Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 June 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 20[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. -- John Reaves (talk) 00:20, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American and International English Differences → American and British English differences[edit]

Misleading: The article doesn't cover "International English," but British and American English. "International English" is not synonymous with "British English," either. ---The user formerly known as JackLumber 21:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete this and the next two redirects. As a minor curiosity, the page history of the redirect goes back all the way to 2001! YechielMan 22:43, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...and that history pre-dates that of American and British English differences, containing an earlier version of the article, which needs to be kept. Can a selective history merge be performed? If yes, then delete, and also the following two. mattbr 18:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Most English languages are compared from the British English. Australian and Canadian are seperate versions of English, we even have Wikipedia articles telling what's different from them and any other English. TheBlazikenMaster 23:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep old harmless redirect with history. — The Storm Surfer 01:48, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American and British English Differences (Archive 1) → American and British English differences[edit]

Nonsensical: it ain't no talk page. ---The user formerly known as JackLumber 21:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

  • ... but the talk page was an archive, which I have now moved to a subpage of the target talk page. mattbr 18:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

North American, British and other Commonwealth English differences → American and British English differences[edit]

Nonsensical: created by mistake by then-newbie User:Myrtone86, it should have been deleted a year ago. ---The user formerly known as JackLumber 21:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Shittington, Northamptonshire → Piddington, Northamptonshire[edit]

The result of the debate was speedy delete as vandalism. --Mr. Lefty (talk) 17:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Created by a user who has repeatedly vandalised the article, this redirect seems rather plainly defamatory of the town. Nyttend 17:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Jimmy Rogers (basketball) → Jimmy Rodgers (basketball coach)[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. -- John Reaves (talk) 00:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Likely misspelling, but unlikely parenthetical. The dab page Jimmy Rogers (disambiguation) does point to Jimmy Rodgers (basketball coach). --Quuxplusone 04:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

List of Diploma Mills → List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 22:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Factually incorrect and potentially libelous ElKevbo 02:53, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Inappropriate redirect given the subject matter it redirects to. --Dynaflow babble 04:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. - Bob K 09:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Inaccurate, inflammatory mischaracterization of unaccredited schools. Very potentially libelous. KatiaRoma 19:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

List of fake colleges → List of unaccredited institutions of higher learning[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 22:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Factually incorrect and likely libelous ElKevbo 02:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Utterly inappropriate redirect. --Dynaflow babble 04:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fake is an inflammatory libelous word when applied to unaccredited schools. It applies to diploma mills, but not here. KatiaRoma 19:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • PLEASE delete. Unaccredited does not mean "fake," and it surely could be considered libel. --orlady 17:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Yes indeed. This certainly could be perceived as libelous. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 20:24, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Messier object M2-9 → Planetary_Nebula_M2-9[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 22:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could cause confusion since M2-9 is not a Messier Object, further, the name is 'Messier Object M2-9' with the M normally meaning Messier in the case of Messier objects is redundant, and thus even more confusing. WilliamKF 00:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. While the Butterfly Nebula article does make clear that M2-9 isn't a Messier object, this name of this redirect page might cause some confusion. Also, it is an unlikely term to be used. There is a perfectly fine M2-9 redirect page. FlowerpotmaN (t · c) 01:04, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

けつばん → Pokémon video game glitches[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 22:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pokécruft. I believe it translates as "ketsuban", meaning "missing number", aka Missingno., a pokémon glitch of ongoing edit wars in the article about known pokémon glitches in general. Doesn't conform to WP:ENGLISH but doesn't qualify for CSD A2 or R3, and who is honestly going to look in the English Wikipedia for a topic of very limited interest using not only the Japanese name but the Japanese alphabet as well? --Stratadrake 01:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Not-english redirects are sometimes tolerated, but this is not needed. YechielMan 22:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree. What are the odds that someone is going to type the above on the english free encyclopedia. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 20:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Mary Austen[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. Not really an RFD, but deleted as db-author applies. -- JLaTondre 02:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In attempting to create an article linking to a person discussed in the Freddie Mercury article, I misspelled the last name: Austen instead of the correct Austin. When I tried to rename ("move") the page I discovered that Mary Austin redirects to Mary Hunter Austin. Although I am now researching and learning, at this time I do not know how to accomplish the whole disambiguation thing. My article is just a few sentences and citations so I just want to "forget the whole thing". 3Phillips 02:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Succinct → wikt:succinct[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 22:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a cross-project redirect, which WP:SRD says to not have. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SheeEttin (talk • contribs) 02:28, June 20, 2007 (UTC).

  • Delete per nomination. Belongs to the Wiktionary. As proposed at Talk: Succinct, it can be a soft redirect if needed. --Biblbroks's talk 20:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as not needed in the Wikipedia project. --Rbraunwa 15:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2007_June_20&oldid=1145631093"