Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 11

Carlisle United F.C. are lame → Carlisle United F.C.
The result of the debate was speedy delete by GDonato. WjBscribe 23:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC) The redirect Carlisle United F.C. are lame should be deleted because the Carlisle United F.C. page was move to Carlisle United F.C. are lame as a form of vandalism by User:Hindduking Kingjamie 16:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete per nom, as an 'attack redirect.' EdJohnston 18:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

monovalent → Antivenom
The result of the debate was disambiguate. WjBscribe 18:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC) "monovalent" is a much more general term as used in immunology--and elsewhere DGG (talk) 22:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete. Not mentioned at valence (chemistry) or its related articles, and may apply in more fields than just chemistry so a disambig page might be appropriate. Either way, redlink is the best for now.  Big Nate 37 (T) 02:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate Since monovalent has a dozen incoming links, I would consider deletion to be a non-ideal solution (bad chemistry pun). Most incoming links seem to refer to valence (chemistry), as with multivalent which is also a disambiguation page. Shalom Hello 02:47, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I concur. Monovalent means a few things and should be turned into a disambiguation page. -- Loukinho 17:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The meaning of monovalent is quite context-dependent. Any disambiguation page is likely to be large and shaggy, and possibly not that helpful.  The DAB for multivalent is currently not very good, in my view. If the incoming links to monovalent were to turn red, that would be a sign to the editors of those pages that some work is needed. EdJohnston 04:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Disamibguate per Shalom. &mdash; Scientizzle 19:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment unless someone creates a disambig page for this title, I don't expect that the closing admin will see disambiguate as an option.  Big Nate 37 (T) 14:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I've contacted the two editors who moved for disambiguation here and here; hopefully they will give the matter more thought/attention.  Big Nate 37 (T) 17:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Disambig'd. &mdash; Scientizzle 18:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)