This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 21, 2013
Fuckedbook
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
I'm listing this here on behalf of
User:Cenedlaetholwr Cymreig who nominated it for speedy deletion. It doesn't qualify, but their concern was: "It is just a background on how got my name.""it is an attack redirect that is also implausible" I can't see this term having been used anywhere so I would suggest delete too.
SmartSE (
talk)
19:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)reply
Umm...actually what I said in the CSD notice was that it was an attack redirect that was also implausible. I don't know where you got the "how I got my name" thing from. Oh well, in any case, Delete per nom. --FreeWales Now!what did I screw up?01:19, 22 February 2013 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Documentary television series
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Originally requested by an editor at
24.0.133.234: "If you look in the history it was changed because of confusion with "Film". This re-direct makes no sense to me but another editor is doing quite a lot of linking to it via television infobox. I do not know how to fix this or send it to an appropriate page. Any help would be appreciated."
Steel1943 (
talk)
16:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
RR Coronae Borealis
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was new article started (non-admin closure). Although I did participate in this RfD, since a new article was started this page is no longer appropriate for RfD, and should be taken to AfD instead if people do not think that it is notable.
StringTheory11 (
t •
c)
19:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)reply
Addendum: Opinions on whether RR CrB deserves an article of its own? The actual RR CrB seems to be borderline notable, so I'm interested in others' opinions.
StringTheory11 (
t •
c)
05:40, 27 February 2013 (UTC)reply
There is now a stub article for the real RR CrB (not me!). This star is only really notable on account of being referenced as one of the best known examples of an SRB variable star and so being linked from another article in Wikipedia. I can find other examples for this, there are several naked eye stars that already have articles.
Lithopsian (
talk)
14:09, 27 February 2013 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Wikipedia:NOTCENTER
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Nephite Church of Christ
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
I'm undecided. Is it satiric? That's some
Poe's law stuff there. I expected to be voting for deletion, and checked the history, expecting it was created by a
WP:SPA. But its creator,
ARTEST4ECHO is a semi-retired member of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement. Doesn't seem like the most likely person to promote a satirical blog like that. Searching the phrase on Google, it does appear to have been some sort of Mormon sect. The topic as a whole likely doesn't meet
WP:GNG, though redirects don't need to. At this point, I was leaning keep. But you're right, it isn't mentioned on the target page, so we fundamentally don't have anything to say about this group. I'm on the fence. --
BDD (
talk)
17:27, 21 February 2013 (UTC)reply
Delete, if it's not mentioned at the target it has no informative value and merely serves to waste time and disappoint anyone using it.
Siuenti (
talk)
19:12, 21 February 2013 (UTC)reply
My comment above had nothing to do with a current sect, but with a ancient sect described in the book of Nephi. No doubt in my mind that no current sect deserve an article or redirect, but the ancient sect seems notable to me.
Ego White Tray (
talk)
04:06, 1 March 2013 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
The New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. 14:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Seems like an implausible redirect. It's supposed to mean "Pocket Monsters Emerald Challenge!! Battle Frontier" as you can see on the redirect's history.
67.161.16.188 (
talk)
02:12, 21 February 2013 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.