Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 June 1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 1[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 1, 2009

Scientific advancement units[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that both redirects be deleted. Both were created on the same day by Anonalomanus--that user's only edits--and relate to nothing on either of the target pages. The only use of the term "scientific advancement units" I could find is as a joke term relating a graph that purportedly depicts historical scientific progress; see this discussion of Christianity and science. ShelfSkewed Talk 17:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I would rather think it's a rather common thing to see in Civilization-type games and other turn-based strategy games. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 11:20, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Angels and demons(film)[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible misspelling of the intended film or article. Suggest deletion.ESpublic013 (talk) 15:58, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep - I'm not sure how this would be implausible. Everything is spelled correctly, the only things of note are "and" instead of "&", "Demons" vs. "demons", and the the lack of a space between the "s" in demons and the "(" at the start of "(film)". Typing "and" and "demons" I can see being extrodinarily common redirects, while forgetting a space probably wouldn't be all that common, but IMO reasonable. The combination of all 3 of these turns this into a "weak" keep, but a keep nonetheless. The only thing I'm slightly worried about is setting a precedent to keep all redirects with a space accidentally missing, but to that I would say we should evaluate such redirects on a case-by-case basis. In this case, I think keeping is reasonable. VegaDark (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very weak keep – I agree with VegaDark. It is unlikely a search will have three misspellings in it, but it is still a useful (and semi-plausable) redirect. American Eagle (talk) 19:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC) Delete after reconsidering and BlackFalcon's view. The [non] space between "demons" and "(film)" is unnecessary. American Eagle (talk) 17:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – While either one of these deviations individually would not be implausible, I think that the combination of them makes it implausible enough so that the negative aspect of having the redirect (the precedent set for keeping all redirects with missing spaces) outweighs the positive aspect. –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 06:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • See also a similar discussion, which closed with a consensus to delete, here. –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 17:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Pedo-bear[edit]

The result of the discussion was Speedy delete NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has been deleted many times under the Pedobear name, this one is the same case. Suggest speady deletion. --Have a nice day. Running 00:19, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2009_June_1&oldid=1138576766"