The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Navigation list with image → Template:Navbox
• Template:Dynamic navigation small → Template:Navbox
• Template:Navigation no hide → Template:Navbox
• Template:Navbox generic with image → Template:Navbox
• Template:Universities navbox → Template:Navbox
• Template:Drug Navigation → Template:Navbox
• Template:Navigation box with image → Template:Navbox
• Template:SC State Parks Navigation → Template:Navbox
• Template:VG Navigation groups → Template:Navbox
• Template:Template:Navbox → Template:Navbox
• Template:Méta palette de navigation → Template:Navbox

• Template:Infobox Physician → Template:Infobox Person
• Template:Infobox Personal → Template:Infobox Person
• Template:Infobox Doctor → Template:Infobox Person
• Template:Infobox Biography V2 → Template:Infobox Person
• Template:Infobox Biography Alive → Template:Infobox Person

There were tagged for speedy deletion by Locos epraix (talk · contribs) as G6 but as they are redirects, they should be judged by redirect criteria, of which none apply. Thus I decided to list them here for this user instead. Regards SoWhy 21:04, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "general" CSDs are valid for all pages, including redirects. Powers ^T 22:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While that's true enough, G6 only applies to uncontroversial maintenance. Since these have been declined and brought to RfD, they can no longer be regarded as uncontroversial. — Gavia immer (talk) 23:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am quite aware that G6 applies to all pages (sorry if I phrased it unclearly) but I did not think that those are uncontroversial deletions. Regards SoWhy 10:31, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all. All of these appear redundant to the better known target template name, and all of them are orphans. There doesn't appear to be any need for them. — Gavia immer (talk) 23:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all - they are no longer in use and editors will not likely to use them again. Locos ~ epraix Beaste~praix 23:30, 24 May 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 Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Beck/redirects → Beck (disambiguation)

Delete. Unnecessary, unlikely search term, no meaningful history. Powers ^T 18:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• delete as useless --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:31, 26 May 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 Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Booger (word) → Mucus

Delete. Unlikely search term; already deleted at AfD before the redirect was created. Powers ^T 18:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - unlikely search term. VegaDark (talk) 20:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The presence of the parenthetical disambiguator makes it unlikely that the term will be searched. There were incoming links from two articles, but I replaced them as part of more comprehensive edits a few minutes ago. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 20:29, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Booger is acceptable, but this is unplausable overkill. American Eagle (talk) 17:33, 25 May 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 Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Too Long To Read → Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read

Unnecessary and undesirable cross-namespace redirect from the mainspace to the project space. The redirect does not have significant incoming links or meaningful edit history. It is not a standard expression of the initialism "tl;dr" and receives virtually no traffic (checked using http://stats.grok.se/), except perhaps that which is generated by minor links from one talk page and one archive. Delete. (Redirect creator notified using ((RFDNote)).) –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 17:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom.--NapoliRoma (talk) 18:15, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Cross-namespace redirect, which 99% of (IMO) should be deleted. VegaDark (talk) 20:24, 24 May 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 Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• RICKROLL'D → Rickrolling

Rickroll'd already exists, so why have the same page in capital letters? gordonrox24 (talk) 16:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I don't think the existence of one is an argument against the existence of the other. It's not as if we're going to run out of space for redirects. — Gavia immer (talk) 18:45, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • But who is going to search that up? It is not practicle.--gordonrox24 (talk) 18:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Wikipedia:Redirect#Spellings, misspellings, tenses and capitalisations: "Related [other-captialization] redirects are needed only if the article title has two or more words and words following the first have different capitalisations." (underlining added) The redirect is not needed for searching, since any search for Rickrolling will be case-insensitive, and the all-caps version has no legitimate use anywhere in the encyclopedia. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 20:20, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - search is case insensitive & articles shouldn't be using all caps in their text. No incoming links currently. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:17, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Black Falcon. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above, although I did find this source which used the "Rickroll'd" spelling. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:10, 27 May 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 Kept as no consensus for deletion. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:45, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Lightbulb joke (university) → Lightbulb joke

I can't begin to imagine how anyone would find this redirect useful. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 15:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: content appears to have been copied to WikiBooks and then later to LOLLERPEDIA. I don't think there is any history that need preserved, but someone should make sure. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, assuming there is no need to preserve this for history purposes. Robofish (talk) 04:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for history purposes. I believe the external pages found at [1] come directly or indirectly from this page. Otherwise harmless.--Rumping (talk) 10:55, 27 May 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 Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:46, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Charles Hoosier Taylor → Charles Taylor

Delete; bad pun ("who's your tailor?") by an anon, no "real" edits since. No real person by this name to be found. bd2412 T 14:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

• comment judging by the history, it may be intented to mean Chuck Taylor (salesman). PaulJones (talk) 16:13, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as lacking navigational value and possibly being meant as a joke. It is no help to users who search for a name to be taken to a disambiguation page which makes no mention of the name. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 20:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per BF. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 20:21, 24 May 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 moot per here. Cunard (talk) 18:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Enzyme induction and inhibition → enzyme inhibitor

This redirect was originally listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enzyme induction and inhibition. I closed that discussion as procedural keep for being at the wrong venue and have listed it here. The nominator's rationale from the AfD is as follows:

“

This page appears to be about two un-linked articles and only redirects to one of them, however a few pages link here: Special:WhatLinksHere/Enzyme_induction_and_inhibition Captain n00dle T/C 14:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

”

. I am neutral. Cunard (talk) 06:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. A merger with enzyme inhibitor was previously discussed in 2006 but it seems it has now been redirected without discussion to the featured article on enzyme inhibitor (see history; contains a lot of good content that shouldn't just be deleted). There is no article with a good discussion of enzyme induction, and enzyme inhibitor does not discuss gene expression inhibition. I suggest that we restore this article and let it focus on gene expression inhibition and induction, which is not discussed anywhere else. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 10:05, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.

The result of the discussion was Delete. Ruslik_Zero 12:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Respirable Suspended Particle → Respirable suspended particle

This redirect is the result of a page move to fix the capitalisation. It would not be a likely thing to search for. It has no main space incoming links. JIMp _talk·cont 05:57, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Wikipedia:Redirect#Spellings, misspellings, tenses and capitalisations, which notes: "Articles, including redirects, whose titles are either all initial caps or only first word capitalised are found via "Go" using a case-insensitive match." (emphasis added) The pagemove history is preserved in the article history of the target article. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 20:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not needed, thanks to automatic capitalisation correction. Robofish (talk) 04:15, 27 May 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. Ruslik_Zero 12:03, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:PARANOID → Wikipedia:Don't be quick to assume that someone is a sockpuppet

Being paranoid could mean just about anything - I see no particular reason that it should link to an essay about not assuming someone is a sock puppet. ThaddeusB (talk) 05:17, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Agree with Thaddeus. Also, what positive benefit would come out of this redirect? I personally wouldn't liked to be called "paranoid" for being concerned about sockpuppets. Icestorm815 • Talk 05:29, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redirect has nothing to do with the page it is redirecting to. –Meiskam (talk•contrib•block) 06:22, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per not related to current target. (as said above). — Ched :  ?  06:27, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Ched. ╟─TreasuryTag►hemicycle─╢ 07:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per everyone above Nick-D (talk) 10:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Redirect could redirect to a numerous number of pages. MC10 | Sign here! 01:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all the above, although I voted to keep the essay pointed to. Also per WP:POINT. — Becksguy (talk) 05:57, 27 May 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 all. Ruslik_Zero 11:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Hd pics → Category:Hilary Duff images
• Hilary d pics → Category:Hilary Duff images
• Hilary duff pics → Category:Hilary Duff images
• Hilary duff images → Category:Hilary Duff images (added late)

Unencyclopedic, cross namespace, no incoming links, and unlikely search term redirects. VegaDark (talk) 05:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Wikipedia is not Tiger Beat. No encyclopedic use. — Gavia immer (talk) 15:37, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per "Wikipedia is not a storage area for images", which is precisely what these cross-namespace redirects treat it as. Anyone who wants "pics" of Hilary Duff would be better off using Google Image Search. Also delete Hilary duff images. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 20:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was debating adding Hilary duff images to the nom since it shares the same name as the category, but I personally also do support deletion of that as well since it is an XNR, so I'll add it now. VegaDark (talk) 20:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, inappropriate cross-namespace redirect. Stifle (talk) 08:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Unneeded CNR, not plausible redirects. American Eagle (talk) 17:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Unlikely search term. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:33, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Cross-reference redirect. MC10 | Sign here! 04:39, 28 May 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 Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• CAT:M2T → Category:Copy to Wiktionary

I have no clue how "M2T" can possibly represent "Copy to Wiktionary". No incoming links, unlikely search term. VegaDark (talk) 05:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I think it stands for Move to Transwiki, in which case it is a bit misleading, since Category:Copy to Wiktionary is not the only transwiki category. I think either CAT:C2W (Copy to Wiktionary) or CAT:M2W (Move to Wiktionary) would be more intuitive and less ambiguous, so delete per nom. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 17:48, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - bad shortcut, in that it's too difficult to remember. Robofish (talk) 04:14, 27 May 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. Ruslik_Zero 11:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• List of "Daria" Episodes → List of Daria episodes

A redirect with no incoming links and an unlikely search parameter. It's the result of a page move from 2006 and I nominate for deletion. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 04:09, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - adding quotes is an unlikely search term. VegaDark (talk) 05:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and VegaDark. The pagemove history is preserved (diff) in the article history of the target article. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 17:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 01:34, 26 May 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 Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Master of Illusion Express: Nensha Camera → Master of Illusion (video game)

The target makes no mention of the page name. The target is a disambiguation page. If there were an article to redirect to, it would make sense to redirect to that page, not to the disambiguation page. I tagged this for immediate deletion as a nonsense redirect, and the User who created it removed my notification from his Talk page, and the db tag, which is not appropriate, and is specifically forbidden by the text in the speedy deletion template. I didn't want to edit war, so I tried explaining to the original editor why I felt this was wrong, but I got no reasonable explanation ("Listing it for deletion is nothing less than pointless. There's nothing that CAN be said, as all most people know is the name, which is why the redirect exists. It may not have content, but will. It was just announced". This redirect is meaningless; if the original author wants to create a page about this topic, more power to him, but this redirect serves no purpose. I gave the original editor 24 hours to come up with a reasonable redirect, but none was forthcoming. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:39, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The issue was the result of a mistake. The redirect now directs to the video game article, which mentions it. Requesting user withdraw. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:02, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a different game. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 06:20, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...Wow, I applaud your incredible efforts you're taking to be stubborn. I guess doing exactly what you said - ie, covering this title in an article to make the redirect make sense - is not enough. You basically are saying it is, 100% impossible for this redirect to exist. It is NOT a different game, and even if it were, it is not significant enough to cover in a separate article. It's a $2.00 game that comes with two mini-games that could be summed up in a single paragraph. I don't see how, at any point, being a "different game" (I put that in quotations because it isn't) means it cannot be covered there. Seriously, are you on a mission to get this redirect deleted for anything besides spite now? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And just to clarify, explain to me how any single argument you've provided to delete the redirect applies anymore. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete – The article Master of Illusion (video game) mentions a yet-to-be-released version titled Chotto Magic Taisen Nensha Camera, but I could find no online reference (except on Wikipedia) to the actual redirect title, which suggests to me that Master of Illusion Express: Nensha Camera is an unofficial and/or user-invented title. If my understanding of the situation is incorrect, please do let me know. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 17:32, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's a common search target, based on the fact that someone already listed it on the List of DSiWare games, and based on the fact that the English name for the series is "Master of Illusion Express". It's obviously not that uncommon that we need to delete it. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:58, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • One person entering it into a Wikipedia list, especially considering that they piped the link to Master of Illusion (video game) (see here), does not really make it a "common search target", particularly in light of the near-absolute absence of the term from Google. However, I did not realize that "Chotto Magic Taisen" translates to "Master of Illusion Express", so I have withdrawn my suggestion to delete the redirect. –BLACK FALCON ^(TALK) 19:53, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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