The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 00:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

I don't think it's common for people to type "metal users" when they are looking for people who listen to heavy metal music. ~Iceshark7 (talk) 17:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I can't imagine anyone typing "metal users" looking for people who listen to heavy metal. When I see it, I think of people who use metals for something. Or people made of metal. The page also doesn't show that it's a Wikipedia category in its title. Bart133 ^{(t) (c)} 20:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and Bart133. Also, the redirect title seems to me to be more of an article category title than a user category title. – Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. VegaDark (talk) 04:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 01:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

An unneeded cross-namespace redirect to a .js page that is unused, unneeded (anyone who can install javascript can set their search preferences outside of mainspace), and potentially quite harmful - if this page were referenced in user javascript, editing it could cause Extremely Bad Things to happen. It should be deleted before said Bad Things come to pass. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This page, if referenced in user scripts, could be used by vandals. Let's keep that from happenning. Bart133 ^{(t) (c)} 17:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was Re-target to Raising the Bar. There are several articles with that title including a new TV series. Raising the Bar has been changed to a disambig page and this redirect re-targeted to it. Higher standards has been broken out as a separate debate (see below). -- JLaTondre 02:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found this on Prod with the reason: "This redirect isn't linked by any pages and it gives a POV slant to the page it links to. The original page was deleted through AfD". Seems questionable to me as well. The same applies to

• Higher standards → Outcome-based education

Tikiwont (talk) 13:05, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support the deletion. definite POV.DGG (talk) 07:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Half-Life 2: Raising the Bar - I believe this is the closest match for this redirect, and many people using this redirect may very well mean this article. ~Iceshark7 (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 01:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

This was originally included in the Raising the bar debate above, but has been broken out separately as the closing rationale for that one does not apply to this one. This was prod'd by WhatamIdoing with a rationale of This redirect page isn't used by any articles and introduces a POV slant onto the subject. Tikiwont converted the prod to a RFD. -- JLaTondre 02:49, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was Deleted. The phrase is used mainly in Wikipedia for Muhammad so there didn't seem to be a disambig alternative. If someone finds other uses, feel free to create the disambig. Given that a search will find Muhammad easily, a red link seems appropriate to encourage the creation of an encyclopedic article regarding the use of the term in multiple religions. -- JLaTondre (talk) 03:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Currently redirects to Muhammad, which seems a little POV-y, since it could just as easily be attributed to Jesus and other religious figures. Of course, I could be missing something— this could be a common way of referring to Muhammad, so if anyone else knows, definitely speak up. slakr^\ talk / 12:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Clarify: It's a fairly common way to refer to Muhammad. It comes from the Shahadah, which is sort of the Muslims' version of the Apostles' Creed, except shorter. Currently, Wikipedia's Shahadah article translates it as "I testify that there is no god (ilah) but God (Allah), and I testify that Muhammad is the messenger of God," but another common way to translate it is " ... Muhammad is His Messenger." Indeed, the "His Messenger" version is the one that appears in the Muhammad article and in the top of the Muslim article right now. Having said all that, though, I'm not sure whether this needs a redirect, since (1) if you do a search for 'his messenger', Muhammad is already the first article to come up, and (2) there are good arguments for redirecting to Shahadah, or perhaps to some other religion such as Christianity that also uses the phrase "his messenger", so I withhold from voting. --M@rēino 15:50, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Change to disambig page, or stub article. Many Abrahamic religions use it to refer to a specific prophet. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 01:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

Nothing links to this redirect, and it is very unlikely that anyone would type in TIME in all capital letters and use "mag" instead of "magazine" and forget to use parentheses all at the same time. 69.142.108.40 (talk) 11:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete like you said no one is likely to do all three at the same time Hatmatbbat10Talk to me 21:12, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 01:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

I am nominating this for User:Freewayguy, who wrote at TfD: Delete it. Nobody ever hear of "mplex", most people does'nt even know what it means. –Pomte 10:59, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 01:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

User has left WP. Cross-namespace redirect not useful for anything. meshach (talk) 04:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Nothing links there. Also, the page name has 55 characters. United States has 13 characters, and would take roughly 1/5 as long to type. How does this redirect improve Wikipedia? It doesn't. Bart133 ^{(t) (c)} 17:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• i was the one who made initialyl the made the made the redirect because it hought it was necessary, but the arugments made here are compelling and i have no objections to it being deleted. Smith Jones (talk) 21:19, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, no reasonable use for this redirect. Terraxos (talk) 02:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was nomination withdrawn. Pegasus «C¦T» 15:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see what purpose this redirect. It seems to be a special character that browsers cannot render. meshach (talk) 04:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Withdrawing, see discussion. meshach (talk) 15:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had ﷴ redirect to Muhammad, as ﷴ is one of the two ways in Unicode to create the special Arabic character that means "Muhammad." (The other is محمد.) I believe that it qualifies under Wikipedia:RFD#KEEP #3: "They aid searches on certain terms." Many people are curious about the Arabic characters in Unicode, and I believe that this redirect helps by directing them to the article about that character's subject. The redirect from محمد is nice but not sufficient, as some readers might not realize that محمد and ﷴ are the same thing. --M@rēino 15:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I see. Thanks for the info Mareino. I withdraw this deletion request. meshach (talk) 15:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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