Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 January 20

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 20

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 20, 2009

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 03:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also:

Wordy search terms for alphabet articles, unlikely to be used. Richard0612 21:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

NnNN

[edit]
The result of the discussion was withdrawn - Retargeted to NNN (I swear that article wasn't there when I nominated this...) Richard0612 17:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term/link target, we could have hundreds of such redirects if this pattern was continued (Aaa, aAa, etc.) Richard0612 21:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Various 'backwards foo' redirects → Various alphabet articles

[edit]

The result of the discussion was delete all--Aervanath (talk) 03:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All are unlikely search terms or link targets. Richard0612 20:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Not to mention most of those are just plain wrong. Q doesn't look at all like P backwards, B and D are also entirely different backwards. Who thought of this? 194.144.87.74 (talk) 01:05, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, the creator has a point when the letters in question are in lower case ("b" vs. "d", "p" vs. "q"), but this seems more like trivia rather than using the similarities as search items. Assuming good faith, this could be the result of a few observations on the part of someone whose primary language does not involve Roman lettering or a discussion with someone who is learning the alphabet... but then again, this is pure speculation. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 19:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I see no possible use for these redirects. Why would someone be searching for 'backwards d' in the first place? Terraxos (talk) 01:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

delete, this is a leftover from an undiscussed move, see Talk:2006_Chávez_speech_at_the_United_Nations#Article's_title. JRSP (talk) 16:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bunch of redirect contestants to individual cycles of America's Next Top Model

[edit]
The result of the discussion was withdrawn--Aervanath (talk) 09:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tessa CarlsonAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 1
Ebony HaithAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 1
Giselle SamsonAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 1
Kesse WallaceAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 1
Robin ManningAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 1
Anna BradfieldAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Bethany HarrisonAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Heather BlumbergAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Jenascia ChakosAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Xiomara FransAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Catie AndersonAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Sara Racey-TabriziAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Camille McDonaldAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
April WilknerAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Shandi SullivanAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 2
Magdalena RivasAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Julie TitusAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Kristi GrommetAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Jennipher FrostAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Kelle JacobAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Cassie GrishamAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Norelle Van HerkAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Leah DarrowAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Nicole BorudAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Ann MarkleyAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 3
Brandy RusherAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Noelle StaggersAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Tatiana DanteAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Tiffany RichardsonAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Brita PetersonsAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Sarah DanklemanAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Lluvy GomezAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Christina MurphyAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Brittany BrowerAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Keenyah HillAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 4
Sarah Rhoades (ANTM)America's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Coryn WoitelAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Ashley BlackAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Ebony TaylorAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Cassandra WhiteheadAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Sarah RhoadesAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Diane HernándezAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Kyle KavanaghAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Jayla RubinelliAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 5
Kathy HoxitAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Wendy WiltzAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Kari SchmidtAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Furonda BrasfieldAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Gina ChoeAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6

Mollie Sue Steenis-GondiAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Leslie ManciaAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Brooke StarichaAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Nnenna AgbaAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Sara AlbertAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Jade ColeAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 6
Jaeda YoungAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 7
Christian EvansAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 7
Monique CalhounAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 7
Monique BabblesworthAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 7
Amanda BabinAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 7
Alexandra Jayne StewartAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 7
AJ StewartAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 7
Michelle BabinAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 7
Jael straussAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Cassandra WatsonAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Felicia ProvostAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Diana ZalewskiAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Sarah VonderHaarAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Jael StraussAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Whitney CunninghamAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Dionne WaltersAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Kathleen DuJourAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 8
Mila BouzinovaAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 9
Kimberly LeemansAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 9
Victoria MarshmanAmerica's Next Top Model
Ebony MorganAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 9
Sarah HartshorneAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 9
Ambreal WilliamsAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 9
Jenah DoucetteAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 9
Marvita WashingtonAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 10
Kimberly RydzewskiAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 10
Atalya SlaterAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 10
Allison KuehnAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 10
Amis JenkinsAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 10
Aimee WrightAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 10
Stacy Ann FequiereAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 10
Lauren UtterAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 10
Brittney "ShaRaun" BrownAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Sheena SatanaAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
ShaRaun BrownAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Nikeysha ClarkeAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Brittany RubalcabaAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Hannah WhiteAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Clark GilmerAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Lauren Brie HardingAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Joslyn PennywellAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Sheena SakaiAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11
Marjorie ConradAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 11

Delete all. With the exception of Rebecca Epley, Michelle Deighton, Nik Pace, Megan Morris, Megg Morales, Anchal Joseph, Samantha Francis, Brittany Hatch, Lisa Jackson, Bianca Golden, Claire Unabia and Katarzyna Dolinska. Non-notable contestants recreated pages per previous AFDs (Cycles 1-7). ApprenticeFan (talk) 15:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Close then break the discussion into to smaller, more manageable chunks. This is well too large to be considered en masse as it will involve determinations of redirects to dozens of individuals. Some of these people may well creep by WP:BIO, but in this lot, one cannot tell at a glance. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 16:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply it can not close this discussion. These people are failing to meet notability requirements. ApprenticeFan (talk) 16:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Whilst these people are clearly not notable enough for their own article (and AfD was correct to delete them), redirects are cheap and the season articles they direct to all mention the people by name. These are entirely plausible search terms and the redirects make them much easier to find. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 17:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per Ryan Postlethwaite. Not being notable would be a reason for deleting an article, but since when has it been a reason to delete a redirect? Seems like it's more of a reason to create a redirect.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the following, anyway, because of previous AFD consensus. Consensus was "delete" not "redirect". There generally seems to be a strong consensus to delete when these are listed individually at AfD:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tessa Carlson - note that this entry covers Ebony Haith, Nicole Panattoni, Giselle Samson, Heather Blumberg, Jenascia Chakos, Anna Bradfield, Bethany Harrison, Xiomara Frans, Nicole Borud, and Tessa Carlson
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kesse Wallace
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catie Anderson
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sara Racey-Tabrizi
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/April Wilkner
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shandi Sullivan (2nd nomination)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norelle Van Herk
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ann Markley
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiffany Richardson
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brita Petersons
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Dankleman
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lluvy Gomez
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christina Murphy
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brittany Brower (2nd nomination)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keenyah Hill
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley Black
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ebony Taylor
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cassandra Whitehead (3rd nomination)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diane Hernández

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyle Kavanaugh
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jayla Rubinelli
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kathy Hoxit
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendy Wiltz
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kari Schmidt
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Furonda Brasfield
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mollie Sue Steenis-Gondi
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brooke Staricha
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nnenna Agba (3rd nomination)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sara Albert (2nd nomination)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jade Cole
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AJ Stewart
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jael Strauss (2nd nomination)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah VonderHaar (2nd nomination)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dionne Walters
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jenah Doucette
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacy Ann Fequiere
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joslyn Pennywell (2nd nomination) - note this entry covers Sheena Sakai and Joslyn Pennywell

As for the rest, many of them were changed to redirects because of this trainwreck AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caridee English, and never had their own AfDs, but I still say delete them, because there seems to be a generally strong consensus to delete when each contestant has her own AfD. I also think the ones that were just created as redirects should be (you guessed it) deleted. I just don't think these are likely search terms. Dawn Bard (talk) 20:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Of course they're plausible search terms - if someone has an interest in a particular participant they'll search for them rather than the program itself. As it happens, the whole reason why I created these redirects was because when I search for one of them, nothing came up from WP. At that point, I didn't even know about individual seasons articles. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 21:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment retargeted the following:
Melrose BikerstaffMel Rose
Victoria MarshmanAmerica's Next Top Model, Cycle 9
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The result of the discussion was Keep. (non-admin closure) Mastrchf (t/c) 23:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged for R3 but exists since 2006 and thus fails R3 but has no use as a search term. SoWhy 12:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There are two "Renee Roberts". One is an actor and is at Renee Roberts and the other is a fictional character at Renee Roberts (Coronation Street). There's no point for this redirect. Dismas|(talk) 13:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The result of the discussion was CSD G6 by User:Jeffro77 (non admin close) Jeffro77 (talk) 13:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect is in the way of the correct capitalization of the book as published Jeffro77 (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The contentious capitalization is with the word 'That', which is not a preposition. The correct article name should be 'The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life', and this redirect is in the way of that correct title. The intended new title (with 'To') is to redirect the incorrect capitalization to the correct article once this redirect is out of the way..--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You can tag it with a G6 then if it's in the way. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshellsOtter chirpsHELP) 13:19, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The result of the discussion was Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was a misspelling that only occurred on the BBC Red Button page, but I fixed it there. Is this a common misspelling of Multi-platform or should it be deleted? Cheezycrust (talk) 10:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the discussion was CSD G3 by User:Orangemike (non admin close) B.Wind (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Makes no sense; delete or redirect to Canada. NJGW (talk) 04:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nonsense.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 07:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
The result of the discussion was snowball keep. There is no way that there will be consensus to delete this redirect. SoWhy 15:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Wikipedia:Dick violates policy. WP:CIVIL prohibits name calling and profanity (WP:PROFANE) such as this. WP:NPA prohibits personal attacks such as this. WP:TONE calls for material suitable for an encyclopedia. WP:NOTCENSORED allows objectionable material ONLY when it is related to the content of the article: it is not needed and is not relavent. It is a Shock Site which does not belong in Wikipedia. Please delete. Rlsheehan (talk) 02:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this is a serious nomination, but just in case, let's examine your arguments... you want the redirect deleted on WP:CIVILITY grounds? The meta article about not being a dick promotes civility (whether it does so effectively is another question) and explicitly discourages "name calling". WP:NPA? IEnjoining the editorial community not to behave like "dicks" is far from a personal attack. It's a completely impersonal plea/reminder. WP:TONE and WP:NOTCENSORED are policies that primarily govern article space and don't really apply here. If you find the essay on meta to be excessively coarse, go over to meta and nominate its deletion or, better yet, write a more family-friendly version expressing the same sentiments.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 07:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep this redirect is not intended to be an insult. It has legitimate usage as redirect to the meta page and as the sentence "don't be a dick", which is a legit comment when someone is, well, behaving like a dick. Also, as The Fat Man says, it links to an essaypromoting civility. --Enric Naval (talk) 09:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, since this is a RfD I'm going to assume the objection is towards WP:DICK itself, not Meta:Don't be a dick. I can only surmise that you don't like the redirect name. That doesn't make it any more of an attack than WP:FUCK or WP:ASS. If on the other hand the redirect was called John Q. Doe is a dick and redirected to Penis - you would have a point. Remember, sticks and stones can break my bones but words will hurt forever. Or something. Usrnme h8er (talk) 10:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As far as I can see, this is an established soft redirect which points people towards some good advice. I don't see why there should be a problem – unless someone uses the link in a manner designed to provoke, but that's more an issue of individual editor conduct than anything inherently wrong with the redirect. – The Parting Glass 10:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep soft redirect with plenty of history behind it, its use, and the essay/guideline that used to be there. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 16:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep so long as the essay exists (and it's not likely to be deleted). There's a substantial history behind this redirect, and deleting this will not stop people from linking to the essay, nor even from using a piped link to do so. Gavia immer (talk) 18:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is one of the basic guidelines of Wikipedia (and, to be honest, of life). There's a lot of history here. None of the nom's concerns are even true (it's certainly not a "shock site"). In addition, the concern seems to be not about the redirect, but the page (which I'm not sure we at Wikipedia have any control over anymore)...I don't see anything wrong with the redirect itself. --UsaSatsui (talk) 14:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The result of the discussion was Delete as per VFD and protection we wouldn't even have this redirect with the right spelling. Tikiwont (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No need to give any legitimacy to this marginally amusing 4chan-style vulgarism (which is misspelled, in any case). Note that the correctly spelled Surprise sex redirect has been deleted many times. --The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 07:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No encyclopedic use for a non-notable joke. Just one more non-notable euphemism for rape, see [1]. Apart from that, no relevant hits on google scholar or google books, all the hits are false positives like "This should not come as a surprise - sex here is not" or "To our surprise sex did not seem to moderate the effects of including". --Enric Naval (talk) 09:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The result of the discussion was CSD G8 by User:Sgeureka (non admin close) B.Wind (talk) 04:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I nominate this for deletion due to a redirect to a non-existing article, and nothing to redirect it to. Demortes (talk) 18:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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