Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 October 19

Abuse reports/204.38.104.10 → Abuse reports/204.38.104.10
The result of the debate was Speedy delete per CSD R2, exactly the CSD's intended purpose. Xoloz 21:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Useless cross-namespace redirect. Alksub 22:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Thomas Delanty → Thomas Delahanty
The result of the debate was no consensus – Gurch 17:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Unlikely misspelling, unlikelier search term. Chick Bowen 20:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Weak keep. The redirect documents the pagemove which was carried out back in 2005.  (Weak because the edit history also shows the pagemove but keep because it doesn't fit any of the "delete if" criteria above.)  It was originally misspelled exactly this way so I don't think we can say that it has suddenly become less likely.  Rossami (talk) 04:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

5318 Dientzenhofer → Dientzenhofer
The result of the debate was converted to stub. WjBscribe 12:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC) Redirect to disambiguation page, that provides no further information on the subject. --FordPrefect42 10:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. A quick search in Google reveals that three interwikis already have an article on the asteroid 5318 Dientzenhofer it:5318 Dientzenhofer pl:5318 Dientzenhofer pt:5318 Dientzenhofer. I already have fixed some links, and created also the redirect. Instead of filing this request, FordPrefect42 easily could have started a stub on the asteroid, and saved me and others the time of dealing with this request. -- Matthead discuß!    O       10:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Instead of contributing useless redirects and pecking on other users you might easily have done that yourself. --FordPrefect42 11:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I've contributed a useful redirect which I've now expanded to a stub. -- Matthead discuß!    O       07:43, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * RfD withdrawn, no problem with the stub --FordPrefect42 09:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep. The target page now mentions the asteroid. Of course, it would be better if the asteroid had its own article, but the redirect is fine for now. --Itub 11:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Xanada → Canada
The result of the debate was keep. WjBscribe 12:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC) Implausible typo. --Blickmaestro 10:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * On my keyboard, X is next to C - u is nowhere near to a, though. -- Matthead discuß!    O       10:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not that implausible, given the QWERTY layout. Also, Air Canada seems to consider it plausible enough to place its "sponsored links" on Google when people search for Xanada: . (Or maybe Google does that automatically; it doesn't matter.) --Itub 11:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Since this is a implausible typo, I suggest delete it. David Pro 13:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, redirects are cheap and this is not unreasonable. meshach 17:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. A place...nobody dared to go...because it is covered in snow...they call it Xanada....  Anyways, harmless and not too implausible.  --UsaSatsui 22:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep plausible typo. I've been to Vanada and Xanada many times when learning to type! SkierRMH 02:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Clever waste of time → Puzzle
The result of the debate was delete. On review of the history of of Online puzzle it does not appears that any text was in fact merged into that article. WjBscribe 12:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC) Outdated reference to an article that failed to be notable enough Personman 06:06, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep Oh com'on, where's your sense of humour?-- Phoenix 15 (Talk) 19:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. No mention of the phrase at target.  Misleading and confusing, and also perpetuating what was originally a spam article. Chick Bowen 20:38, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. This type of redirect may be misleading and confusing, as I commented it in this discussion made a few weeks ago. David Pro 13:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm struggling with this one. It was originally an article about one specific online puzzle that was not particularly notable.  It was merged and then redirected into Online puzzle but that article had real problems with editorial disputes, spam and vandalism.  It appears that page was relatively recently turned into a redirect to Puzzle without a great deal of discussion.  It does not look like any significant merger was done at that point.  I'm uncertain whether or not that second redirect will be upheld by the community consensus.  If that redirect is reverted, we would need this page's history in order to comply with GFDL.  I'm going to recommend keep for now but no prejudice against a reconsideration once we've seen what happens with Online puzzle (maybe a few months).  Rossami (talk) 04:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as unnecessary and potentially misleading. It's arguable that most of the other redirects to Puzzle could go as well... but this one seems particularly pointless. Terraxos 02:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

List of Cyborg 009 characters → Category:Cyborg 009 characters
The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 12:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC) Cross namespace --Closedmouth 14:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete, it's unneeded. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, doesn't really achieve anything. N b u r d e n  (T) 17:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)