Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 October 2

Bill O'Reilly (disambiguation) → Bill O'Reilly
The result of the debate was speedy keep per WP:R, see instructions on this page. Kusma (talk) 12:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Uncontentious deletion of unnecessary redirect to "real" disambig page, see article talk page. Dweller 14:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete Delete and move Bill O'Reilly to Bill O'Reilly (disambiguation), then delete Bill O'Reilly; that would be the most sensible course of action-- Phoenix 15 18:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ehm, so which page would you want to move to Bill O'Reilly? It couldn't become a red link...  Melsaran  (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * What? Bill O'Reilly is actually the most sensible search term, which should then disambiguate to the different articles of the same name. If you delete it, people (either from Australia or the United States) won't know there's an article on both persons, and is likely to create it again. - Mtmelendez (Talk 00:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, sensible redirect (someone who types "Bill O'Reilly (disambiguation)" into the search bar expects to end up at a disambiguation page listing multiple Bill O'Reillys (as many disambiguation pages have (disambiguation) after their titles) nd that is exactly what they get here), no compelling reason to delete.  Melsaran  (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep under R to disambiguation page. Redirect policy states that these facilitate disambiguation. - Mtmelendez (Talk 00:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I see no reason why this redirect would cause harm, and a small potential for it to be useful. Stephen Turner (Talk) 09:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Son of the Suns → Anakin Skywalker
The result of the debate was delete. -- John Reaves 21:37, 12 October 2007 (UTC) It's a nonsense redirect. David Pro 18:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * This was originally created as a stub and was then redirected to Luke Skywalker as "fancruft" (someone thought it didn't merit its own article). For some reason, an anon changed the redirect target to Anakin Skywalker, while the stub clearly said that it was a nickname for Luke Skywalker. Ergo, keep, and revert to the version of 31 May 2006 (redirect to Luke Skywalker).  Melsaran  (talk) 18:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - since makes no sense. David Pro 21:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * David, you've been advised before not to "vote" multiple times in a discussion. Your nomination implies deletion (or so I understood from it), and your second comment (as identical to your nom) doesn't add much to the discussion. If you have doubts or questions about other users comments, such as Melsaran's above, then ask him what he meant by them. If you disagree with his comments, then tell him and us by replying directly. If you wish to add to your arguments then expand your nom (you're still welcome to do that, as long as it's a constructive suggestion). The closing admin or user (who decides what action to take) won't be counting the deletes or keeps, but rather reading each comment to determine consensus. If you have any questions about this process, ask anyone of us. We'd be glad to help. - Mtmelendez (Talk 00:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * A quick search on Google shows there's some dispute among Star Wars fans over whom the term actually refers to. Therefore, to avoid continual edit-warring over this redirect, I suggest deleting it - it's a pretty unlikely search term anyway. Terraxos 18:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The term term isn't mentioned at either target and may not be exclusive to Star Wars. Doesn't seem to aid navigation -people looking for one of the Skywalkers will type their name and the target will contain no information about the term. More likely to confuse the reader than anything else... WjBscribe 14:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Some redirects such as this may be confusing for the users. David Pro 21:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)