Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 December 1

December 1
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 1, 2008

Bossa → Bossa Nova
The result of the debate was Keep. Ruslik (talk) 07:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

It is too general. There are | many other uses for the term Bossa, such as the Bossa distributed computing framework by BOINC Aaronp808 (talk) 21:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep — It's not that general. There are only one or two extra plausible articles in my opinion, these could be linked at the top of the Bossa Nova article. If you're really fussed, delete and create a disambiguation page, but I really don't think it's necessary. —Matt (talk · contribs · email) 22:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, but if a disambiguation page should replace it, then do so. Stifle (talk) 12:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Katathymika Fantasiosiki Psychotherapy → Guided affective imagery
The result of the debate was Keep. This redirect has non-trivial history and should be preserved to document a merge. Ruslik (talk) 07:20, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Someone originally set up several similarly named articles that covered the same ground as guided affective imagery. This one was originally written in Greek, though someone replaced it with a translation. I'd put a merger tag here a couple of months ago, with no response. I changed it to a redirect earlier today, consistent with the treatment that was given to the similarly named articles, but I think this one is a stretch. Who's going to be looking on English Wikipedia for this topic under a bastardized Greek name? —Largo Plazo (talk) 16:06, 1 December 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Superboss → Boss (video games)
The result of the debate was Keep. Ruslik (talk) 07:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

The article was originally nominated for deletion 3 years ago. The reason for deletion was because the term was a neologism. The result of the debate was deletion, however instead of deleting the page it was redirected to Boss (video games). However, that article does not even mention the term "superboss". Checking to see what links to Superboss, I found only 2 articles for video games, which I changed to link to Boss (video games). As it stands this redirect does not seem to make sense, and there's no reason to keep it around. --  At am a chat 02:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I've heard the term used, and it seems better to have it point to something. It could be retargeted to supervisor or boss. - Richard Cavell (talk) 10:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - You've heard the term used? That somehow prevents it from being a neologism? Would anyone ever actually look up the term "superboss"? I guess that's the real question. If there's any real point in having it as a redirect, of course it should stay, but I can't imagine someone wanting to look up a "supervisor" and typing in "superboss". --  At am a chat 20:17, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The term 'superboss' was looked up 933 times in October: Superboss traffic. - Richard Cavell (talk) 22:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

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