Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 December 6

December 6
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 6, 2013.

Wikipedia:FAGFP



 * 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 keep. (NAC)Armbrust The Homunculus 01:11, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * FAGFP → Find-A-Grave famous people (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

We don't need more "fag" nonsense on Wikipedia. Likely to stir up a lot of trouble. (Plus any way to keep FindAGrave crap away from here should be endorsed.) Beerest 2 talk 02:05, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as a completely unlikely search term, and i think this is similar to people using "BAMF" in various articles to get away with stuff. sophomoric at best.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:32, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep on two grounds. The first is that we don't delete pages because we think they will be a problem in the future. The second is that we don't delete pages that redirect to pages that the nominator doesn't like.  Konveyor   Belt  18:13, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per Konveyor Belt. The reasoning presented by Konveyor Belt is rather clear, and I agree with it. Steel1943  (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:FAG (which redirects to the same article) was closed as no consensus not long after this was opened and I don't see how this is any worse. Considering that in this case the term fag is part of a larger string fagfp it does not make sense for me to delete this redirect since the case for offensiveness regarding the kept redirect (wp:fag) is stronger than it is here.--174.93.163.194 (talk) 19:36, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Boils down to WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Anyways should we delete the entire Fagaceae family? I think those trees are named quite offensively.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 03:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.