Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 November 22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 22[edit]

Wikiholism → Wikipedia:Are You a Wikipediholic Test[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre 01:24, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary cross-namespace redirect. --Rory096 07:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Inappropriate CNR. -- Renesis (talk) 20:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Cross-namespace redirects to pages which do not aid in building the encyclopedia are inappropriate. Khatru2 01:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as cross-namespace. --Rbraunwa 20:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Portal:BigFishGames → Big Fish Games[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre 01:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pointless cross-namespace redirect BigDT 02:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as CNR. Looks like it may have been an attempt for advertising. -- Renesis (talk) 20:28, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete cross-space redir. --Slgr@ndson (page - messages - contribs) 02:54, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom [even as this serves as a redirect, it's quite possibly speediable as {{db-emptyportal}} (P2), but I think it's best that we deal with all cross-namespace redirects at RfD, the potential applicability of criteria for speedy deletion notwithstanding]. Joe 03:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Stephen Yagman → Mostafa Tabatabainejad[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre 01:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Yagman is the attorney for Mostafa Tabatabainejad in the latter's proposed lawsuit over police brutality. It makes no sense to have this redirect: I think it could very easily be confusing, as well as misleading, as it implies that Yagman's only relevant work has been with Tabatabainejad (while in reality it seems that he has been a fairly high-profile civil rights lawyer in other cases as well). At any rate, since we don't have any article on Yagman, the redirect should simply be deleted, rather than redirecting to the most relevant subject to Yagman on which we do have an article. Dylan 08:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Confusing. Red links would be better for this name (or no links at all) -- Renesis (talk) 20:29, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Words to avoid → Wikipedia:Words to avoid[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre 00:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect; this one is dangerous because I can imagine an encyclopedia article at the source (I saw a link to it, and wasn't sure whether it would be an XNR or not). There are several incoming links, mostly from Talk pages. --ais523 11:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Strong delete per nom. -- Renesis (talk) 20:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Joe 02:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Khatru2 01:27, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nomination. --Rbraunwa 20:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

A wizard did it → List of neologisms on The Simpsons[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. If someone feels they can make a standalone, encyclopedic article, they are welcome to create it, but all the links to this page are from non-articles. -- JLaTondre 00:34, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to page about The Simpsons where the phrase isn't used or explained. JP Godfrey (Talk to me) 11:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. It was recently removed from the target page. -- Renesis (talk) 20:35, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it an option to place the content that was removed from the Simpsons article in place of the redirect instead? It has a few linkbacks, after all. H Hog 17:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Lost (disambiguation) → Lost[edit]

The result of the debate was Kept. -- JLaTondre 00:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant redirect to disambiguation page with shorter, much more plausible search term. Redirect created stemming from failed attempt to reach consensus on article move at Talk:Lost_(TV_series)#Requested_move. BlueSquadronRaven 18:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - seems to protect the Lost disambig page from being moved to Lost (disambiguation) and redirected to Lost (TV series). Seems like this has been discussed much in the past, and the consensus was that Lost should be the disambiguation page. If this was removed, it might cause another edit war of moves and redirections. -- Renesis (talk) 20:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, {{R to disambiguation page}}, tagged as such. Redirects are cheap, and this kind is useful to disambiguation link repairers and therefore not redundant. Kusma (討論) 07:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2006_November_22&oldid=1138574207"