Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 May 5

Bram Stoker´s Dracula (pinball) → Bram Stoker's Dracula
The result of the debate was Re-targeted to Bram Stoker's Dracula (pinball). -- JLaTondre 12:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC) Redirect has absolutely nothing to do with the target article. --David Pro 00:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * It's since been changed to point to Bram Stoker's Dracula (pinball) (note difference in apostrophe style). Now that it makes sense it should be kept. *** Crotalus ***  04:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Teaching Grandma to suck eggs → Pedant
The result of the debate was speedy deleted – Gurch 18:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC) Meaningless redirect, similar to deleted before [] Jemather 00:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete - Tagged it with, and provided a link for the administration.  Cool Blue  talk to me  01:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as nonsense. *** Crotalus ***  04:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

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

WikiDrama → Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents
The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 13:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC) Redirect has absolutely nothing to do with the target article.  Cool Blue  talk to me 23:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete; inaccurate and insulting to AN/I contributors. *** Crotalus ***  04:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete; possibly accurate, but the meaning strays too far away and looks trollish. –Pomte 05:34, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, redundant to WP:WIKIDRAMA, which is a proper shortcut. However, I don't think the shortcut is any worse than WP:LAME, especially when referring to a case that looks likely to end up at the latter. :)  --Xtifr tälk 13:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Aviation historical anniversaries redirects
The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 13:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikiportal/Aviation/Historical anniversaries/January in aviation (hist links) → Portal:Aviation/Historical anniversaries/January in aviation
 * Wikiportal/Aviation/Historical anniversaries/February in aviation (hist links) → Portal:Aviation/Historical anniversaries/February in aviation
 * Wikiportal/Aviation/Historical anniversaries/March in aviation (hist links) → Portal:Aviation/Historical anniversaries/March in aviation
 * Wikiportal/Aviation/Historical anniversaries/June in aviation (hist links) → Portal:Aviation/Historical anniversaries/June in aviation
 * Wikiportal/Aviation/Historical anniversaries/July in aviation (hist links) → Portal:Aviation/Historical anniversaries/July in aviation
 * Wikiportal/Aviation/Historical anniversaries/September in aviation (hist links) → Portal:Aviation/Historical anniversaries/September in aviation

The above cross-namespace redirects are from the "Wikipedia:" namespace to the "Portal:" namespace. They exist because the latter namespace did not come into existence until late 2005. The only history they contain is a pagemove (preserved in the target) by the Portal namespace initialisation script. None of the articles have incoming links, except from a list of pages from a database dump, and edits like these suggest that all of the relevant links have long since been updated, so there should be no issue with broken links involving subpages. Also, the redirects are not useful as search terms ... anyone who's aware of a sub-sub-subpage of a portal is sure to be aware of its correct title. In any case, the main Portal:Aviation page has a direct link to the main index of historical anniversaries. Lastly, of 12 possible redirects (12 months), only 6 exist ... the others having been deleted or having never been created in the first place. Delete -- Black Falcon (Talk) 16:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete useless now. –Pomte 05:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

====Motherfucking snakes on a motherfucking plane, Snakes on a Motherfucking Plane, I want these motherfucking snakes off this motherfucking plane, Mother fucking snakes on a mother fucking plane, Motherfucking snakes on this motherfucking plane, Snakes On A Motherfucking Plane and More Motherfucking Snakes on More Motherfucking Planes → Snakes on a Plane==== The result of the debate was delete Mother fucking snakes on a mother fucking plane and More Motherfucking Snakes on More Motherfucking Planes. Keep others. WjBscribe 13:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC) These redirects are over the top and should be deleted. Edward 13:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Is it the obscenity or is it because redirects are found to serve little or no purpose? Personally I think some of the above redirects may actually be useful considering the phrase's hype. --Oblivious 13:58, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Partly the obscenity, but mostly because I think the redirects serve no purpose. Edward 16:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep most. I think the "I want...." and the "More Mutherfucking..." may be excessive, but the rest seem fairly reasonable, and no policy-based reason for deletion has been presented.  And redirects are cheap, and several of these are quite plausible search terms.  Plausible enough to meet the very low threshold required for keeping redirects, anyway.  IMO.  What we have here is one of the more notable movie quotes of the last couple of years and one that actually includes the title of the movie in question.  I don't think it's too hard to discern the purpose.  Xtifr tälk 20:41, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep all per Xtifr, except Mother fucking snakes on a mother fucking plane, which I find less plausible due to the separation of the word "motherfucking". Apparently "More Motherfucking Snakes on More Motherfucking Planes" is part of a quote by Samuel L. Jackson made at the 2006 MTV Movie Awards (acc. to the Snakes on a Plane article). -- Black Falcon (Talk) 21:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Less plausible but still still helps because in wikipedia we dont have Did you mean. --Oblivious 11:57, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - Unlikely search terms. I don't know why someone would search for it. If they wanted the movie, they would just type in Snakes on a Plane.  Cool Blue  talk to me 23:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Knowing Wikipedia, many people might reasonably assume that we have an article just on this phrase. It is what got the ball rolling in this cultural nugget, right? --zenohockey 01:52, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep; this is the movie's most famous line and it's at least conceivable someone might actually enter it. *** Crotalus ***  04:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Given the median age of our users, someone will type these in sooner or later. However, they will also know the correct title of the movie. Placeholder account 04:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Am offended by the first point, not so much for myself, but for the honor of my dead mother, who isn't here to defend herself and her educated-but-controversial manner of expression. As for the second point, I strongly disagree; people may remember the name now, but in a few years, it's quite possible that someone may come across the quote and not know where it came from and hope to find more (like the name of the movie).  Xtifr tälk 17:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, per Xtifr. I don't how often they will be used, but the seem "keepable", as they are relevant to the article. Tim.bounceback( review me! 00:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - This is very much over-the-top and unnecessary. As long as the line (or lines) is given in the article, a good search engine should be able to find it.  (And if I was looking for the source of a line like that I would think of using a search engine long before I would try it in Wikipedia.)  Wikipedia is not a search engine or an indexing service. Vulgarity like that should not appear in article titles without a compelling reason. --EMS | Talk 17:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - they are plausible search targets. Will (is it can be time for messages now plz?) 03:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The phrase, without the gratuitous expletives, would go to the movie directly. I'm not sure that 'we should account for the stupid 'cleverness' of preteens' is a good reason to keep them. ThuranX 03:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Raven Cliff Falls
The result of the debate was disambig. Standard procedure with duplicate names is a disambiguation page. If nominator believes the Georgia one is significantly better known then the South Carolina one and therefore should be located in place of the dab page, that is case for WP:RM, not here. -- JLaTondre 02:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC) Delete this redirect page so that we can move Raven Cliff Falls (Georgia) to Raven Cliff Falls. There is also a Raven Cliff Falls (South Carolina) article. It's a lesser-known waterfall and the SC article is clearly not referenced the way the GA article is. Majoreditor 22:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Comment. Would disambiguating the redirect to link to both waterfalls be a fitting solution? -- Black Falcon (Talk) 23:10, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * or at the least, wouldn't this be better handled through Requested moves? Xtifr tälk 12:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)