Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 May 31

Law basic topics → List of basic law topics
The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 23:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC) This page became a cross-namespace redirect after being moved to the article mainspace in 2005 and the pagemove history is preserved in the target. Thus, it has no useful page history. Aside from links generated due to this RfD nomination, it has only three incoming links – 2 from lists of pages from a database dump and 1 from a user subpage that hasn't been modified since 2005 – so there is no need to be concerned about broken links. Finally, I feel that it is an unlikely search term that wouldn't aid accidental linking. Delete. Black Falcon (Talk) 07:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete As usual, a thorough explanation from BF. Yechiel Man 19:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree, BlackFalcon has said it all. Excellent find. Excellent nomination. - Mtmelendez (Talk 01:22, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Delete per nom. &mdash;Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley talk contrib 14:30, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Transfers 2006-2007 → List of English football transfers 2006-07
The result of the debate was delete. Close investigation of the histories of the two pages shows that although Transfers 2006-2007 was tagged to be merged, it contained no content not already in List of English football transfers 2006-07 and as such no content was actually merged. WjBscribe 23:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC) Highly ambiguous and therefore misleading. Punkmorten 22:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Comment - this used to be an article before a merge & redirect. The article history contains useful pre-merge information and deletion would probably violate GFDL. Qwghlm 22:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Qwghlm. I've tagged it as R from merge (after confirming the history).  Xtifr tälk 16:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually though I know a delete is not possible under GFDL I agree with the nominator it should not be allowed to stand. Maybe move it to Talk:List of English football transfers 2006-07/pre-merge material and add a note, then delete the new historyless redirect? Qwghlm 17:44, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * No objections if that's really enough to meet the GDFL (I'll defer to more experienced heads on this one). Xtifr tälk 05:01, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a history merge would solve the issue? -- Black Falcon (Talk) 17:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

UK Football League Transfers → List of English football transfers 2006-07
The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 23:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC) Ambiguous and therefore misleading. Why should it link to that season specifically? Punkmorten 22:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete No useful history, misleading name. Qwghlm 22:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree, no useful history, misleading name. aLii 08:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

UK Football League transfers → List of English football transfers 2006-07
The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 23:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC) Ambiguous and therefore misleading. Why should it link to that season specifically? Punkmorten 22:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete No useful history, misleading name. Qwghlm 22:52, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree, no useful history, misleading name. aLii 08:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)