The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Speedy close as incorrect venue. No one, including nominator, is advocating deletion in this case. According to the Deletion Policy, any user can boldly redirect to another article. If the change is disputed, an attempt should be made on the talk page to reach a consensus before restoring the redirect. Non-admin closure RoninBK _{T C} 19:05, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Intellectual honesty[edit]

Intellectual honesty (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to intellectual dishonesty. Jeffro77 (talk) 06:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per nom. I was going to close this discussion and instead open it at RfD, but apparently that process is for discussing redirects that have already taken place. Anyway, I should point out that the nominator did boldly redirect before, but another user keeps disagreeing with it. Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 07:04, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect per nom. This term is used only as an opposite to intellectual dishonesty. EALacey (talk) 10:57, 2 January 2011 (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 (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.