The result of the debate was WP:CSD#G3. John Reaves (talk) 01:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term, especially since we use disambiguation 'round these parts... -- Scientizzle 22:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Created as a result of a pointless page move. --- RockMFR 22:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy-delete as an overlooked cleanup of minor pagemove vandalism. Rossami (talk) 23:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was keep. John Reaves (talk) 09:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an unlikely search term for the English wikipedia. 204.50.66.66 16:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirects do far more than merely support the search engine. Those characters are prominently displayed in the first line of the destination article and on the poster's image. Why is that an inappropriate redirect? Rossami (talk) 23:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Wikipedia is huge in China. bd2412 T 00:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Rossami. Characters appears in the article. Redirects are cheap and there is a logical reason to think this one will help some users. A Chineese speaking contributor may have difficulty working out the translation- show title translation are often approximate or very different. A redirect seems to address this problem well and causes no harm. WjBscribe 17:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete. John Reaves (talk) 02:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The standard prefix for category shortcuts is "CAT" (note that CAT:QT already exists). This shortcut has no incoming links and was recently created. --- RockMFR 00:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, not needed given standard shortcut's existence. John Reaves (talk) 00:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per John. CAT works just fine. Patstuart^talk·edits 21:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as non–standard. mattbr 17:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, undesirable cross-namespace redirect – Qxz 20:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was relisted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 March 13#Koh Tral → Phú Quốc. See my comments there. WjBscribe 23:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Koh Tral is a Cambodian Island and shouldn't be redirected to Phú Quốc which is a Vietnamese Island Hardworking 04:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• So fix it. That doesn't require deletion. Rossami (talk) 23:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • And now I see that an anon editor has already made a start. Rossami (talk) 23:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Koh Tral is the Cambodian name for the island now known as Phu Quoc and currently administered by Vietnam. It doesn't appear that the Cambodian government is pursuing claims to the island. DHN 20:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was deleted by Lectonar as only content was ((db-author)). WjBscribe 16:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable redirect. This was an article about a non-notable student who went to the high school. Once it was tagged for deletion, they decided to replace the page with a redirect. Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 07:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Student contributes to the most popular nationally-read column on impromptu speaking. Redirect makes sense and is helpful to those searching for information on the author. Keep.

• Speedy delete as vandalism. John Reaves (talk) 08:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was no consensus leaning toward keep. John Reaves (talk) 02:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For all of the following RFD2s, see the note after "Watt (disambig)" below. JohnI 19:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANC (disambig) → ANC, page ANC (disambiguation) also exists.

A properly named DAB page exists. No history before redirect created. JohnI 18:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brewster (disambig) → Brewster, page Brewster (disambiguation) also exists.

A properly named DAB page exists. All history was copied to new page. JohnI 18:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Krka (disambig) → Krka, page Krka (disambiguation) also exists.

A properly named DAB page exists. All history was copied to new page. JohnI 18:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Matte (disambig) → Matte, page Matte (disambiguation) also exists.

A properly named DAB page exists. No history before redirect created. JohnI 18:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maude (disambig) → Maude, page Maude (disambiguation) also exists.

A properly named DAB page exists. History was copied to new page. JohnI 18:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rebate (disambig) → Market dominance (#redirect to non-DAB page), page Rebate (disambiguation) also exists.

A properly named DAB page (Rebate) exists. No history before redirects created. JohnI 18:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Satsuma (disambig) → Satsuma, page Satsuma (disambiguation) also exists.

A properly named DAB page exists. No history before redirects created. JohnI 18:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Watt (disambig) → Watt (surname), page Watt (disambiguation) also exists.

A properly named DAB page exists. No history before redirects created. JohnI 18:42, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For "ANC (disambig)" through "Watt (disambig)" listed above,
see: Reference to previous discussion about similiar RFD2s. JohnI 19:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

American (disamb) → American

Essentially the same issue. --Russ (talk) 19:22, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all. No reason has been offered to justify deletion. None of them conflict with any existing or proposed title. Deleting a redirect does not save any system resources. In fact, the act of deletion consumes more than just leaving them alone. This is not a "bad precedent", it is an evolutionary improvement over what used to be the preferred practice.
  Note: History does exist for ANC, Satsuma and Watt, it was merely moved when the page was moved. Rossami (talk) 23:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all Unnecessary, and a bad precedent (let's not give out excuses to make redirects for partial words). -- Scientizzle 22:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess I'm still green enough to know that the past naming conventions included "(disambig)". Keep all for the reasons listed here, below, and on User talk:JohnI. -- Scientizzle 17:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• How odd - we have a policy in favor of redirecting [[Foo (disambiguation)]] to [[Foo]] (the latter being a disambiguation page) because it fits in with our scheme of naming pages such as John Roberts (disambiguation) where the regular page is unavailable, but we have no such policy for pages including the abbreviation, (disambig). Delete all. bd2412 T 00:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
• Not sure if I get a vote on this, as I made the nomination or there may be other voting criteria. Anyway, I'll add to my case for deletion.
  1. I think having 2 pages called DAB, with different spellings, is confusing. To get to the "foo (disambiguation)" page is easy by going to "foo" first, and clicking on the "foo (disambiguation)" link which should be there.
  2. I did a google search which gave 12,800 results for disambiguation, and 173 for disambig. Most of the 173 are in the "Category:" namespace. These search numbers are not accurate, but do give an indication of the relative numbers.
  3. See WP:DAB#Page naming conventions for information about the naming conventions. Although it doesn't explicitly state that other abbreviations for DAB page names redirecting to an article are unacceptable, I think it is implied. I have added links above to the other "(disambiguation)" page which redirects to main article.
  Regards, JohnI 02:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all - see reasons at previous discussion, including arguments against the above. ··gracefool |☺ 05:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• A reminder: [[Foo (disambig)]] used to be our preferred naming convention for disambiguation pages. Then for a longish while we allowed both (disambiguation) and (disambig) to run in parallel. Now we have a preference for the long version. Conventions can change. That does not mean that the old versions were created with malicious intent or even that they were inappropriate at the time. These redirects preserve the history. Rossami (talk)
• I'd like to hear more on 2 issues mentioned by Rossami:
  1. Consuming or Saving system resources: To what resources are you referring?
  2. Preserving the history: To what history are you referring?
  Also, thanks for the info about the the old DAB pages. Regards, JohnI 07:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Answered on your userpage. (Apologies for my wordiness.) Rossami (talk) 15:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment As an editor of the page Watt (disambig), I have no strong feelings either way (keep or delete), but if it's going to be kept, I'd prefer that it point to Watt (disambiguation), as I originally set it up to do, rather than Watt (surname), as it currently does. - dcljr (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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