Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 April 9

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:3CC-cleanup → Template:Disambig-cleanup

• Template:4CC-cleanup → Template:Disambig-cleanup

Delete. These redirects date back to when templates named {{2CC}}, {{3CC}}, {{4CC}} existed as redirects to {{Disambig}}. Those have long since been deleted, but the -cleanup variants remain for no particular reason. All are unused. R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:43, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per R'n'B. Robofish (talk) 22:17, 11 April 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. The keep recommendation is misplaced (believe it was meant for the next debate) as this was not the name of the original article. History shows it was created as a redirect. -- JLaTondre (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Target article no longer mentions skiing video games and it is unlikely "Snowboarding and skiing video games" would be an article search term. Ost (talk) 13:49, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom - implausible search term, no history worth preserving. Robofish (talk) 22:17, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• delete as the target only covers snowboarding and not skiing. PaulJones (talk) 11:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - location of original article before move. Harmless and could be linked externally --Rumping (talk) 21:40, 16 April 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 --Aervanath (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely someone will search for exact phrase "Snowboarding computer and video games." Target page would be found in search and is more in line with video game naming conventions. Ost (talk) 13:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom - implausible search term, no history worth preserving. Robofish (talk) 22:16, 11 April 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. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 02:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Crane was moved to the DJ/actor name without discussion and per a requested move has been moved back. No edit history needing preservation, not a remotely logical search term. Otto4711 (talk) 07:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just give me a day to fix all the links to the recently moved article. ike9898 (talk) 14:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly done. The remaining links to this page are mostly technical links, such as the one from this very page, and i don't think I should change them (although I'm not sure about that). ike9898 (talk) 14:27, 9 April 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 keep--Aervanath (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGa^talk 20:03, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep likely misinterpretation of some of the entries. 76.66.193.69 (talk) 04:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aervanath (talk) 06:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• keep as it is an alternative formatting of the target term. PaulJones (talk) 07:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A different formatting of the target article, entirely plausible. tempodivalse [☎] 00:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Is it really likely that someone will type the subscript-one in the search box, though? If so, I've no problem with keeping it. --JaGa^talk 22:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment someone could copy-paste it into the searchbox. 70.29.213.241 (talk) 05:01, 17 April 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 retarget to Braille#Other_symbols--Aervanath (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. CSD declined and it is not a certain redirect. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 02:18, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This Unicode character is the Braille symbol indicating the next letter is capitalized, and thus this is a plausible redirect. Would not object to a retarget to Braille. --Allen3 ^talk 10:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Braille#Other_symbols --Rumping (talk) 21:36, 16 April 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 no consensus.--Aervanath (talk) 16:20, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded, we don't have to redirect every person's name put together. No incoming links. TheAE talk/sign 00:54, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – implausible search target with no useful incoming links or edit history worth preserving. If anyone does search for "ChristianChavez", the search function will produce a prominent notice stating: "Did you mean: Christian chavez", and clicking on the link will bring up the actual article as the first result. –Black Falcon ^(Talk) 01:07, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. As pointed out many times before, redirects do not have to have incoming links. Also to me it looks like a likely one as many people do not know how to add an accent and often a space is missed in typing. Simply south (talk) 22:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• keep as per Simply South. PaulJones (talk) 08:11, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, there are two typos in this, which makes it implausible. If by some accident that this does happen, the search function will do the trick as BlackFalcon pointed out. Tavix |  Talk  16:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Black Falcon (talk · contribs). Implausible spelling, unlikely search term, the "did you mean" line in the search results should suffice here. tempodivalse [☎] 17:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - harmless and unlikely to mean anything else --Rumping (talk) 21:37, 16 April 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 retarget to The Fish-Slapping Dance.--Aervanath (talk) 16:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion (or create an article on it). Trout slapping as i seem to understand seems to be a humourous way of telling people off on the computer for doing something bad, but not bad. I do notr see what it has to do with a sexual act. Simply south (talk) 15:47, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - He's right, that redirect is way off base. I don't think the trout slap needs its own article, but it definitely should not be linked to the other thing. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:06, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Pointing it to The Fish-Slapping Dance might help readers, given the existence of this. Uncle G (talk) 23:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to The Fish-Slapping Dance, optional hatnote to WP:TROUT.--Lenticel ^(talk) 11:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to the pithy khaki Fliegen Zirkus article. 70.29.213.241 (talk) 05:03, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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