maracaibo (links to redirect • history • stats)

It is not the official "Lake of Venezuela" or the only lake so this redirect is incorrect. Maracaibo is not known as the Lake of Venezuela Tavix | Talk 22:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Retarget to the more logical List of lakes#Venezuela. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:12, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Retarget as per Brad. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 08:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] List of things described as headless

List of things described as headless → Headless (disambiguation) (links to redirect • history • stats)

This page should be deleted because it suggests that the disambiguation page to which it redirects is an indiscriminate list to which partial title matches may be added. Neelix (talk) 16:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete; unlikely title, and no mainspace incoming links. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete; presumably an article in the past, has solid view history; no edit history now. I can't think of anywhere to send the external visitors Josh Parris 04:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep from the target's history "12:17, 27 November 2009 JHunterJ (talk | contribs) m (2,503 bytes) (moved List of things described as headless to Headless (disambiguation): return to dab, clean up) (undo)". Two weeks after a page move is far too soon to get rid of the redirect without a really good reason. Keep it for now, reassess in a couple months. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:16, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

When I wrote that edit summary, I believe there were still incoming mainspace links to it. It was a dab page posing as a list, now it's a dab page and the links have been fixed. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete as nominator I don't see what good it would do to put off the deletion for a couple months. It seems to me that really good reasons have already been provided for why the redirect should be deleted. Neelix (talk) 16:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] No, Luke, I am your father

No, Luke, I am your father → Darth Vader (links to redirect • history • stats)

This should be deleted, along with Luke's father, Luke I am your father, and Luke, I am your father. Implausible, can't see why anyone would expect these string of words to have articles. Fail to see why a line of dialogue should redirect to a character. Declan Clam (talk) 01:40, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Retarget to The Empire Strikes Back, as it's a line said in the film, and a quite famous. So it is a viable search term to figure out where the phrase came from. 70.29.209.121 (talk) 05:57, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep Luke's father and Retarget the rest to The Empire Strikes Back, per 70.29.209.121. This is an incredibly famous line. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 07:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep Seem helpful to me. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Retarget as per A Stop at Willoughby Josh Parris 04:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Retarget all to The Empire Strikes Back, except Retarget Luke's father to Anakin Skywalker. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Rh blood group system

Rh blood group system → Rhesus blood group system (links to redirect • history • stats)

Deletion; I moved the article Rhesus blood group system to Rh blood group system since the latter is the correct name and the former is a misnomer. All steps are clearly explained in the talk page of the article. I did not realize that there was already a redirect from Rh blood group system to Rhesus blood group system, which created a cycling dual-redirect. I temporarily renamed the target of the Rh blood group system redirect to itself which would work as a work-around; however, I undid this myself to allow you the proper solution. Please delete the Rh blood group system redirect to Rhesus blood group system without deleting the original article page with the content. Thank you. Firefly's luciferase (talk) 07:05, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Additional note: In contrast to many people's believe, Rh is not an abbreviation of Rhesus. It is the real name of the blood group system. Therefore, it makes sense to keep this name as the name of the article and keep Rhesus blood group system just as a redirect as currently implemented. --Firefly's luciferase (talk) 07:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

~~Tag it with {{db-self}} and it will all go away. Josh Parris 04:24, 7 December 2009 (UTC)~~

Comment, the proposal is back to front. Josh Parris 04:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep, extensive internal linking and large number of external hits. Josh Parris 04:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment: As I mentioned above. Rh blood group system is now the main article. I am just asking to remove the redirect to Rhesus blood group system which leads to a cycling double redirect. It is just a technical problem that I cannot solve myself but have to ask an admin through this process here. The article will still be available through both key words. Thanks for understanding and solving the technical problem soon. --Firefly's luciferase (talk) 06:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I think I understand now. Is this what happened? You found Rhesus blood group system and realised it was titled incorrectly, so you hit the move button and moved it to Rh blood group system, the correct title. But it turns out that there were a bunch of redirects pointing to Rhesus blood group system, and now they're all double-redirects (as Rhesus blood group system became a redirect when you moved the article to Rh blood group system), and as such not working, so: you've come here, asking for an admin to make the double redirects go away? If that's the problem, just wait a bit and a WP:bot will come along and tidy everything up. I'm pretty sure I've seen a double-redirect bot running around here somewhere. Josh Parris 07:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

This is exactly what happened. I would have asked an admin first to delete the redirect and then move the page (move request) if I had realized that there was already a redirect from the new name to the old name. I learned something: check first. So, if you have already seen a bot running around, then it hopefully will be at this no longer used redirect soon. :-) Otherwise I am glad if an admin can solve the problem manually. Thanks. --Firefly's luciferase (talk) 07:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 5

[edit] Template:Talk page header

Template:Talk page header → Template:User talk rules (links to redirect • history • stats)

Really confusing since {{Talkpageheader}} redirects to {{Talk header}}. Either delete or retarget. I suggest to do the first since we have a lot of redirects to talk header. Even Talkpageheader is a bit useless. Magioladitis (talk) 23:16, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete or retarget (I created said redirect) per nom. This redirect is the result of a move. Speedy may apply because I'm the "author" of this redirect. --Thin boy 00 @671, i.e. 15:06, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mediation (biology)

Mediation (biology) → Mediator (coactivator) (links to redirect • history • stats)

I think this redirect is based on a misunderstanding. The word mediation is widely used in biology for its usual meaning, is doesn't have a special meaning to do with the mediator. (so delete) Narayanese (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Boxxy

Boxxy → List of Internet phenomena (links to redirect • history • stats)

Nothing in the target list about Boxxy, highly unlikely there will be in future, article deleted at AFD, this redirect is just confusing for people searching for the term "Boxxy". Closedmouth (talk) 13:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

There is a sentence at List_of_Internet_phenomena#People. I would rather have one sentence and a redirect here, than have a Google search for Boxxy start with Encyclopedia Dramatica and some stalker blog. --Apoc2400 (talk) 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Yay, somebody added that after I nominated this. :-/ --Closedmouth (talk) 03:23, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Re-added, actually; it was removed in this edit after having been on this list for since February. As a side note, I'm not sure that edit was much good in general. ÷seresin 05:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Esmeralda Squalor

Esmeralda Squalor → Esmé Squalor (links to redirect • history • stats)

This simply is not the character's name. It would be like creating the redirect Thomas Bombadil to Tom Bombadil, or Tabitha cat to tabby cat, only with a much less common name that is not even the full form of the name to which it purports to belong. (While "Esmé" may be used by some as a nickname for "Esmeralda", the names are not etymologically connected.) Anyone who has read the books will furthermore be familiar with the fact that Esmé Squalor summarily introduces herself by her full name—Esmé Gigi Geniveve Squalor. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 02:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Book the Twelfth (A Series of Unfortunate Events)/The Nameless Novel

Book the Twelfth (A Series of Unfortunate Events)/The Nameless Novel → The Penultimate Peril (links to redirect • history • stats)

Another ridiculously long and over-punctuated redirect that no one will ever search. "The Nameless Novel" was never the name of the novel anyhow. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 02:13, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep This wasn't created by someone fishing around for redirects to create. This was once an article [[4]] back in the Dark Times when sub-pages were used in mainspace. The book got a name, the article got moved, a redirect got left, and then subpages in mainsapce went away making this look like a very silly redirect, which it actually wasn't. It's been 4 years, sure, but the redirect might still be useful somewhere out in cyberspace- not to mention the page history attached to this redirect is quite extensive. At worst, keep as harmless Bradjamesbrown (talk) 09:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- The fact that the book "got a name" does not excuse making a title up for it in the interim, though. This seems like the perpetuation of misinformation. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

No, it doesn't but, I was explaining that this redirect didn't get created as a term to be searched for, it's a result of a change in how Wikipedia organizes itself from 3-4 years ago. We still get between 4 and 6 hits a month off this redirect, so it's linked from somewhere. Not many, I agree. Maybe even few enough to just delete it. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 4

[edit] ISBN 0064410153

ISBN 0064410153 → The Penultimate Peril (links to redirect • history • stats)

0064410153 → The Penultimate Peril (links to redirect • history • stats)

As if anyone would enter this in search. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:48, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete 0064410153, as it is a meaningless number in that form. Weak Delete the ISBN, I couldn't find any specific policy on this, but there are only 4 such redirects in existance, and searching an ISBN code sends you to the right page anyway so long as there is a relevant article with an infobox containing its ISBN on Wikipedia. --Taelus (talk) 00:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete, can't imagine someone searching for a book by its ISBN. Nyttend (talk) 00:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Kevin, the Ambidextrous Freak

Kevin, the Ambidextrous Freak → Count Olaf's theater troupe (links to redirect • history • stats)

While Kevin is ambidextrous, he is never referred to as "the ambidextrous freak". — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Weak Keep, searching for the term only gives its usage in mirrors of Wikipedia, however some of them link inbound towards us, thus it is probably beneficial to redirect them to the correct place. Some mirrors don't update very often, and I see no harm in keeping this redirect. --Taelus (talk) 01:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] List of Guardians

List of Guardians → List of A Series of Unfortunate Events characters (links to redirect • history • stats)

Too general to refer to A Series of Unfortunate Events. The "guardians" referenced are simply legal guardians appearing in the series, not some group of characters known as Guardians or whatever. (Should be deleted.) — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:45, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete as misleading, or Convert to Disambig as appropriate if multiple character lists include "Guardians", which I assume they will. --Taelus (talk) 01:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] List of Guardian in A Series of Unfortunate Events

List of Guardian in A Series of Unfortunate Events → List of A Series of Unfortunate Events characters (links to redirect • history • stats)

Pointless typo for "List of Guardians in A Series of Unfortunate Events", a page which is now only a redirect anyway. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fernald, The Hook-Handed Man (Hookie)

Fernald, The Hook-Handed Man (Hookie) → Hook-handed man (links to redirect • history • stats)

The concept that anyone would type this in search seems absurd. The character is known as both "Fernald" (Fernald (A Series of Unfortunate Events)) and the "Hook-handed man", and very briefly he is referred to as "Hookie", but never as Fernald the Hook-handed Man or anything similar. One doesn't keep a page like Abraham Lincoln, 16th President (Honest Abe) or other such nonsense. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:39, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete, yep, seems an odd disambiguation to add to the term. Implausible search term, very unlikely to be used by inbound external links. --Taelus (talk) 00:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Tony "Mommy" Eggmonterorer

Tony "Mommy" Eggmonterorer → List of A Series of Unfortunate Events characters (links to redirect • history • stats)

Peculiar misspelling of Tony "Mommy" Eggmonteror, a redirect which is in itself so un-noteworthy it should probably be listed here too. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:33, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Multctuary Money Management

Multctuary Money Management → List of A Series of Unfortunate Events locations (links to redirect • history • stats)

Typo for Mulctuary Money Management. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:15, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Poe.

Mr. Poe. → Arthur Poe (links to redirect • history • stats)

No one would include a period in their search. Redirect Mr. Poe already exists. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete as implausible. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete, quite unlikely. Nyttend (talk) 00:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Count Olaf's Castle

Count Olaf's Castle → List of A Series of Unfortunate Events locations (links to redirect • history • stats)

Count Olaf does not have a castle. At no point is his house in any way described as a castle. Count Olaf's house redirect already exists. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete, not a likely search target: "a man's home is his castle" isn't a good enough reason to keep this. Nyttend (talk) 00:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lemony snickett

Lemony snickett → Lemony Snicket (links to redirect • history • stats)

Really? Anyone searching will find Lemony Snicket. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:11, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep, plausible search term, plausible to be used by inbound external links. Harmless to keep, thus a net positive to the end-user. --Taelus (talk) 00:56, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Mmm. I knew this one wouldn't fly after I posted it. Ah, well. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 01:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment. Maybe it's worth pointing out that there is already a redirect Lemony Snickett. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 02:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment then why do you want to delete it? 70.29.209.121 (talk) 05:20, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, deletions, etc., hopefully aren't personal issues—but I inherently dislike clutter. Two articles that represent the same misspelling, only differentiated by capitalization, doesn't fly with me. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 06:30, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

However, remember that inbound external links with incorrect capitalisation do not work. This redirect is still beneficial, hope this helps. --Taelus (talk) 12:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep, eighty thousand Ghits indicates that this is a likely search target, and with that many hits, there are likely to be people who type "lemony snickett" instead of "Lemony Snickett". Nyttend (talk) 00:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Mmm, I did drop the ball not checking Google on this one. All right. Although it would seem there are only really 840 valid Google hits: [5]. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Book the tweflth

Book the tweflth → The Penultimate Peril (links to redirect • history • stats)

Typo for Book the Twelfth, a redirect which already exists. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:10, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Weak Keep, plausible. Low number of hits, but plausable mis-spelling/inbound external link. Does no real harm by existing. --Taelus (talk) 00:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Snicket triplets

Snicket triplets → Snicket family (links to redirect • history • stats)

There are no Snicket triplets. This is misinformation. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:09, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Prufrock Prepatory School

Prufrock Prepatory School → List of A Series of Unfortunate Events locations (links to redirect • history • stats)

List of Prufrock Prepatory School Staff → List of A Series of Unfortunate Events characters (links to redirect • history • stats)

Silly misspelling of Prufrock Preparatory School / List of Prufrock Preparatory School Staff, redirects which currently exists. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] A Series of Unfortunate Events: In the Clutches of Count Olaf

A Series of Unfortunate Events: In the Clutches of Count Olaf → Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events (links to redirect • history • stats)

Not a title or working title or anything else for the film. Seems to be someone's fanciful description of the promotional poster. No one thinks the film is called this. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:07, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Only 17 hits on Google. — The Man in Question (gesprec) 10:12, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] ASOUE summary

ASOUE summary → Recurring themes in A Series of Unfortunate Events (links to redirect • history • stats)

Useless redirect. No particular reason anyone would look this up. Target page is not even a summary. No articles linked. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:06, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Misleading redirect, not a search term likely to be used in an encyclopedia. As the summary doesn't exist, we shouldn't send users around looking for one. --Taelus (talk) 00:53, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hugo (A Series of Unfortnate Events)

Hugo (A Series of Unfortnate Events) → Count Olaf's theater troupe (links to redirect • history • stats)

Misspelling of "Unfortunate". Hugo (A Series of Unfortunate Events) already exists separately. Useless typo. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 19:04, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Weak Keep, page was created by a page move and has a small amount of history. Harmless enough, small amount of traffic, not really a plausible search term, but just in-case there are any dodgy inbound external links we should keep it. Minor benefit against no disbenefits, so weak keep. --Taelus (talk) 00:52, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 3

[edit] The Great Unknown (D&D)

The Great Unknown (D&D) → Faction (Planescape) (links to redirect • history • stats)

No mention in target article. Searches on Google [6] seem to be sparse references to the afterlife in general. Unlikely anyone will tack on "(D&D)" to a search, even if The Great Unknown is a part of Dungeons & Dragons. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 23:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep - that smelt funny to me, so it turns out that The Great Unknown is a dab page, and The Great Unknown (D&D) wasn't on it. It is now. Problem solved. Josh Parris 12:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep as redirect, although a page move to The Great Unknown (Dungeons & Dragons) or perhaps better yet The Great Unknown (Planescape) might be in order. The subject is mentioned on the target page now. BOZ (talk) 16:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep, not much point performing a page move as that will create a double redirect anyway. Keep, with no prejudice to also creating redirects at other possible usages. --Taelus (talk) 01:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether

The result of the discussion was Keep as no longer a redirect Josh Parris 23:30, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether → Epoxy putty (links to redirect • history • stats)

Please delete: the target article contains almost no information on bisphenol A diglycidyl ether (BADGE), and epoxy putty is by far not the only product that this substance is used in (there are many more types of epoxy resins) so useful information on BADGE should not reside in the article on epoxy putty). Pbech (talk) 18:35, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy keep has been turned into an article addressing these concerns. Josh Parris 20:03, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] President’s Council of Scientific and Technical Advisors

The result of the discussion was Deleted under CSD G7, author requested deletion. --Taelus (talk) 01:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

President’s Council of Scientific and Technical Advisors → United States President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (links to redirect • history • stats)

Probably should be deleted according to Reasons for Deletion no. 7 (obscurity): after correcting a reference in Ralph E. Gomory, it seems to appear in only one external source: http://sippi.aaas.org/ipissues/updates/?res_id=575 (Note that the redirect is not consistent with the acronym of the target, PCAST.) Airsplit (talk) 07:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete, no access history, no links, and an imprecise title. I might be misreading the history, but didn't you create this an hour ago? If so, surely {{db-author}} could be used? Josh Parris 08:08, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Correct. db-author added to page. Airsplit (talk) 10:25, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] December 2

[edit] Fix it again Tony

Fix it again Tony → Fiat Automobiles#US slang use of "Fiat" (links to redirect • history • stats)

Request for deletion of this redirect. Nominating Fix it again Tony for deletion. The redirect is a pointless attack on Fiat. Silly old jokes should not be used for redirect. It's not appropriate to encourage this on Wiki. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia NOT a joke, so please remove it. G87 21:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

No opinion, but see this discussion. TNXMan 21:55, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep and retarget to Fiat Automobiles#Fiat in the United States, the current location of the content. This is the second time that this has been discussed here and previously at Talk:Fiat Automobiles#Fix it again Tony. As the sources in the target show, this is a widely used term, neither particularly as an attack nor a silly joke. It did start out as a joke but is now widely used in reliable sources often in articles that contrast the previous poor image of Fiat with the present excellent product range. Useful redirect to the target. Bridgeplayer (talk)

Changed redirect accordingly. - Roy Boy 19:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

- Just because the term is cited doesn't mean it needs a redirect. Article does not prove it's a widely used "appropriate" term. G87 22:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  - All you are doing is recycling the old arguments that failed to find favour when the article was discussed. This term is used in New Zealand, UK, US in the past, US in the present, Italy, Ireland, Israel etc Bridgeplayer (talk) 23:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  - last time the voting was 50/50, so its not so hard to find favor, I wonder why it was last time preserved with 50/50 voting.. --Typ932 ^T·C 09:47, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
    - And all you are doing is promoting this old joke for your own personal amusement. Just like the pathetic people who wrote those articles you linked. How you can find this redirect so important is beyond me. It's stupid enough being briefely noted in the target. A redirect is simply going too far, so shame on you and everyone else on here who thinks such offensive redirects are appropriate. Like I said before, Wiki is supposed to be an encyclopedia not a joke promoter. G87 00:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
    - The discussion strongly supported keeping (this is not a vote). And even if you think there was no consensus in the last discussion: no consensus defaults to keep. — Kusma ^talk 10:23, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep per Bridgeplayer. Appropriately sourced and a useful redirect. Killiondude (talk) 22:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes jokes are very useful. If you think its appropriate then you should create redirect Fix Or Repair Daily for Ford as that is a widely used "Joke" term. G87 22:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
  - It looks like everyone besides you (thus far) has agreed that this is useful. We work by consensus around here. Killiondude (talk) 05:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
    - 50/50 voting does not look like concensus... --Typ932 ^T·C 12:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
      - 5 people saying keep, 1 saying delete, and 1 "delete" nom ≠ 50/50. I think Google functions as a calculator, if needed. Killiondude (talk) 20:15, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
I was speaking the older "consensus" not this one, and this is hardly "community decision" as only a few people follows these discussions --Typ932 ^T·C 21:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep nothing seems to have changed since the last RfD Josh Parris 22:54, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep and retarget as specified by other users. Wikipedia contains relevant content, and the redirect points to it. I see no issue, especially as redirects are not bound by NPOV. --Taelus (talk) 00:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete strong no need for this, do you have any data that shows this redirect is really needed? how many people used this term to search Fiat? --Typ932 ^T·C 09:35, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
- Actually they may want to find out about the phrase itself, and may not even know its associated with Fiat. - Roy Boy 20:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
~~Keep~~, mentioned in article. If it's not undue weight to discuss the joke backronym in the article, it is ok to have a redirect for it. — Kusma ^talk 09:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Why? --Typ932 ^T·C 09:40, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Why not? Redirects are cheap, and we do not delete them just because somebody finds them useless. Somebody else might find a use for them. Anyway, the fact that this is a joke is discussed in the article. Especially if the redirect is changed to point to the section, I don't see the problem. — Kusma ^talk 10:23, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Because its not needed, thats why, we dont add useless redirects to other articles either, even then if some article mentions a thing we dont make redirect to those mentions --Typ932 ^T·C 12:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

The community gets to decide what is and isn't useless. Killiondude (talk) 20:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Hehe, so you think that it is needed even nobody uses that search term...weird --Typ932 ^T·C 21:58, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

You might read up on logical fallacies. I don't see anybody but you claiming that "nobody uses" the search term. In any case, there's a "stats" link at the top of this discussion which shows that it is used. The last discussion's "numbers" don't play into this one when the outcome is decided. I'm not sure why you're so bent on getting this deleted, when nobody else sees much of an issue with it. Killiondude (talk) 22:09, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Yep those stats are people from this page, its not used any other, think it about on other angle why you and the others here insist keeping this joke so important when nobody really does not need it?? and what comes to the older voting, it was decided wrongly, it was not consensus --Typ932 ^T·C 22:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Yep, there's a drop down box where you can choose what month's page view stats you're looking at. It is impossible that all the pagehits are from RFD discussions. For the sake of argument, if it is a "joke" it is still a sourced "joke" that makes sense to include in the article. I don't wish to discuss this further, since you seem bound to make pointless comments. Killiondude (talk) 22:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you say it is needed according to those stats?, was the earlier decision a concensus?? Im off this stupid discussion again...you can keep your "concensus" --Typ932 ^T·C 22:31, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

The section has now been reworded appropriately to remove this stupid old Joke. User Typ932 is the only person in this discussion with a sense of normality. Obviously all those above who want to KEEP this inappropriate redirect are biased Americains. I'm sure of that! Hopefully we'll get some input from more sensible folk. G87 20:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I may be biased, but I'm not American. I think the joke is stupid, but that's not a reason not to document it. As I am not American, I don't know how important the joke is for the perception of Fiat in the United States -- if an anti-Italian joke is an important part of it, that needs to be said in the article. It may reflect poorly on the United States, but again: if it's important enough to be said in the article, the phrase can be a redirect. If it isn't important enough for the article, then I don't care. — Kusma ^talk 10:13, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

After thinking about it some more and considering where miserable failure points to, perhaps retarget to Backronym#Jokes_and_pejorative_meanings is better than keeping the current target. — Kusma ^talk 17:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment - G87 tried to remove the "Fix it again Tony" line completely from the article, most likely in an attempt to end the need for this redirect discussion. Time Magazine and The Guardian (sourced in the target article) both make mention of the phrase "Fix it again Tony", and I've undone the removal. Killiondude (talk) 20:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely. By rewording the article I have made it appear relevant and appropriate for users. As a result, there is no need for this silly joke-redirect. Hopefully it will be an end to this nonsense. G87 20:51, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

COMMENT - the relevent redirect would surely be to Backronym#Jokes_and_pejorative_meanings ? where the backronym is currently listed. And no I don't think joke backronyms need redirects. But it's up to you..
- Note when creating the article AEG I didn't feel the need to make a redirect from "Auspacken, Einschalten, Geht nicht" or "Auspacken, Einschalten, Garantiefall" , nor did anyone at de:wikipedia.. Maybe an article List of backronyms would be a good idea? Shortfatlad (talk) 21:28, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete -- it's an ethnic attack. As noted above, we don't have Fix or repair daily, and Found on road dead is not a redir to Ford... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- note - I don't find it that hurtful, as per a mention in the article I wouldn't object in general (not just this case) - such backronyms are often quite well known and worth mentioning. However the redirect is just plain stupid idea..I won't even mention that "jesus killers" redirects to "jew" (JOKE). How about acting all grown up and going for a delete? (but keep mention in article as joke backronym - evidence seems to be that it is sufficiently well known to pass the "I made it up yesterday" test Shortfatlad (talk) 21:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
  - Are you asking for others to act grown up when you just made a jew = jesus killer joke? I just want to clarify. Killiondude (talk) 21:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
    - Sorry. Though attempting to salvage something from my ill-chosen analogy I would say that the point here is that even though the backcronym can be shown to have been covered in reliable sources that doesn't make it suitable for a redirect. Shortfatlad (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- Found on road dead was an improper recreation of a recently deleted redirect and has now been deleted and salted after I tagged it as db-attack. Hans Adler 11:08, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete as an obvious attack redirect serving no legitimate purpose. This should normally have been speedily deleted per CSD G10 (see WP:Attack page), ~~but a number of editors have edit warred against the db-attack template~~. The ethnic component pointed out by SarekOfVulcan makes this even worse than Fix Or Repair Daily, and even that was speedily deleted in May 2006 under CSD A6 (now G10). Hans Adler 21:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
- I have now become aware that two of the editors who removed the db-attack template were actually admins. They did not make it clear in the edit summaries that they were declining the speedy as admins, so I was misled. But in any case according to policy this redirect may be "deleted by any administrator at any time", so an ongoing RfD seems to be an improper argument against the template. Hans Adler 10:44, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete. Un likely search term, and as an acronym mis-capitalised anyway. Guy (Help!) 22:54, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep this and other car-related acronyms. If they can be verified and are in common use then they should be documented on WIkipedia. --Biker Biker (talk) 22:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, of course. Redirects are our normal way of "documenting" random tidbits. How silly of me not to think of that. Perhaps we should create Category:Fix it again Tony as well? And a portal of the same name? Hans Adler 23:03, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete, and what's more allow for speedy deletion of all corporate attack redirects and censure editors who continue to create them. Wikipedia is not here for tired old hackneyed stupid unfunny "jokes" of any kind, but especially not for attack redirects. Nobody will plug the phrase into the search engine unless they're really trying to justify their dislike of a corporation. Wikipedia isn't here for that. In fact, I suggest that all such phrases be hard-blocked as found so they can never be recreated. This kind of useless stuff belongs at Urban Dictionary or a car blog, not on an encyclopedia. --NellieBly (talk) 23:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
COMMENT - Just thought I'd note here also that Fix it again Tony gets 15,000 Google hits and Fix Or Repair Daily (deleted under "CSD:A6. CSD:A1." in May 2006) gets 40,000 so I say speedy delete of this and any other similar attack. G87 23:31, 05 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete - Unlike G87, I don't see this as an attack, or a racial slur or any such on FIAT. Every car manufacture has similar acronyms made up (eg http://www.dunkworld.com/car_acronyms.htm, http://www.carbuyingtips.com/humor.htm). It's just some people's way to let off some steam without hurting anyone. No sane person takes these acronyms seriously, which makes it non-offensive. But still not really worthy of a redirect. Perhaps a small mention in the article somewhere (the article should be unbiased, showing good and bad points instead of just glorious praise). Stepho (talk) 01:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete No need to keep the redirect, plain search results for 'fix it again tony' are more informational. Unomi (talk) 12:42, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep: Legitimate search term. No valid reason for deletion given. --MZMcBride (talk) 14:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- Are you joking? How is "pointless attack" not a valid reason? Do you disagree that WP:Attack page is a valid policy? Hans Adler 15:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- And there is no valid reason to keep. Negative and unhumerous jokes are not seen as legitimate search terms. How anyone can justify the use of such terms is beyond my comprehension. G87 16:48, 06 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment - Just to make everyone aware user Killiondude initiated an ANI on this issue in an obvious attempt to get me blocked. Some valid points have been made there which are worth noting here. G87 17:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Weak speedy keep: Someone could/would be curious on the etymology of the phrase, or in other words it is a valid search. It being "negative" and "unhumorous" is irrelevant when we are speaking of the pursuit of knowledge. - Roy Boy 19:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep, if this is worthy of being mentioned by Time and the Los Angeles Times as popular, it's likely to be a useful redirect. Nyttend (talk) 00:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- That usefulness argument only applies to people who enter "Fix it again Tony" into the search field and press Go (or the return key). They are currently sent to Fiat Automobiles#Fiat in the United States, while Backronym#Jokes and pejorative meanings is equally relevant. Without a redirect the users would see this: [7]. Note that the two most significant results come first, so it's more useful without the redirect. Hans Adler 09:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Strong Delete Yes, it's common. So is "Fix or Repair Daily". So is "Poor Old N....'s Think It's A Cadillac". So is "Big Money Wasted". I know dozens of common car "acronyms". A redirect for a joke makes no sense in an encyclopedia. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ace candy

Ace candy → Filipino cuisine#Desserts and snacks (links to redirect • history • stats)

This redirect was recently speedily deleted; then an attempt at an article was quickly turned back into a redirect (with one editor claiming it to be a "hoax"). Nowhere is "Ace candy" mentioned in the target. Since the original redirect was deleted without an RfD discussion, it seems that WP:CSD#G4 cannot apply (if I read the template correctly). 147.70.242.54 (talk) 16:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete and salt, no evidence online for existence of the term, claimed to be "popular food in the Phillipines invented by two people called Ace and Candy", seems to be some kind of in-joke. MuffledThud (talk) 23:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete as hoax Josh Parris 22:50, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Template:CSD/Quick reference

Template:CSD/Quick reference → Category:Candidates for speedy deletion (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Cross-namespace redirect. Receives little hits according to the page view stats and seems like an obscure search term. — ξ ^xplicit 03:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete has a history, but it's basically a list of CSD (and thus administrative), not an article. Not used. Josh Parris 06:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Norman-238

Norman-238 → Dude (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Implausible search term, no relation between the term dude and title of redirect. — ξ ^xplicit 03:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete rapidly, as a silly variant of doing an article on one's name. DGG ( talk ) 04:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete has a history, but it's repeated attempts to get the syntax of a redirect right. Not helpful. Josh Parris 06:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Funny, but delete I wonder if anyone ever went through that re-direct? The new way to get an article about yourself in Mainspace, perhaps. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 09:49, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] *******, Austria

*******, Austria → Fucking, Austria (links to redirect|history) ([http://stats.grok.se/en/200911/
- - - - ,_Austria stats])
****ing, Austria → Fucking, Austria (links to redirect|history) ([http://stats.grok.se/en/200911/
- - - ing,_Austria stats])

Delete this vague bowdlerisation of redirect as 7 stars don't give any context for this. The village doesn't use the 7 stars, nor can I find a reliable source that uses them (searches on Ask and Google turn up zero hits). With a similar justification, I also add ****ing, Austria for deletion consideration. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 02:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep *******,_Austria has been viewed 62 times in 200803 (I went back that far to avoid hits from currently linked pages, the current hit rate is much higher) which, assuming there were no links to the redirect back then, we're getting external visits via this url. Josh Parris 02:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep per Josh's reasoning: appears to be getting a reasonable number of hits, so its presence helps the encyclopedia, and that trumps anything else. Nyttend (talk) 00:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Dr. Peter Johnsen, Provost Bradley University

Dr. Peter Johnsen, Provost Bradley University → Bradley University (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Delete as the title is a most improbable search item; Johnsen's name is nowhere to be found in target; redirect too old to tag for speedy deletion. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 01:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete, I wonder why Eubot created it, avoiding redlinks perhaps? Josh Parris 02:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] F*****

F***** → Fuck (links to redirect|history) (stats)
F----- → Fuck (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Delete - this nomination in the wake of F--- has the same justifications (Wikipedia is uncensored, redirect is ambiguous, etc.), plus the 5-star variant is even more oblique than the three hyphen variant. In addition, I also nominate the 5-hyphen variant, F-----, for deletion consideration. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 01:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete very few hits back in 200803, a fair number today, but I think that's all down to internal report links. Josh Parris 02:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:What The Fuck? Oh My God! Too Many Damn Three Letter Acronyms. ARRRGGGHHH!!!!~!@!~1`2

Wikipedia:What The Fuck? Oh My God! Too Many Damn Three Letter Acronyms. ARRRGGGHHH!!!!~!@!~1`2 → Wikipedia:WTF? OMG! TMD TLA. ARG! (links to redirect|history) (stats)

"Short cut" that is not a short cut has been deprecated since mid-2009. There's humour... and there's belabouring a point. This is hardly a search item that even hints at probability of its use (even the template on the redirect page suggests a different shortcut for linkage: WP:WOTTA).

I also nominate the following ultra-long "short cut" for discussion for the same reason, save this one doesn't have a "deprecated" template on it:

Wikipedia:Oh I say, what are you doing? Come down from there at once! Really, you're making a frightful exhibition of yourself. → Wikipedia:No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man (links to redirect|history) (stats)

147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment Wikipedia:What_The_Fuck?_Oh_My_God!_Too_Many_Damn_Three_Letter_Acronyms._ARRRGGGHHH!!!!~!@!~1`2 has been viewed 15 times in 200803, so it was popular; also, what's the problem?
Keep first, useless but completely harmless. I especially like to read the information that this shortcut has been deprecated. — Kusma ^talk 10:27, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep second Wikipedia:Oh_I_say,_what_are_you_doing?_Come_down_from_there_at_once!_Really,_you're_making_a_frightful_exhibition_of_yourself. has been viewed 79 times in 200803. and is linked to by dozens and dozens of pages, deleting this would break things (specifically, user talk histories). Josh Parris 02:51, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep second, a classic. Deleting silly Wikipedia humor won't do anything good, so don't do it. — Kusma ^talk 10:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep second - Like Josh said, there are many places it is linked to. Additionally, I've always thought the absurdity of the redirect related nicely with the actions required of a user for somebody to actually need to link that long of a redirect. It's part of Wikipedia humor, which the community thus far hasn't outlawed. :-) Killiondude (talk) 22:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Continue keeping second. Both are harmless as redirects, and even a bit practical. Wikipedia:Oh I say, what are you doing? Come down from there at once! Really, you're making a frightful exhibition of yourself.) is particularly helpful with editors who need relatively explicit suggestions. / edg ☺ ☭ 17:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep second, delete first -- second is humorous, first isn't particularly, and why would anyone seriously link to it when the whole point is the acronym use in the target? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 1

[edit] Interior Decorator (Curb Your Enthusiasm)

Interior Decorator (Curb Your Enthusiasm) → List of Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes (links to redirect|history) (stats)

It is unlikely that somebody will search for a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode by title because the show seems to place little to no emphasis on each episode's title. Also there are very few CYE episodes with their own pages which I think is also a basis for deletion as there is no precedence for it. A notable episode may warrent a redirect to the episode list but this one isn't even particularly notable. Although there are some page stats I would assume most of that is down to the article being linked from the CYE episode list until today. raseaC^{talk to me} 20:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep and refine target to List of Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes#Season 1: 2000 as the episode title is indeed listed on the page (and with a synopsis), thus making the nominated redirect a useful one.147.70.242.54 (talk) 22:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep per reasons given above. Boleyn2 (talk) 22:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep as not going to block the creation of an article Josh Parris 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep and keep all the other ones also. We always do this as a minimum for episode names when we includes any mention of them at all in the larger article. DGG ( talk ) 04:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Porno Gil (Curb Your Enthusiasm)

Porno Gil (Curb Your Enthusiasm) → List of Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes (links to redirect|history) (stats)

It is unlikely that somebody will search for a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode by title because the show seems to place little to no emphasis on each episode's title. Also there are very few CYE episodes with their own pages which I think is also a basis for deletion as there is no precedence for it. A notable episode may warrent a redirect to the episode list but this one isn't even particularly notable. Although there are some page stats I would assume most of that is down to the article being linked from the CYE episode list until today. raseaC^{talk to me} 20:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep and refine target to List of Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes#Season 1: 2000 as the episode title is indeed listed on the page (and with a synopsis), thus making the nominated redirect a useful one.147.70.242.54 (talk) 22:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep per reasons given above. Boleyn2 (talk) 22:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep as not going to block the creation of an article Josh Parris 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Pants Tent

The Pants Tent → List of Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes (links to redirect|history) (stats)

It is unlikely that somebody will search for a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode by title because the show seems to place little to no emphasis on each episode's title. Also there are very few CYE episodes with their own pages which I think is also a basis for deletion as there is no precedence for it. A notable episode may warrent a redirect to the episode list but this one isn't even particularly notable. Although there are some page stats I would assume most of that is down to the article being linked from the CYE episode list until today. raseaC^{talk to me} 20:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep and refine target to List of Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes#Season 1: 2000 as the episode title is indeed listed on the page (and with a synopsis), thus making the nominated redirect a useful one.147.70.242.54 (talk) 22:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep per reasons given above. Boleyn2 (talk) 22:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete or move to The Pants Tent (Curb Your Enthusiasm), potentially blocking an article Josh Parris 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Speedy Keep extensive article history Josh Parris 02:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The Ida Funkhouser Roadside Memorial

The Ida Funkhouser Roadside Memorial → List of Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes (links to redirect|history) (stats)

It is unlikely that somebody will search for a Curb Your Enthusiasm episode by title because the show seems to place little to no emphasis on each episode's title. Also there are very few CYE episodes with their own pages which I think is also a basis for deletion as there is no precedence for it. A notable episode may warrent a redirect to the episode list but this one isn't even particularly notable. raseaC^{talk to me} 20:40, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Keep and refine target to List of Curb Your Enthusiasm episodes#Season 6: 2007 as the episode title is indeed listed on the page (and with a synopsis), thus making the nominated redirect a useful one. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete or move to The Ida Funkhouser Roadside Memorial (Curb Your Enthusiasm), potentially blocking an article Josh Parris 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Speedy Keep extensive article history Josh Parris 02:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:U2

Wikipedia:U2 → Wikipedia:WikiProject U2 (links to redirect|history) (stats)

The current target is an inactive WikiProject. I propose retargeting to Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#U2, as other CSD abbreviations already redirect thus. For example, WP:G2, WP:A2, WP:R2, WP:T2, etc. Retarget. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 20:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Given this seems like a reasonable idea, within the hour I'll be finished bypassing the 90-odd links to this redirect. Josh Parris 00:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
- Job done, heavy server lag slowed progress. Nothing links to the nominated article. Josh Parris 02:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
- I've just re-confirmed there are no links (despite What links here says) Josh Parris 04:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ōwakudani/redirects

The result of the discussion was Delete Josh Parris 04:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Ōwakudani/redirects → Ōwakudani (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Redirect that advertises that it is a redirect was caused by a temporary page move. Like so many we've managed to eliminate in the past few months, this is a most highly improbable search item that has served its purpose and should be eradicated. With the same justification, I also nominate

Organisation internationale de la Francophonie/redirects → Organisation internationale de la Francophonie (links to redirect|history) (stats)

147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:17, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete as housekeeping Josh Parris 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete per previous RfDs. Unlikely search term, not beneficial. --Taelus (talk) 10:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Deleted per Josh's argument: this is purely housekeeping. Nyttend (talk) 00:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] Jeremy Glick (author)

Jeremy Glick (author) → Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Delete Glick does not seem to even be mentioned in article. Boleyn2 (talk) 13:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete - this was originally an article that went through AfD, whereupon it was closed as "merge into Criticism of Bill O'Reilly"; then the new target itself was merged into Bill O'Reilly. Along the line, this redirect lost all relevance to its target(s). Deletion is desirable as there is another Jeremy Glick unrelated to this one. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 16:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete, no context Josh Parris 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User:Joeydauben/Joey Dauben

The result of the discussion was CSD G8, target was deleted. --Taelus (talk) 19:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Joeydauben/Joey Dauben → Joey Dauben (links to redirect|history) (stats)

R2: Cross Namespace redirect Adam in MO Talk 11:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

User to Mainspace is not banned, as it won't show up in any search terms. Whilst the target for this redirect no longer exists, it is up to the user whether they keep them as it is within their userspace. They cause no harm where they are currently, and are not visible via searching. --Taelus (talk) 13:34, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Speedy delete CSD G8 - redirect to a nonexistent target. Tagged (as are the next two below). 147.70.242.54 (talk) 16:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] User:O. O. Anumati

The result of the discussion was CSD G8, target was deleted. --Taelus (talk) 19:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

User:O. O. Anumati → Evangelist O. O. Anumati (links to redirect|history) (stats)

R2: Cross Namespace redirect Adam in MO Talk 11:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

This would strike me as potentially confusing, but I cannot find anything in WP:USERPAGE that says they may not do this. Only user talk pages have rules about redirecting. Additionally, this doesn't fall under R2, as that only applies to redirects coming from the mainspace. --Taelus (talk) 13:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] User:Odubenu

The result of the discussion was CSD G8, target was deleted. --Taelus (talk) 19:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Odubenu → Evangelist O. O. Anumati (links to redirect|history) (stats)

R2: Cross Namespace redirect Adam in MO Talk 11:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

This would strike me as potentially confusing, but I cannot find anything in WP:USERPAGE that says they may not do this. Only user talk pages have rules about redirecting. Additionally, this doesn't fall under R2, as that only applies to redirects coming from the mainspace. --Taelus (talk) 13:39, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] Variedad Nehari

Non-admin contested WP:CSD#G6. Article is a redirect from a foreign translation of the title. Sławomir Biały (talk) 00:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment I removed the speedy tag — I don't see any speedy criterion met by this redirect. I also don't see any point in deleting it — it's accurate, not misleading or ambiguous, not POV, it doesn't insult anyone, etc etc. I would never have bothered to create such a redirect if it weren't there already, but I don't understand why bother to delete it either. --Trovatore (talk) 01:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment the term "Variedad Nehari" gets 2ghits outside of WP. Josh Parris 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Butkus Stallone

Butkus Stallone → Rocky (film series) (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Delete: Butkus was Sylvester Stallone's dog and appeared in the first two films but he is not mentioned in the target article. AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Weak retarget to Rocky II. He's not mentioned in the parent article, but (with a different spelling), the dog's name appears in the "Cast and Crew" section of the Rocky II article (not in the article for the first one), but since the name of the dog is so trivial to the movie, deleting the redirect and removing the redlink in Rocky II is just as "good." 147.70.242.54 (talk) 21:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Butcrease Stallone

Butcrease Stallone → Rocky (film series) (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Delete: Butcrease was Sylvester Stallone's dog (withe his actual name or the film dog's name); he appeared in the first two films but he is not mentioned in the target article. AdamBMorgan (talk) 18:59, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Delete - not mentioned anywhere in any Rocky article. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 21:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete per reasons given above. Boleyn2 (talk) 22:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Delete, typo Josh Parris 23:51, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] November 30

[edit] 215 (number)

215 (number) → 210 (number) (links to redirect|history) (stats)

Delete pointless redirect to a article on different number that recently had a section deleted (per WP:SELFREF) that had mentions of other numbers that did not have Wikipedia articles (Full Disclosure Department: I was the one who removed the self-references). With the same rationale I also nominate

217 (number) → 210 (number) (links to redirect) (stats)
218 (number) → 210 (number) (links to redirect) (stats)
219 (number) → 210 (number) (links to redirect) (stats)
224 (number) → 220 (number) (links to redirect) (stats)
225 (number) → 220 (number) (links to redirect) (stats)
228 (number) → 220 (number) (links to redirect) (stats)

147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

~~Speedy~~ Keep, per many discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers. (The last discussion was a couple years ago, so "Speedy" may be inappropriate.) See Wikipedia:WikiProject Numbers#Creation of articles. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Ambulance Chasers

Category:Ambulance Chasers → Category:Lawyers (links to redirect) (stats)

Delete; disparaging and unhelpful. R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete - while I could see this as a valid article redirect, keeping this as a category redirect is pointless as "ambulance chaser" is a derogatory term for lawyer. Since this is a category redirect, it should be deleted. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Delete per nom. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 23:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Reverse Convoy

The result of the discussion was retargeted to Megatron, more suitable target for disambiguation. --Taelus (talk) 11:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Reverse Convoy → Megatron (disambiguation) (links to redirect) (stats)

No mention of term in targets of the disambiguation page, thus unsure where to retarget this to. Any suggestions for what the actual target should be? Or should this simply be deleted as misleading? Taelus (talk) 11:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep. Seems to have some merit [8], [9], etc. According to the Transformers: Robot Masters article, the character "Reverse Convoy" is an incarnation of Megatron. Most if not all Google hits are in reference to Megatron [10]. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 11:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that, ironically the article which mentions it is not on the disambiguation page. I am unsure why but when I googled it I didn't really find anything relevant, perhaps I was using dodgy search settings. I will retarget to Megatron as it is a more suitable target, skips a double disambig that way, and I will add the article you mentioned to that disambiguation page. Thanks, will close this when done. --Taelus (talk) 11:42, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Done, updated the relevant disambiguation page to contain relevant links. Thanks for research again! --Taelus (talk) 11:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] Escape from Grandma's House

Escape from Grandma's House → Bart Gets an F (links to redirect) (stats)

No mention of term in target page, uncertain of relevance. Potentially misleading for readers? Taelus (talk) 11:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment. A fictional game appearing in the episode "Bart Gets an F" [11]. Whether the fact that there is a connection merits its inclusion seems doubtful, especially since versions of the game appear in other episodes, according to the above source. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 11:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Retarget to The Simpsons, since it appears in multiple episodes. Unfortunately no mention of the game is made on the page, but Google has 18,400 results, which seams notable enough. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Super Slugfest

Super Slugfest → Moaning Lisa (links to redirect) (stats)

No mention of this term in redirect target, unsure of its relevance. Potentially misleading for some readers? Taelus (talk) 11:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment. A game played in the episode [12]. Usefulness doubtful. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 11:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Based on Google, I say Delete. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Intraocular lens

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Intraocular lens → Intraocular lens (links to redirect) (stats)

Appears to contain an invisible byte-order mark or other Unicode control character at the beginning (as confirmed by the URL). Completely random and implausible. Indeed, the creator appears to be unsure why the redirect is needed in the first place. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Creator's tag particularly convincing—and strange. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 11:22, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Delete not helpful Josh Parris 21:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] V.F.D. Snails

V.F.D. Snails → Fauna of A Series of Unfortunate Events (links to redirect) (stats)

At no point are snails mentioned in A Series of Unfortunate Events. Ergo, at no point are snails mentioned in connection with V.F.D. At no point are any creatures which in some small way resemble snails mentioned. Redirect clearly created as a joke. Currently redirects to a page which, naturally, makes no mention of snails. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 03:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

The page used to redirect to "Other V.F.D. Animals". It seems the redirect was created because of the last paragraph in this revision: [13] It was not "clearly created as a joke", but as the page no longer contains references to snails, the redirect no longer makes sense. Pacaman! (talk) 04:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- Hmmm. The paragraph in question must then have been the joke/vandalism. Discussion of Volatile Fungus Deportation is limited in the series, and does not reference snails. I meant no offense against you. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Delete, not helping Josh Parris 04:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The definition of america is rock and roll

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

The definition of america is rock and roll → Rock and roll (links to redirect) (stats)

Pointless redirect. Not a phrase in use. No articles link here. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 03:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete. Pointless, silly •••Life of Riley (T–C) 04:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Comment The definition of america is rock and roll has been viewed 10 times in 200910. which is higher than I'd expect for an unused link
- "definition of america is rock and roll" = 10 results on Google, all based on Wikipedia. "definition of america is rock n roll" = 0 results on Google. Seems like the phrase was invented by the user who first made the page. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:29, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Delete, clearly the result of vandalism and improper clean-up afterwards. Josh Parris 21:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] Rock and roll.

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Rock and roll. → Rock and roll (links to redirect) (stats)

Pointless typo. No reason for period. No articles linked here. No one would add a period in search. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 03:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete, Rock and roll. has been viewed 4 times in 200910. so no-one is linking in from outside Josh Parris 04:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Delete, the page hits suggests it is not used in any inbound external links, and it isn't a plausible typo. --Taelus (talk) 08:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] Rock Music Racism

Rock Music Racism → Rock and roll (links to redirect) (stats)
Rock music racism → Rock and roll (links to redirect) (stats)

Improbable search item. Originally redirect to another article (Racism in rock music) which now also redirects to Rock and roll. Pointless redirect. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 03:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete both as misleading and incorrect. The target Rock and roll#Race is not about racism in rock and roll, it is about race in rock and roll—not the same thing. For what it's worth, Racism in rock music should probably be deleted for the same reasons. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 04:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Delete, not helping Josh Parris 04:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Every child is special

Every child is special → Taare Zameen Par (links to redirect) (stats)

Misleading redirect, no mention of term within article. However, it seems to be subtext in the image of a publicity poster, however it seems odd to redirect it here because of its minor use in publicity. There are many other advertising campaigns that no doubt use this term, yet not in a notable way which will be covered at wikipedia. Thoughts? Taelus (talk) 00:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete, unrelated Josh Parris 04:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Delete. The redirect has no relationship to the target as far as I can tell. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 04:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Dabify. So far I see three notable uses of the phrase that recur in a Google search: 1) "Every child is special" appears to be the English translation of the Hindi title of Taare Zameen Par; 2) "Every child is special" is a long-standing slogan used by Easter Seals (U.S.), most prominently in their current stamp campaign; 3) "Every Child Is Special" appears to be a monologue on an album by George Carlin, It's Bad for Ya. Of the three, the first dominates in Google hits. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 17:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Keep it, I created the link because it was the title I saw on the box of the DVD. See for example: http://www.cinecynic.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/taare_zameen_par_poster.jpg Some people like me think that this is the official English translation and therefore they may use it to refer to the movie. Diego Torquemada (talk) 23:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Keep - frequently used term in connection with this film - [14][15][16][17] etc. Looks useful and, in any case, mostly harmless. Bridgeplayer (talk) 21:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Dabify per points listed above on other uses, and the fact that a non-English title is obviously not the most common use of this common English language phrase. 70.29.209.121 (talk) 05:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Dabify; too general for redirect, but still applicable. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hypercity

The result of the discussion was retargeted to HyperCity --Taelus (talk) 08:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Hypercity → Sky City 1000

Misleading/irrelevant redirect. "Hypercity" is not another name for Sky City 1000. "Hypercity" is not discussed in the article on Sky City 1000. The article from which I reached this redirect (Metropolitan area) stated that a hypercity was a city with a population of over 20,000,000. Someone the Person (talk) 01:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

redirect to Megacity Josh Parris 04:26, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Close this. I redirected it to HyperCity. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 04:33, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Good one. Josh Parris 05:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] November 29

The result of the discussion was Deleted as G6/author agreed to deletion Cenarium (talk) 18:07, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Barack Obama/Article probation

Barack Obama/Article probation → Wikipedia:General sanctions/Obama article probation (links to redirect) (stats)

Also: Barack Obama/article probation/logs, Barack Obama/Article probation/Logs and Barack Obama/Article probation/Requests for enforcement
Those are unecessary cross-namespace redirects which show up in searches for probation, readers shouldn't be confronted to this kind of content. [[WP:]] redirects can be used to access the pages quickly. Cenarium (talk) 15:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I think they can be speedily deleted under G6 / general housekeeping. I forget exactly why I created them - I think they are products of a page move during an effort to figure out the best way to organize them. They are not in use: nothing of any substance links to them. - Wikidemon (talk) 17:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete. These are useful for people monitoring the appropriate actions on Barack Obama, at the expense of confusing any of our readers who is simply searching for "Barack Obama" or "Probation". Cross-namespace redirects like this are bad. — Gavia immer (talk) 17:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy delete - straightforward as the page should be in Wikipedia space; this was created by error and am not sure why it hadn't been picked up on until now. Ncmvocalist (talk) 17:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete, unsuitable cross-namespace redirects which will show up in searches. --Taelus (talk) 00:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] TheWillToPower

The result of the discussion was Keep. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:28, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

TheWillToPower → Friedrich Nietzsche (links to redirect) (stats)

Ancient (yes, ancient!) page, from February 2001. It pains me to say this about an old CamelCase redirect, but really, this is not useful anymore. No-one is going to search for a title like this. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:13, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

TheWillToPower has been viewed 6 times in 200910, which isn't a lot, but it's more than zero. It's not blocking another article, so why worry? Josh Parris 10:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

delete -- I'm guessing, but I wouldn't be surprised if all six of those visits were from random article, What links here, etc. Although there is no "blocking" flaw, the presence of junk like this just encourages more of it (the broken windows theory. Ma^t_chups 03:09, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

How is this redirect comparable to a broken window? No one sees it. And what "crime" or further troubles could it possibly lead to? And, after all that: the broken windows article makes it clear that "fixing broken windows" may or may not have correlated benefits for bigger problems - i.e., testing the theory has shown... not much. Josh Parris 11:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Obviously someone saw it and posted it here. And it shows up on Allpages, What Links Here, etc. It could lead to people creating more non-useful redirects like WizardOfOz or BarackHusseinObama. Ma^t_chups 04:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

There's a difference: we no longer use CamelCase linking, but we also try to maintain Wikipedia's history to deter link rot. (Thanks to Rossami for that lesson!) 147.70.242.54 (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep per WP:RFD#KEEP #4: You risk breaking incoming or internal links by deleting the redirect. Old CamelCase links and old subpage links should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. This is exactly on point here... 147.70.242.54 (talk) 15:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Keep, has not caused harm for the last 8 years, not likely to do so in the future. "Useless" is not a reason to delete redirects. Redirects are cheap. — Kusma ^talk 07:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] Faculty of Engineering

Faculty of Engineering → Faculty of Engineering, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (links to redirect) (stats)

Procedural nomination; originally prodded by Philtro (talk · contribs) but redirects are not eligible for prods. Concern was: "No need to redirect. There are many 'Faculty of Engineering' around the world. Else, place all the Faculties of Engineering here (it will serves as a list)." Tim Song (talk) 08:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete and salt This is excessively vague, and many faculties of engineering have articles [18] ; this verges on advertising for this particular faculty. A list would not work, since there are ever so many of such faculties around the world, a category would serve for the container of articles that exist on Wikipedia, but the list would be misnamed, if not excessively broad in any case. 76.66.194.154 (talk) 08:24, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Redirect to Engineering, or delete works too. Josh Parris 09:52, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Delete and salt per suggestion, or convert to disambig although it would likely be a very large and not very useful disambig, since people can just put the location into the search box and end up where they want to be. Retargetting to Engineering isn't very helpful as it is not directly related to the term. --Taelus (talk) 00:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Retarget to Engineering college and semiprotect - while the target is imperfect (I have just added a {{globalize}} tag to it), a semiprotected redirect might just alleviate most problems with the current redirect. Unfortunately, there is no mention of faculty in the target, but in some arenas "faculty" and "college" are synonymous. The only other worthwhile option is to delete and salt, but a semiprotected redirect would be more constructive. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:19, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
- Comment "Engineering college" isn't a faculty of engineering, or even close, I don't think it's an appropriate target. For one thing, the definition listed already excludes universities IN ENGLAND, where the article "Engineering college" is about. Everything on the list is a high school, apparently. 76.66.202.219 (talk) 05:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Hence the {{globalize}} tag. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Hence it would still be wrong after "globalization" because in England, it would not refer to Faculties of Engineering, because it would be about highschools in England. 76.66.203.178 (talk) 05:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fredrick neechee

Fredrick neechee → Friedrich Nietzsche (links to redirect) (stats)

Silly redirect from implausible typo. Name is pronounced "nee-chə", not "nee-chee". Not recent (2007), so does not qualify for R1. Seems to get hits; I can't imagine why. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:52, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Fredrick_neechee has been viewed 32 times in 200910, so I reckon keep it, clearly it is a plausible typo. Josh Parris 10:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but we don't know if the viewers were looking for the article on Nietzsche. — This, that, and the other (talk) 02:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

No, but it is a reasonable guess Josh Parris 13:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment While in academic circles the name is often pronounced "nee-chə", most casual speakers of English say "nee-chee".[19] It's the Fredrick that bothers me. That's not even how the English cognate is usually spelled. Neechee seems like a decent redirect, though. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete - the phonetic pronunciation of the last name I can see as a plausible search item; the misspelling of the first name is similarly plausible... but to expect someone to search based on both? I think not - the combination (plus the irregular capitalisation) clearly lands in the "implausible search item" territory. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 04:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Weak Keep since this is for searching and not linking, the miscapitalized second word is not a problem because the searchbox automagically matches upper and lower case forms. As for "Fredrick", that is also not a big problem, since "Fred*" has many different spellings, and it is quite conceivable that an English-speaker would not know a German form, but would thinkk it were an English form of the name. 76.66.202.219 (talk) 05:05, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Al Bryant

The result of the discussion was Delete. Ruslik_Zero 13:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Al Bryant → Albert Bryant, Jr. (links to redirect) (stats)

Delete in the hope that an article on the comic writer will be created (as linked to from Bill Ward (comics)). Albert Bryant, Jr. has quite a few speculative redirects pointing at it, and two or three articles, so this redirect is a little greedy on the part of the current target article. Josh Parris 05:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] Fresno, CA Police Department

The result of the discussion was Delete. Ruslik_Zero 13:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Fresno, CA Police Department → Fresno Police Department (links to redirect) (stats)

Redirect has no links and unlikely ever will. emerson7 01:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete one or two hits a month, quite possibly ~~accidental~~ Special:RandomRedirect. Josh Parris 10:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

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

[edit] Avb

The result of the discussion was Retargeted to AVB by The Man in Question (talk · contribs). Non-admin closure. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Avb → Acapella Vocal Band (links to redirect) (stats)

This redirect was bad practice when there is an existing disambiguation article for AVB, particularly since this target is not the most obvious meaning of the abbreviation. Michael Johas Teener (talk) 05:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Be bold and retarget to AVB. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. — The Man in Question (gesprec) · (forðung) 07:47, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

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

Contents

[edit] Before you list a redirect for discussion...

[edit] The guiding principles of RfD

[edit] When should we delete a redirect?

[edit] Reasons for deleting

[edit] Reasons for not deleting

[edit] Neutrality of redirects

[edit] Closing notes

[edit] How to list a redirect for discussion

[edit] Current list

[edit] December 7

[edit] Dubbiya

[edit] G Dubya B

[edit] Bush jnr

[edit] Mr. President 43

[edit] Barakc Obama

[edit] OBAMA!

[edit] Ob ama

[edit] Shit (euphemism)

[edit] Muda fooka

[edit] Fûck

[edit] Fuck.

[edit] FUDIE

[edit] Glaciers of Gabon

[edit] Portal:Scientific method

[edit] Guydo Baggins

[edit] MAYORS OF AGRA

[edit] December 6

[edit] Gallery of Pompeii and Herculaneum

[edit] Lake of Venezuela

[edit] List of things described as headless

[edit] No, Luke, I am your father

[edit] Rh blood group system

[edit] December 5

[edit] Template:Talk page header

[edit] Mediation (biology)

[edit] Boxxy

[edit] Esmeralda Squalor

[edit] Book the Twelfth (A Series of Unfortunate Events)/The Nameless Novel

[edit] December 4

[edit] ISBN 0064410153

[edit] Kevin, the Ambidextrous Freak

[edit] List of Guardians

[edit] List of Guardian in A Series of Unfortunate Events

[edit] Fernald, The Hook-Handed Man (Hookie)

[edit] Tony "Mommy" Eggmonterorer

[edit] Multctuary Money Management

[edit] Mr. Poe.

[edit] Count Olaf's Castle

[edit] Lemony snickett

[edit] Book the tweflth

[edit] Snicket triplets

[edit] Prufrock Prepatory School

[edit] A Series of Unfortunate Events: In the Clutches of Count Olaf

[edit] ASOUE summary

[edit] Hugo (A Series of Unfortnate Events)

[edit] December 3

[edit] The Great Unknown (D&D)

[edit] Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether

[edit] President’s Council of Scientific and Technical Advisors

[edit] December 2

[edit] Fix it again Tony

[edit] Ace candy

[edit] Template:CSD/Quick reference

[edit] Norman-238

[edit] *******, Austria

[edit] Dr. Peter Johnsen, Provost Bradley University

[edit] F*****

[edit] Wikipedia:What The Fuck? Oh My God! Too Many Damn Three Letter Acronyms. ARRRGGGHHH!!!!~!@!~1`2

[edit] December 1

[edit] Interior Decorator (Curb Your Enthusiasm)

[edit] Porno Gil (Curb Your Enthusiasm)

[edit] The Pants Tent

[edit] The Ida Funkhouser Roadside Memorial

[edit] Wikipedia:U2

[edit] Ōwakudani/redirects

[edit] Jeremy Glick (author)

[edit] User:Joeydauben/Joey Dauben

[edit] User:O. O. Anumati

[edit] User:Odubenu

[edit] Intraocular lens