Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 January 17

January 17
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 17, 2010

Www.bbc.co.uk/nature/programmes/tv/wildnewworld
The result of the discussion was speedy delete. NW ( Talk ) 00:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * → Prehistoric America (film) (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Redirects are not needed from URLs of external organisations. mattbr 10:05, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it was a mistake on my part. FunkMonk (talk) 15:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * By calling the redirect a mistake are you saying that we want this to be deleted. I ask since if you as the page creator wants the page deleted and if there are no other major contributors (adding the deletion tag does not count) the page can then be speedy deleted.--76.69.164.121 (talk) 02:43, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup. FunkMonk (talk) 13:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete as per above. URLs are not appropriate article titles  Me Three  ( talk to me )  21:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Institue for Theological Zoology
The result of the discussion was delete. Jafeluv (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * → Institute for Theological Zoology (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Created last December as the result of moving a misspelled new page. Not a useful redirect to leave in place.  Glenfarclas  ( talk ) 07:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete. Misspelling in creation of page, but not a likely misspelling for someone searching for the article  Me Three  ( talk to me )  21:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep clearly a likely misspelling as it was created misspelled before being moved. Josh Parris 13:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - a random typo, not a likely one (in a month when Institute received 5,080 pageviews, "Institue" received only 8 hits). A single occurrence does not indicate likeliness, and the move history is preserved in the page history of the target article. –Black Falcon (talk) 21:51, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Flora Stone Mather Memorial Hall
The result of the discussion was Delete. Ruslik_ Zero 17:14, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * → Mather House (Case Western Reserve University) (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Delete. This is misleading, because the Mather Memorial Building and Mather House are different structures. - Eureka Lott 06:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Cum fart
The result of the discussion was retarget to Creampie (sexual act). Jafeluv (talk) 18:31, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * → Semen (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Nominated for R3 as an implausible search term, but cleared R3 due to recency. I still contend that this is an implausible search term, however, and therefore it is ready for deletion. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete I can't see how someone would type this in if they were actually researching semen Clovis Sangrail (talk) 06:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This doesn't seem to be a good target. Either anal sex or creampie (sexual act) would be better. Interestingly, it was discussed at AfD: Articles for deletion/Cum fart (2nd nomination) and redirected to oral sex (the first discussion was at Articles for deletion/Cum fart). The current target came about after a RfD discussion: Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 May 16, where semen and flatulence were also suggested. The redirect's history suggests that it is a non-notable neologism best searched for on Urban Dictionary, not here. But I still wouldn't be surprised if there is a suitable target also here, if the term is common enough. —Кузьма討論 06:54, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to creampie (sexual act). Earlier versions of the article (when it was not a redirect) begin with "...also known as creampie...". I suppose it could be a plausible search term, although if it has a synonym or near-synonym it doesn't need a full article.  Me Three  ( talk to me )  21:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to creampie (sexual act). Not entirely right, but less wrong than the current target. Josh Parris 12:56, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Sorry, but LOL. I needed a good laugh. NJA (t/ c)  09:51, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Uncyclopedia, the content free encyclopedia
The result of the discussion was keep. Jafeluv (talk) 18:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * → Uncyclopedia (links to redirect • [ history] • )

The search engine will already suggest Uncyclopedia without typing this in, pointless redirect. Otterathome (talk) 02:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep, harmless R from alternative name. —Кузьма討論 06:35, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete, but not per nom. While the redirect does not appear to be used much (only 5–15 pageviews per month), it is not implausible; however, it is missing a dash. So, delete the nominated redirect, create Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia instead, and tag it as R from alternative name. –Black Falcon (talk) 20:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. As the "official" name (with tagline), it seems to be a plausible search term.  I'd keep, and also create the redirect (with hyphen) as above.  Most Wiki articles with a hyphen in the title also exist as a redirect without one, since they are likely to be omitted by someone typing in the search box.    Me Three  ( talk to me )  21:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as a valid alternative name. Tagged. Josh Parris 12:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)