Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 October 12

October 12
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 12, 2009

Again (2009 song)
The result of the discussion was Retarget to Again. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:59, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * → Again (Flyleaf song) (links to redirect)

Delete. This redirect could equally apply to either Again (Yui song) and Again (Flyleaf song), both of which are 2009 songs with the title "Again". I suppose the redirect could be converted to a dab page, but it's an unlikely search term, and the disambiguation is already well-covered by existing dab page at Again. The only article-space links to the redirect were piped links, which I've changed to the actual article names, Again (Yui song) and Again (Flyleaf song), as applicable. TJRC (talk) 18:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The original article was created for the Flyleaf song, which I moved to Again (Flyleaf song), creating the initial redirect. If there could be any confusion, I'd say Delete per nom. --Wolfer68 (talk) 19:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Retarget to Again disambiguation page. While the year should not be used as a basis of disambiguation of music (it should be by either artist or composer), it is nonetheless used with great regularity. Deletion of the redirect would only prompt recreation; retargeting it would be a far better choice. Note that Again (song) is also a redirect to the dab page. B.Wind (talk) 03:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Retarget per above.--Tikiwont (talk) 15:31, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Retarget as per B.Wind above. This should point to a DAB page but there's no reason it needs to be one specific to only 2009 songs. The small number of people that get to this page should be able to figure out what they want. — m a k o ๛  02:29, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment As the nom, I have no problem with the Redirect solution proposed above; especially because User:B.Wind is almost certainly correct; it might just get recreated if deleted. TJRC (talk) 07:43, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

access mode
The result of the discussion was Delete. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * → VAX (links to redirect)

Delete. This was originally a stub that mentioned the VAX and someone turned it into a redirect. There are mentions of access modes (and access levels) in many articles in many domains and we do best by not putting anything in the way of searches. (There are no incoming links.) Matchups 12:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as being too generic to be useful as a search item. As a rule, it is not a good idea to have general redirect to specific... particularly something so nebulous as this. B.Wind (talk) 02:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Retarget &rarr; Access control. As noted above, the current target is much too specific for this term.  While Access control is not a perfect fit, it does provide basic information on a variety of access modes (physical, telecommunications, IT security) and dab links to other forms of access control. --Allen3 talk 13:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe these topics are sufficiently different that a redirect would not be helpful. Matchups 16:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete -- This is better off going to search results. It could mean any number of things and I see no reason to assume that VAX should be the first thing on that list. — m a k o ๛  01:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Randy schwartz
The result of the discussion was speedily deleted by DGG. Jafeluv (talk) 10:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * → Douche (links to redirect)

Vandalism Kameejl (Talk) 03:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Speedy delete per criterion G3 (pure vandalism). I have tagged it. Kameejl, in the future, such redirects do not have to come here to be deleted; you can just add to the page, and someone will delete it for you. — Gavia immer (talk) 02:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)