Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 August 19

Arnaud-Amaury, Papal legate -> Arnaud Amalric
The result of the debate was delete by Haemo (WP:CSD.) --Aarktica 15:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC) Redirect I created accidentally today, because I didn't notice the overly specific name of the redlink. I've since created a redirect for this permutation of the individuals name at "Arnaud-Amaury" which is more likely to be searched for. ornis ( t ) 04:34, 19 August 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Why not use the db-author tag? --Aarktica 17:55, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well obviously because I didn't realise such a thing existed ;). So tagged. ornis ( t ) 06:35, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Brewster (disambig) → Brewster
The result of the debate was Deleted. Page move is recorded in the history of the target & no other objections given. -- JLaTondre 00:54, 27 August 2007 (UTC) Note: page "Brewster (disambiguation)" also exists. This is a misnamed DAB page! Nominated for deletion because most (if not all) people will go to the correct DAB page name. JohnI 09:35, 19 August 2007 (UTC) Comments: JohnI 21:47, 25 August 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep. This page has non-trivial history.  Believe it or not, the "(disambig)" suffix used to be the preferred usage.  The disambiguation page was moved to the full suffix when the standards changed.  Keeping the page-history preserves the evidence of contribution histories, a requirement of GFDL.  Rossami (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Since GFDL history is a concern, we can move Brewster (disambig) overtop of Brewster (disambiguation). GFDL compliance alone is not a reason to keep a redirect at Brewster (disambig).  Big Nate 37 (T) 22:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It's already been moved. The redirect preserves the record of the move itself.  It also catches any references to the page in old versions of other pages, etc.  Incidentally, this redirect was already nominated for deletion back in March 2007.  The decision then was closed as "no consensus leaning to keep" by user:John Reaves.  Rossami (talk) 22:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, I must have accidentally looked at the wrong page when I saw the history. At any rate, I'm not sure why you keep asserting that pagemove history is necessary. It isn't—the record of the move is also preserved at the destination and history of pagemoves and redirection aren't necessary anyways.  Big Nate 37 (T) 01:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Newcomers may be confused and think that this is an alternative allowable spelling of "disambiguation",
 * 2) The redirect makes no sense, the standard is to type "Brewster" or "Brewster (disambiguation)". As this is an uncommon spelling (ie "disambig") almost no one will know it exists.
 * 3) Therefore, because it is both harmful (confusing), and non-useful I propose it should be deleted.
 * Delete: we have ample precedent for deleting these "(disambig)" redirects. In most cases, they're simply relics of the time before we standardized our naming, and they serve no use at all any more.  JohnI has masterfully summed up the standard reasons for deleting these.  And the history of the page move that Rossami is so intent on keeping is faithfully preserved in the history of the move target, so there are no GDFL issues here.   Xtifr tälk 08:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Steve Rollins → Walter E. Rollins
The result of the debate was Deleted. It doesn't appear to common enough to warrant mention in the target. -- JLaTondre 00:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC) Article about Walter E. Rollins was created as "Steve Rollins" by mistake, mixing him up with his co-writer Steve Nelson. Now if you google  you will see other sites quoting the names the wrong way round. End this now! I've changed most incoming links; the redirect remains on a few stub lists but I guess those will get re-generated in time. Fayenatic london (talk) 22:02, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * If this is a common misinterpretation, perhaps we should add it to Category:Unprintworthy redirects, mention the mistake in the target article, and keep the redirect? Sure, linking to it is bad because it is incorrect but we don't want people who've only seen the wrong name to be unable to find accurate information on the topic.  Big Nate 37 (T) 23:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC)