The result of the discussion was Retarget to the respective dab page for Radio Active. I'll also pick up on the suggestion to make Radio Active itself the dab page by moving Radio Active (disambiguation) there. Tikiwont (talk) 08:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No Clear path to Radio Active (disambiguation), suggest it be changed to that, possible with additional reference on the disambig to Radioactive decay Scatterkeir (talk) 15:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Radio Active (disambiguation) as a "See also" section has just been added to the dab page. While it can be interpreted as a typographical error in searching for Radioactive (itself a redirect to Radioactive decay), variants due to capitalisation (of lack thereof) are generally accepted as valid redirects for the search item. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 17:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Radio Active (disambiguation) as there is no way of knowing which meaning the user was looking for. PaulJones (talk) 13:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retargeted per above. B.Wind (talk) 03:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as is, there is a hatnote on radioactive decay to the dab page. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 06:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any reasons for not having the redirect go to the dab page directly? Note that there is a difference between "Radioactive" and "Radio Active". 147.70.242.54 (talk) 14:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's how I interpret primary meaning. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 23:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Radio Active (disambiguation), although that page itself should really be at Radio Active in my view. Terraxos (talk) 01:24, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the discussion was retarget to List of James Bond henchmen in GoldenEye#Boris Grishenko--Aervanath (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense redir. David Pro (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC) David Pro (talk) 13:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of James Bond henchmen in GoldenEye#Boris Grishenko, as Grishenko uses "I am invincible" as his catchphrase in the James Bond film Goldeneye (and is stated as such in the character's entry in the proposed target). The sentence is not mentioned at all in the article about the film. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 17:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above. Terraxos (talk) 01:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the discussion was delete--Aervanath (talk) 16:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: relic of deleted/merged article, unlikely search term. (this is one which got away) Ohconfucius (talk) 07:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as unlikely term. PaulJones (talk) 13:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Violation of WP:NAME as it implies the redirect to be a subpage of its target. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 18:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the discussion was delete--Aervanath (talk) 16:44, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The show never had an episode called Big (comma) Bad Rubber Piggy, but they did have one called Bad (no comma) Bad Rubber Piggy. This seems a little too far off to be a valid search term. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 04:37, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as plausible typo. As TPH has just pointed out, the difference between the name of this redirect and the name of the episode is exactly one comma. B.Wind (talk) 06:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC) Struck as I have clearly misread the name of the redirect. B.Wind (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Look again. The episode is BAD Bad Rubber Piggy, not BIG Bad. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 13:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Yep, too far afield - the comma is not the problem: the first word is. Delete per TPH. It should be noted that a Google search for "Big Bad Rubber Piggy" (in quotes) yielded 222 hits, including from Yahoo Answers Indonesia[1]; so B.Wind is not alone, it seems. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 17:52, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as the destination has the correct name, but a user could easily look for Big Bad rather than Bad Bad. PaulJones (talk) 13:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the incorrect word and comma use makes this too implausible a search term. Terraxos (talk) 01:22, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the discussion was delete. krimpet✽ 18:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (and borderline attack page speedy): Same rationale as that below: Looney bin is an extremely offensive term for phychiatric hospital. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - extremely unlikely search term due to its sheer length. B.Wind (talk) 06:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as both unlikely search term and derogatory. --Eivind (t) 14:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the discussion was snowball keep.--Aervanath (talk) 09:42, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (and borderline attack page speedy): Looney bin is an extremely offensive term for phychiatric hospital. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:22, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Yes, but is it also one that a reader might reasonably input when seeking psychiatric hospital? Even as the term has been cast out of contemporary parlance (and finely so), it was—and not long ago—commonly used informally (and, in many instances, sincerely, i.e., without intended offense). This strikes me as one for which the usefulness outweighs the potential offensiveness, especially because offensiveness concerns are at their nadir in the context of redirects, which are obscured from the view of the reader of the target article, but my sense of its usefulness—of the frequency with which it might be a legitimate search—may be off. Joe 05:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. NPOV does not apply to redirects. Keep in mind that the term "looney bin" is centuries old, predating the phrase "psychiatric hospital" and (the more recent) "mental health facility." B.Wind (talk) 06:27, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per B.Wind. --Eivind (t) 15:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Common enough of a slang term to be a likely search. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 15:14, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per B.Wind and consistent with my comment supra. Joe 22:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Far from being cast out of contemporary parlance, "looney bin" does still exist as a slang term. We certainly shouldn't ever title an article with it on Wikipedia, but the term has enough historical and contemporary use that it's worth keeping as a redirect to the more neutral and standard term. Keep. Bearcat (talk) 18:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep its a common slang term. PaulJones (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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