Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 September 13

September 13
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 13, 2009

Brutal death metal
The result of the discussion was Keep retarget Rich Farmbrough, 15:37, 18 September 2009 (UTC). Previous AfDs: 
 * → Death metal (links to redirect)

"Brutal death metal" is not a valid genre. The target section, a list of death metal subgenres, does not include "brutal". The article on "brutal death metal" has been deleted via AfD twice. Mike R (talk) 19:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - it seems clear that some people are using the phrase as a search item; so the redirect is serving two purposes here: that of redirecting to a wider, more "accepted" genre containing it (well, at least in the minds of those who use the term "brutal death metal"), and that of preventing accidental linking (if recreation of the deleted article remains a significant problem, the redirect can be protected to prevent further recreations). All that AfD resolved is whether or not we should keep an article; the issue of the redirect, discussed here, is different, with different reasons for keeping and deleting . B.Wind (talk) 22:57, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - users who search for or click on a link to brutal death metal should be taken to the death metal page instead of a search page, as it's clear that this is the most relevant page for the "supposed subgenre". Deleting the redirect would result in brutal death metal appearing as a redlink, which could be counterproductive by encouraging people to create an article. Also, this redirect page was a suggested result of the first AfD discussion. I might, however, recommend, getting rid of the section target since "brutal" is not mentioned there. —Zach425 talk / contribs 01:43, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Retarget to Death metal -- This is getting loads of traffic and is a common search term. That said, unless the section on subgenres actually contains information on brutal death metal I don't understand why this wouldn't just redirect to the top of the death metal article. If the subgenre section grows a referenced, encylcopedic description of brutal death metal, someone should feel welcome to change the redirect back into its current form. — m a k o  ๛  01:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Boldly retargeted per above suggestion. I was debating this in my mind before Benjamin convinced me. B.Wind (talk) 04:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I was on the fence about doing it myself but I think this was the right choice and can't imagine that this will be controversial. — m a k o ๛  13:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as retargeted. If the nominator feels that this is not a correct term, then consider tagging with R from incorrect name. -- ToET 14:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Motors Liquidation Company



 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was Speedily deleted per author request. TN X Man  16:36, 13 September 2009 (UTC)


 * → User:Evosoho/Motors Liquidation Company (links to redirect)

Redirect to user subpage that is not ready for existing in the mainspace.--3^0$0%0 1@!k 13:40, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Since the nominator was also the creator of the redirect, I've tagged it with db-author for speedy deletion. B.Wind (talk) 15:08, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That's right. This can be speedied under G7 (i.e., author requests deletion). — m a k o ๛  16:11, 13 September 2009 (UTC)