Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 January 6

Misleading redirect. "Spots" means many things, but cannabis smoking/knife is hardly the most prominent. See [1] for original basis for redirect. MikeHobday (talk) 22:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest redirecting it to Spot. In fact, I've been bold and done just that. The previous redirect was simply the result of an AfD in which I only participated as the closer of the AfD. This doesn't even need to be here. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 22:32, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should lead to a disambiguation page or Otaku, until someone (like me) makes a full article... I would do it myself, but there is full protection... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.63.236 (talk • contribs)

• Delete No reliable sources are found to talk about the origins or primary meaning of weeaboo. Neither The Perry Bible Fellowship nor otaku is explanatory; the former may be the origin of the term, but the latter has been responsible for its spread in usage. –Pomte 07:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - an admin saw merit in the redirect enough to create it and remove it from Protected Titles. Will ^(talk) 22:20, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Looking at the deleted history, the page has been alternately redirecting to three targets:
  • The Perry Bible Fellowship, which seems to be the origin of the word; see this comic;
  • Japanophile; and
  • Wapanese, a deleted article which I am going to temporarily restore for consideration (the relevant revision is here).
• That said, Wikipedia is not Urban Dictionary, so the latter two targets are probably out of question, and I don't think it's necessary to redirect the name of one comic to The Perry Bible Fellowship if the word is not even discussed in the article. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 09:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or add definition to article. --Masamage ♫ 15:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and have someone -an 'expert'- expand upon the phenom. After all, we have an article on Wiggers (and btw, the pic of Ali G shouldn't be there since the character's a Chav). I know the 'wigger' phenom is way bigger but IMHO, weebs still merit exploring. --Piepie (talk) 16:06, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the risk of getting V& I'll profess to be an 'expert' here and restate that there is no sauce to expand with. –Pomte 05:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please note that this is a debate about the redirect Weeaboo, not the deleted article Wapanese. (If the latter article is to be restored, the best place to go is deletion review). - Mike Rosoft (talk) 10:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I find this redirect very confusing, because I feel like the more logical redirect would be to another footballer, Jordon Mutch. Neither footballer seems to be much more important than the other, both are young and haven't had much senior team experience at any level. Perhaps make the page into a disambig to differentiate? Or maybe just delete entirely to avoid confusion matt91486 (talk) 19:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Jordon Mutch. Agreed - this is misleading as it stands. Jordan is closer to Jordon than Mutch is to Murch. MSGJ (talk) 16:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I recommend adding dablinks at the top of each of these pages to the other as well. MSGJ (talk) 16:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Innapropiate redir, and unlikely search term. David Pro (talk) 18:06, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete doesn't seem to have anything official to do with Aerosmith, and seems to just be a common username/avatar/handle on the Internet. Koweja (talk) 22:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not a useful redirect (oh, and read it backwards) --UsaSatsui (talk) 08:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Searching is not that difficult Victuallers (talk) 23:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Just search for it spelling the right direction. --M4gnum0n (talk) 14:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Snowball no jokes in the mainspace. --Thinboy00 @244, i.e. 04:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Each game in the Fatal Fury series should have its own article. David Pro (talk) 18:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Create article. This also must be done with the following pages that redirect to Fatal Fury:

• Fatal Fury 3: Road to the Final Victory → Fatal Fury
  • Real Bout Fatal Fury → Fatal Fury
  • Real Bout Fatal Fury Special → Fatal Fury
  • Fatal Fury Special → Fatal Fury
  • Fatal Fury: Wild Ambition → Fatal Fury
  • Real Bout Fatal Fury 2: The Newcomers → Fatal Fury
  • Fatal Fury: 1st Contact → Fatal Fury

David Pro (talk) 19:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Just do it. No need to discuss the deletion of these redirects if you want to make an article about the games. Just create the articles. --UsaSatsui (talk) 08:38, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Just do it. Thats true. But doesnt mean we believe all these games are notable. That is for you to demonstrate Victuallers (talk) 23:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most of them probably are. --UsaSatsui (talk) 01:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]