Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 October 17

Unverifiable - a google search on both English and Japanese gives nothing but a person's online moniker Will ^{(Glaciers melting in the dead of night)} 19:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• The claim is based on research by 2chan denizens, back when the Nevada-tan issue was current. The relevant threads are long gone by now, so google probably won't find them, but IIRC someone closely examined some of the pictures drawn by "Nevada-tan" which had been shown on Japanese TV, and on enlarging them, found several of them faintly signed "つじなつみ" = "Natsumi Tsuji" in blue crayon. From what I recall, the TV station had tried to obscure the signatures via photoshop (hence the faintness) in order to not reveal the name, but had not been successful enough to keep a determined imageboard poster from spotting them. Cohen the Bavarian 14:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. 24 October 2006: check out http://nevada.natural20.net/nevada.html - includes a photograph, and the name in kanji ( 辻菜摘), which contains the family name Tsuji.
• Delete. That does not seem enough to establish verifiability, especially in view of the strict guidelines for biographies of living persons. I did a speedy delete under CSD G4 (re-creation of deleted material) and G10 (attack page), but I'm leaving the discussion open since this may be controversial, especially since I argued on Talk:Nevada-tan that her real name should not be mentioned for privacy reasons, even if it is verifiable. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 01:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I originally created the redirect page as a more subtle way to point out the unverified connection between Nevada-tan and "Natsumi Tsuji" than stating it blatantly in the article, because people would be unlikely to hit the Natsumi Tsuji page unless they manually typed it into their browser's address field. I'm an occasional 2chan and 4chan poster myself (though unlike many other "/b/tards" I try not to vandalise intentionally), so I'd heard my share of veiled references to Nevada-tan, including references to "Natsumi Tsuji" as a kind of inside joke. Since I often use Wikipedia to research references that are too obscure to me, I thought it would be handy to others for that purpose, and a redirect with nothing linking to it should be less controversial than putting her real name in the article (which itself arguably might be less frowned-upon more than two years after the murder). However, I can see that wiki policy is not so flexible, so I won't challenge the deletion. Cohen the Bavarian 23:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect does not make sense. It used to redirect to Serious Business Records but that article was deleted per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serious Business Records. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Because the Internet is serious business. —Malber (talk • contribs) 13:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, come on. Agriculture, mining, oil refineries, pharmaceutics, insurance, films, etc. are also serious business. So why not redirect to one of them? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Are you seriously saying that this redirect is messing up someone's search? If so, Wikipedia is in serious trouble! —Malber (talk • contribs) 19:14, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, was based on a joke in the AfD, where someone suggested it redirect to Internet as a joke. Funny, but no use keeping. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 13:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: It was fun while it lasted. John Vandenberg 14:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete and protect. Page has been deleted eight times already. -- Vary | Talk 15:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The more recent AFD for 'Serious Business Records' is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serious Business Records (2nd nomination). -- Vary | Talk 15:49, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Transwiki to BJAODN Internet only says Cyberslacking is serious business. "Cyberslacking has become a serious drain on corporate resources". Why BJAODN, see: [1]. Anomo 17:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC) Also see [2] Anomo 02:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]