The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre 13:58, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Was going to be new name for channel redirected to in March 2007, but plans were subsequently cancelled without explanation or publicity. Since then, the namesake music service has been merged into Rhapsody, cancelling out any possibility that URGE TV will become the channel's name. Nate 11:47, 14 October 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. -- JLaTondre 13:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per criteria 5: cross-space redirect out of article space --PEJL 23:16, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Not really a redirect out of article space, but what the heck... no useful links or page history, might as well delete. — xDanielx ^T/_C 08:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Would you mind clarifying what "out of article space" is supposed to mean? It's a little vague. Is it a redirect from non-article space, or a redirect to non-article space, or a redirect from article space to non-article space, or something else? --PEJL 09:09, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I took it to mean "from article namespace out to some other namespace," but I guess my interpretation could be off. As I see it, redirecting from article namespace to other namespace is normally inappropriate (like sticking copyright information in the middle of a dictionary... sort of?), while non-article namespace to non-article namespace is unusual but could be more acceptable since it won't interrupt the experience of the hypothetical reader-only user (browsing, say, WP-space and user-space kinda goes hand in hand). Anyway, I think we agree on this redirect. — xDanielx ^T/_C 09:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not technically from the articlespace but the redirect is a left-over from a pagemove of a page which was clearly created in the wrong space. Rossami (talk) 01:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Maybe speedy this as housekeeping? — xDanielx ^T/_C 03:53, 15 October 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 Not a redirect. This is an article and not a redirect. Deletion of this needs to be via WP:PROD or WP:AFD. I will note that Google shows other sites (non-mirrors) with this name so while it could still be wrong, it's probably not a fake. -- JLaTondre 14:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the article is probably a fake, search a stadium in Banjul on google earth..... you see nothing
this picture is the stadium of Bakau... the national station call Independence Stadium (Bakau) --Atamari 16:39, 13 October 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 Result: Deleted by User:Soumyasch. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 01:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

There isn't anything by the name zunephone. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball to speak and discuss about rumours. Hence delete this page.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mugunth Kumar (talk • contribs) 14:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Windows Mobile and the hypothetical Zunephone have been compared before.[1] The redirect is so that we show the user a page that is most closely what a Zunephone would be if it actually existed, instead of showing them a baseless speculative page about the Zunephone. SteveSims 07:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but according to this policy, WP:NOT#CRYSTAL, rumours and speculations should not be discussed or disseminated through Wikipedia. Unless there is a press release from Microsoft that they are working on a product like this, we should not create a page/redirect page or any such rumoured articles. Remember that, An article by name iPhone was blocked from creation (Protected Title) till iPhone was officially launched as Apple fanboys, started creating a lot of OR related stuff into the speculated iPhone article.

Also note that, the link which you have marked previously is a rumour. Moreover, it says that Zunephone is *not* Windows mobile. Mugunth 08:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it isn't that important. Reffering to Windows Mobile as Zunephone is more of a joke amongst computer people than anything else. Plus, it could lead the user to think that Zunephone = Windows Mobile. SteveSims 08:46, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, Admin, please delete this redirect page. Mugunth 12:15, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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