Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 November 12

November 12
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 12, 2008

Redirects created en masse by a now-banned user
The result of the debate was Delete all that haven't yet been retargeted or already deleted.Tikiwont (talk) 10:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC) I would like to formally propose that we consolidate the many highly similar deletion discussions below. They are all arising out of various investigations into the contribution history of a now-banned user. I believe that we could be more efficient if we consolidate, then cluster the redirects similar to the process that was successfully used in June (here). (We can exclude discussions below that have already received substantive feedback.)

Is there consensus to treat this as a single case? Rossami (talk) 23:29, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree - even if one of those really was a legit redirect (as far as I can see they are all SNOWs or R3s), we can restore that one. But they seem all to be nonsensical.  So Why  00:04, 13 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree. At least for the ones where an obvious new target hasn't been proposed.  Just nuke 'em.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 04:24, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree looking at his user history is very frustrating, so many bad redirects. 76.66.192.6 (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment someone should also look into the categories created by this user. 76.66.192.6 (talk) 05:31, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree - I'm still having flashbacks from the group we did in June. I would even advocate speedying all those that even smell of spam. Those that might be in a gray area should be brought individually, though. B.Wind (talk) 06:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * There appearing to be consensus to a consolidated approach, here's a start. Rossami (talk) 07:55, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Agree - we should eliminate the proprietary redirects with all due speed, plus the nonsensical ones. The rest need to be checked on a case-by-case basis. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 15:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree Looks pretty unambiguous by now,none of these serve any purpose. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Disagree - at least a few of the redirects are obviously keepable. To be honest, I don't know enough about these topics to know whether most of the redirects are any good without doing research. But I don't believe that Mac was attempting to vandalise. If all his edits were intentionally disruptive, he hid it well. The redirects ought to be considered on their merits and not judged by the user who created them. - Richard Cavell (talk) 03:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that if you read the "ground rules" of the list, you'll see that your concerns are accommodated. Any valid redirects in the list can be struck; disagreements on validity can be discussed on an individual basis if the redirect in contention is presented for its own RfD discussion. I agree with Richard Cavell in that it doesn't appear that Mac's redirect creations were malicious in nature, but many, if not most, were questionable and require oversight after having a few dozen of his redirect brought here. It's not the 500+ that we had to do at once in June, but Mac's lack of interaction after repeated requests for comment triggered all this, it seems. Speaking for myself only, I believe that all of Mac's edits were in good faith. B.Wind (talk) 04:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not entirely sure what the difference is between these 'ground rules' and what would be done if each redirect were brought to discussion in the usual way. Each redirect ought to be considered on its own merits. - Richard Cavell (talk) 04:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The argument in favor of consolidation is based upon the experience shown below (some still visible but some now hidden in the pagehistory for this and the prior day). I agree that every redirect needs to be individually researched and investigated.  What I kept noticing, though, was that the investigation kept yielding the same results.  I copied essentially the same write-up of findings into several dozen discussions. This user created literally hundreds of redirects and if the initial trends hold true, the majority of them will end up deleted and the remainder retargetted.  The time and repetitive edits needed to nominate, list, discuss, close, etc. is high.  The intent of this exception process is that we individually investigate but then cluster the results in order to reduce some of the overhead load on our discussion process.  No one, for example, should take my word for it that a particular redirect is an example of a "non-notable company being inappropriately redirected to one of it's products".  But if, after your investigation, you find exactly the same thing, it would be efficient to not have to repeat yourself 25 times.  That's the idea, anyway.  It seemed to work back in June.  Rossami (talk)
 * Agree Seems pretty straight-up way of dealing with the mess. And a hat-tip to Rossami for taking the time on this. Eusebeus (talk) 18:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree. Useful ones can be seperated and dealt with individually. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t·c·r) 17:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Plantic Technologies Limited → Haigh's Chocolates
The result of the debate was speedy delete as implausible redirect. ... disco spinster   talk  16:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Company name appears nowhere in target article. This borders on speedy territory as connection between redirect and target is elusive and may be proprietary in nature. Originated by the same editor who started the two below this. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 17:59, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Speedy Delete as WP:R3 or even WP:G3, and tagged as such. Doesn't appear to be a useful contribution.  Companies are entirely different.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Talk about an obscure connection. Per this news story, Haigh's Chocolates recently decided to start purchasing biodegradable packaging make by Plantic Technologies.  In isolation, I do not consider this a good speedy-deletion candidate.  And I don't think it qualifies under CSD R3 regardless.  In aggregate with all the redirects that we're discussing below, I would like to recommend that we consolidate these cases into a single investigation of the redirects created by the now-banned user.  If we consolidate, I think there is convincing evidence of a pattern of bad-faith edits to the point that it qualifies as disruptive vandalism and would qualify under CSD G3.  We had a similar case back in June here that was successfully resolved through consolidation.  The few useful redirects can be culled out or retargetted but let's stop discussing these in isolation.  Rossami (talk) 23:08, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Cereplast → Bioplastic
The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC) Company name only trivially mentioned in target; placement seems to be propriety in purpose. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 17:54, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Weak Keep. Could be spam, but it is the most likely target for a search on the company.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Five non-duplicative google news hits for the company suggests that this company will not soon meet WP:CORP.  The one inbound link to the page was the result of the same editor who created this mass of inappropriate redirects, making it poor evidence in my opinion.  Rossami (talk) 23:13, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Vital Products → Bioplastic
The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:20, 20 November 2008 (UTC) Company name appears nowhere in the target. Most likely promotional in nature. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 17:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Speedy Delete as WP:R3. Company does not even deal in bio-plastics. --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, it does - if you find the right non-notable company using the "Vital Products" name. Here is the plastics maker.  Here is the medical device maker.  By the way, even for the plastics maker, this is a very minor line for them.  Delete because I can find no evidence that either of these companies will soon meet WP:CORP - and even if they someday do, this redirect won't help.  Rossami (talk) 23:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as a non-notable or promotional redirect. Thanks, &mdash; Mizu onna sango15 Hello!  20:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC).

German Federal Network Agency → WiMAX
The result of the debate was Re-targeted to Federal Network Agency which is an article on the agency. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC) WiMAX is not a Germany article 76.66.192.6 (talk) 09:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - the former needs its own article, but the connection here is an obscure one that doesn't appear in the target - the GFNA (or whatever the abbreviation is in German) - is preparing to hold an auction of WiMAX licenses in Germany. As a weak analogy, this would be akin to trying to redirect the American Federal Communications Commission to mobile phone (as cell phone is a redirect. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 15:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:CSD. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t·c·r) 11:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Biolene → Gasoline
The result of the debate was Deleted. Leaving it to the search function is a better option given VictorC's comments. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC) not explained at target 76.66.192.6 (talk) 09:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Retarget to Biodiesel. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t·c·r) 11:39, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Gasoline, the only Wikipedia article that actually mentions biolene (as an additive to gasoline to produce biodiesel). 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Considering that biodiesel is supposed to come from non-petroleum sources, I can't see how this is even possible, since gasoline is a petroleum product, and adding an additive doesn't change that fact. The biogasoline article makes no mention of "biolene", so this seems like an advertisement section in the gasoline article. 76.66.192.6 (talk) 04:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Check Gasoline to see what I saw. If it doesn't belong there, please feel free to edit appropriately, preferably after a possible consultation with the editors of the article. But it's the only location with "biolene" in Wikipedia article space aside from the redirect. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 16:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Biolene is an ambiguous term, used in more than one colloquial context. It is applicable, for example to biodiesel, ethanol, it's a brand name for a plastic sheet agricultural mulch, and a company name of a firm that makes ethylene oxide sterilization products, and a possible host of other things. VictorC (talk) 16:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

XcelPlus Global Holdings → gasoline
The result of the debate was speedy delete as R3 by Fuhghettaboutit (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) Galatee (talk) 15:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

company name redirecting to generic term 76.66.192.6 (talk) 09:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Outdoor lighting → solar lamp
The result of the discussion was Speedy retarget NAC. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC) these are not logically connected 76.66.192.6 (talk) 09:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Speedy Retarget to Lighting, and so done. --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

World petroleum inflation → 2000s energy crisis
The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:24, 20 November 2008 (UTC) this could just as easily refer to the 1970s 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Disambiguate the page. --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:32, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * This can not be disambiguated because it has no independent meaning. Google returns a mere 7 hits for this phrase, all derivative of this page.  The phrase does not exist and has no connection to any energy crisis, 2000s or otherwise.  Parsing the phrase makes it clearer because the noun (petroleum) can't inflate.  The price of petroleum could rise but that's not inflation.  The amount of petroleum could go up but that wouldn't cause an energy crisis.  There's no way to parse this phrase so it makes sense.  Rossami (talk) 23:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete nonsense redirect. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 00:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Price of petroleum. I suppose that if a country can be said to experience 'inflation' and for that to be grammatically correct, then a single commodity can experience 'inflation' too. - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete : Ambiguous term which is too general for a redirect. This can refer to any of several historic situations dating back at least to the early 1900's, and a few situations in the 19th century (such as the discovery of paraffin in the mid 1800's); naive to restrict it to just the 2000's. VictorC (talk) 16:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

World fueling inflation → 2000s energy crisis
The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC) this could just as easily refer to the 1970s 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Disambiguate the page. --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:33, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, it can't be disambiguated because it has no stand-alone meaning. This phrase returns five google hits.  In this case, only two are derivative of wikipedia but the other three are in the form "x happened somewhere in the 'world, fueling inflation'...  Delete (again, possibly speedily if the pattern supports a determination of vandalism).  Rossami (talk) 23:38, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a newspaper headline: is the inflation being fueled by the world? Delete as nonsense. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 00:12, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Distance costs money → 2000s energy crisis
The result of the debate was deleted. (non-admin closure) Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t·c·r) 23:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

this makes no sense 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Speedy delete nonsense redirect. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 17:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Ronald A. Putt → Algae fuel
The result of the debate was deleted by SoWhy (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t·c·r) 11:32, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

not found at target, person redirecting to generic concept 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Ron Putt → Algae fuel
The result of the debate was speedy delete as R3.  So Why  10:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

not found at target, person redirecting to generic concept 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

First Wind → Wind power in the United States
The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC) company name to a general article, seems like advertising 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Weak keep - company name is mentioned, albeit on the trivial side. Anticipating greater notoriety on the part of the company is crystal balling, but there's not a strong reason for deletion here. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 17:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - The name of a company that builds wind farms isn't the same as the topic of wind power in the US. The redirect is misleading and inaccurate. If it redirects to anything it should redirect to "Wind Farmers" or "Wind Farms." VictorC (talk) 16:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Trap grease → Vegetable oil used as fuel
The result of the debate was Re-targeted to Grease interceptor. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC) I could just be looking for Liquid Plumber with this search term... or the phone number for a plumber... 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Retarget to grease interceptor, itself a target of the redirect Grease Trap. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 16:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:BOLDly retargeted. Grease trap should point in the same direction. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 00:14, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Not quite the same: a grease trap is a trap, i.e. a piece of kitchen equipment, while trap grease is fat which might then be used for biofuel. Despite that I would agree: Retarget to grease interceptor --Rumping (talk) 01:41, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Green Star Products → Algae fuel
The result of the debate was Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:28, 20 November 2008 (UTC) company name redirecting to generic article, seems like advertising 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep - company's announcement is mentioned in last paragraph of article. Fine-tuning the targeting of the redirect could help here. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 17:49, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Green-Car-Guide Live! → Green vehicle
<span id="Green-Car-Guide Live!" > <div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC) seems like advertising 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - trivially mentioned as a single line with external link. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 18:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - A guide is not, and never will be a vehicle. They are both green, one is a vehicle and one is a piece of paper about vehicles, but lettuce is green too. VictorC (talk) 16:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Oppressive cost of gasoline → 2000s energy crisis
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC) This could refer to the 1970's crisis 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - most highly unlikely search term ("oppressive" is far more likely to be used in terms of "oppression" and "oppressive regimes"): in this case, the title of the redirect is more of an editorial comment than an actual title. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 19:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Price of petroleum - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - The entire term is a POV term. In the unlikely event you are a gasoline manufacturer or a petroleum producer, the cost of gasoline wouldn't be oppressive, it would be advantageous. This term just furthers an opinion and a point of view that cannot be shared by all (albeit it is probably shared by most) and to preserve neutrality it should be removed. Secondly - if there is such a thing as oppression having to do with the cost of gasoline, it is an entirely different matter than the topic of the 2000s energy crises. Oppression and an energy crises do not align accurately. For oppression to exist there should be an identifiable oppressor. Thirdly - even if the first two points aren't applied, there has been more than one time in history when energy has been in short supply and caused populations to have hardship. So notwithstanding NPOV, nor topic alignment, the term isn't solely applicable to the 2000s. Delete. VictorC (talk) 16:54, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Water-burning vehicle → water
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Re-targeted to Water-fuelled car. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC) this makes no sense 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Speedy delete - nonsensical. PhilKnight (talk) 12:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I changed it to redirect to Water-fuelled car. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed - I guess water-burning does make some sense, in the sense that water is factored into component parts, which are then burned to obtain water as an end product. - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Water-burning car → water
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Re-targeted to Water-fuelled car. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC) this makes no sense 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Speedy delete - nonsensical. PhilKnight (talk) 12:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I changed it to redirect to Water-fuelled car. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:09, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

National Pollution Prevention Roundtable → Solar cell
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Delete. Tikiwont (talk) 09:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC) NPPR is not just about solar cells 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Speedy delete - once the NPPR gets its independent coverage in reliable sources, it could have its own standalone article... but this redirect borders on nonsense and seems proprietary in nature. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 19:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete in the hope that someone will write an article about the NPPR one day. I say that the NPPR is notable. - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:05, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Small car → City car
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Re-targeted to Compact car. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC) A small car is anything smaller than a mid-sized (or anything smaller than a full-sized) 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Retarget to Compact car. --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Dabify as several car types have been introduced as "small cars", such as city cars, compact cars, subcompact cars, Kei cars, supermini cars, and (arguably) pony cars. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 19:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to compact car. - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Low cost car → Tata Nano
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Retarget to Economy car. Lenticel ( talk ) 06:08, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

blatant advertising NPOV violation, this is not the only low cost car. 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete. Alternately, Retarget to Subcompact car .  When I think of "low cost car", though, I thino of these.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:40, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Ooo, I like that target. Retarget to Economy car. --UsaSatsui (talk) 22:45, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as there are too many possible targets for this redirect even if there were an agreement as to a criterion for calling a particular type of automobile "low cost" (low price? low maintenance cost? Would a Volkswagen Beetle, which originally cost less than $500, qualify? How about a Model T Ford?). Too many subjectivities here: it's better simply to get rid of it. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 20:01, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - can't even make a good dab article out of this (too subjective for objective criteria). The term is too vague, too. B.Wind (talk) 04:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Economy car - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Economy car. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t·c·r) 22:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Hemlock Semiconductor Corporation → Crystalline silicon
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Delete. Lenticel ( talk ) 01:11, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

company should redirect to generic concept 76.66.192.6 (talk) 08:48, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - trivial mention in target article (citation points to official company site) smacks of promotion. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 19:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - the company is not notable. - Richard Cavell (talk) 04:59, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Soaring fuel prices → 2000s energy crisis
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Retarget to Price of petroleum. Lenticel ( talk ) 01:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

This could just as easily refer to the 1970's oil shock, the Suez Crisis, hyperinflation, war shortages, ... 76.66.192.6 (talk) 07:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * ...Or any given 3-month period. Retarget to Price of petroleum.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Price of petroleum. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (t·c·r) 11:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Price of petroleum. - Richard Cavell (talk) 04:58, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Unlike the similar ones above, the name of this redirect does not editorialise; so I WP:BOLDly retargeted this one per Tohd8 and Usa. If they're not already doing so, Fuel price and Price of fuel should point in the same direction. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 15:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in the United States → Political positions of John McCain
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was Retarget to Plug-in hybrid. Lenticel ( talk ) 06:06, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

John McCain is not the totality of PHEV in the US 76.66.192.6 (talk) 07:36, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Retarget to Plug-in hybrid. Could be a future article in this spot.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 18:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Plug-in hybrid. - Richard Cavell (talk) 04:58, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 15:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

WEAK → Articles for deletion/Daniel Brandt (14th nomination)
<div class="boilerplate mfd" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">The result of the debate was speedy-deleted by User:Tznkai per WP:CSD - A l is o n  ❤ 10:37, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:POINT violation and lashing out of a user. SirFozzie (talk) 04:44, 12 November 2008 (UTC) Can be speedy closed as speedy delete, per User:Tznkai. SirFozzie (talk) 06:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - with fire. Absolutely ludicrous! Why are we still messing this guy about? Let it go already - yeesh! - A l is o n  ❤ 05:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)