Talk:9/11 domestic complicity allegations

Untitled
From WP:RfD:


 * 9/11 domestic complicity allegations → 9/11 conspiracy theories
 * These redirects have no pages linking to it. Carbonite | Talk 13:40, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * See #2. Noel (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, I didn't want to go into detail, but the fact that no pages link to these is NOT the only reason. Certain users have been moving 9/11 conspiracy theory articles all over the place, creating redirects and, in some cases, double-redirects. This is an attempt to clean up the mess. As an aside, I did RTFM first and still don't see how Keep #2 applies. These are not common phrases and would almost certainly not be linked accidentally. However, the sheer number of redirects created will lead to confusion, especially if the page moves continue. I do apologize for not being more detailed in my initial description. Carbonite | Talk 16:41, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah. You needed to say that! Hmm, well, the second one does seem completely useless; the first one might be useful. On the other hand, looking at Special:Whatlinkshere/9/11 conspiracy theories, there are a whole flock of redirs to this page - are there any more that could usefully be discarded? Noel (talk) 01:39, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I have no comments on deleting or keeping them, but I have gone after 16 double redirects only to find that 9/11 complicity theory would be redirected again and again. It is very unstable.--Jusjih 08:23, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * After pondering this for a while, I did delete a whole flock, including some typos and ones with minor differences (as well as all the unused Talk: page redirs created by page move wars), but decided to keep this one because it seemed a plausible search/article creation target. Noel (talk) 00:10, 16 September 2005 (UTC)