The result of the debate was delete - no mention in article, no substantive mention in proposed retarget Fritzpoll (talk) 14:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Jebus" in target section or anywhere in target article. No history worth preserving. Mike R (talk) 16:09, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Missionary: Impossible#Legacy - there's a brief explanation of some significance of the term as it pertains to The Simpsons, Family Guy, and "several movies." 147.70.242.40 (talk) 19:39, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget. It's mentioned. JASpencer (talk) 16:53, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget. --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete neither The Simpsons#Influences on language or Missionary: Impossible mention the word (well the later mentions it once as Homer calling jesus, jebus.) CTJF83Talk 05:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete Fritzpoll (talk) 14:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Joey Jo-Jo "Junior" Shabadoo" in target article. Mike R (talk) 16:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to The Last Temptation of Homer, which is where I should have targeted this in the first place. This is a name actually mentioned in that episode; although it currently isn't mentioned at the proposed target, that can be changed - it's a likely search term. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is "Junior" in quotes? I would support redirecting Joey Jo-Jo Junior Shabadoo (without the quotes) to The Last Temptation of Homer if the target article mentioned the term. Mike R (talk) 21:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Way too obscure, and not a plausible search term...particularly with the quotes. --UsaSatsui (talk) 19:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete agree with UsaSatsui, way too obscure. Redirects are there for convenience. -- how do you turn this on 14:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete that's the worst redirect I've ever heard. JuJube (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term and JuJube is exactly right!! Who comes up with these?! CTJF83Talk 05:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • *runs out of room crying* Jubie Ju-Ju "Junior" Jubadoo (talk) 09:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nooooo! Jubie Ju-Ju! --UsaSatsui (talk) 15:16, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Academie (talk) 18:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete Fritzpoll (talk) 14:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Rock Strongo" in target article. Mike R (talk) 15:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral - the more appropriate target is The Dad Who Knew Too Little, but name is only nominally mentioned there. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 19:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Really, does every alias Homer has used need a redirect? Shall we point Max Power there too? (Oh hell, it's the top link on the disambig page...) --UsaSatsui (talk) 16:59, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarifying: Delete it regardless of the target. --UsaSatsui (talk) 02:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not a well known alias. JuJube (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note. Reopening Rfd, the new target is The Dad Who Knew Too Little.--Lenticel ^(talk) 23:54, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term CTJF83Talk 05:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - nominal mention in new proposed target is confusing - is Rock Strongo another name for Homer... or for Elvis Presley... or for some Elvis Presley imitator? Perhaps the target should be editor to clarify this, but until/unless it happens, the redirect would be useless. B.Wind (talk) 13:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete Fritzpoll (talk) 14:28, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improbable search term. Mike R (talk) 15:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - appropriate disambiguation involving wife Marge's often-said nickname for Simpson. See "Homie" for other uses of word. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 18:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom, it's an improbable search term. Redirects are for convenience, not for obscure phrases. -- how do you turn this on 14:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's used in over 200 episodes of the series, hardly an obscurity. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 17:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I don't think this is going to be reasonably searched for or linked to. Homie, however, should probably have a hatnote saying it's a nickname for Homer. --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Marge does call Homer "Homie", but nobody else does, really. JuJube (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment While Marge does call him Homie a lot, no doubt if you watch an episode, you would hear him called Homer too. Also, if it is kept, we should have Homie (disambiguation) page for this, Homey the Clown, and Homie (band). CTJF83Talk 05:43, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Academie (talk) 18:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Homer Simpson is called "Homie" as an affectionate term with regularity by wife Marge in a significant number (at least half?) of episodes of a series covering nearly 20 years. Thus it is likely that someone, particularly one who has seen a couple of episodes, would remember "Homie" as a "name" mentioned in the series. This per WP:RfD#KEEP, makes it a useful search item. The fact that she also refers to him by "Homer" is irrelevant in this instance. B.Wind (talk) 14:06, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was Delete --Lenticel ^(talk) 23:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Lance Uppercut" in target article. Mike R (talk) 15:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - no mention of "Lance Uppercut" in article space besides redirect page. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 19:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. -- how do you turn this on 14:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. JuJube (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was Retarget to Homie Fritzpoll (talk) 14:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Homee" in target article. Connection of "Homee" to "Homer Simpson" is tenuous at best. Mike R (talk) 15:53, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - variant of Marge's nickname for Homer Simpson ("Homie") often said in the aired program. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 18:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mention of "Homie" has been added to target article (and Marge Simpson as well). 147.70.242.40 (talk) 20:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it's Homie, not Homee. -- how do you turn this on 14:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• change target to Homie or delete. Beeblebrox (talk) 07:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Homie. --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete mmmm. JuJube (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Homie, spelling variation CTJF83Talk 05:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak redirect to Homie as a spelling variation.B.Wind (talk) 14:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete Fritzpoll (talk) 14:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improbable search term. Mike R (talk) 15:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as Simpson's full name is Homer Jay Simpson. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 18:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely search term. -- how do you turn this on 14:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There could be any number of "H. J. Simpsons", and it's unlikely someone searching for this would want to find info on Homer (or would at least already know his name and how to find him). --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not a well known alias for Homer in any respect. JuJube (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term and no one has ever referred to him as H.J. Simpson CTJF83Talk 05:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Academie (talk) 18:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. While it is "true" that Homer's full name is Homer Jay Simpson, the initial form was never used in an episode. B.Wind (talk) 14:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete Fritzpoll (talk) 14:34, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improbable search term. Mike R (talk) 15:49, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as Simpson's full name is Homer Jay Simpson. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 18:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely search term. -- how do you turn this on 14:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There could be any number of "H. J. Simpsons", and it's unlikely someone searching for this would want to find info on Homer (or would at least already know his name and how to find him). --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete not a well known alias for Homer in any respect. JuJube (talk) 09:27, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term and no one has ever referred to him as H.J. Simpson CTJF83Talk 05:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Academie (talk) 18:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. While it is "true" that Homer's full name is Homer Jay Simpson, the initial form was never used in an episode. B.Wind (talk) 14:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete - per it's more closely related redirect's deletion above Fritzpoll (talk) 14:42, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Jeebus" in target article. Mike R (talk) 15:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Infinitessimally weak keep (on the order of ε) - variant of "Jebus (The Simpsons)" above. If it is kept, it should be retargeted to Missionary: Impossible#Legacy as there's a brief explanation of some significance of the term as it pertains to The Simpsons, Family Guy, and "several movies." 147.70.242.40 (talk) 19:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and retarget per above. --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term CTJF83Talk 05:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Academie (talk) 18:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as it clearly doesn't belong targeted to Homer Simpson and the section in the IP's proposed new target seems to be missing now (it seems another editor has removed it for lack of referencing). B.Wind (talk) 14:15, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete Fritzpoll (talk) 14:39, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Jebus" in target article. No history worth preserving. Mike R (talk) 15:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - malformed redirect title as it is not a subpage. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 19:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely search term. And why is there a / there? -- how do you turn this on 14:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Wow, that's an old one. Anyways, I think it is needed to document a page move. --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unlikely search term and who would ever search with a "/"?? CTJF83Talk 05:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - the only page move that the history indicates is the one to the current name. There is only one non-deletion-linked page pointing to it, the talk page of the editor who made the move. It was a redirect that was moved, not an actual article (the one sentence "stub" was redirected just before the move). No loss here - and we get rid of an obsolete title. B.Wind (talk) 14:22, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was delete Fritzpoll (talk) 14:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Highly improbable search term –– Lid^(Talk) 08:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• It is the single quotes that makes it an improbable search term. Delete. Mike R (talk) 16:18, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• The reason for the quotes is that sometimes people put nicknames in quotes. Since "Barry" was Obama's name in childhood, I would say Keep. Plus some news sites like this http://www.france24.com/en/20080831-barry-barack-obama-fifth-grade-high-school-hawaii-dean-aldo-democrat-convention-usa-president refer to "'Barry' Obama" WhisperToMe (talk) 18:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - while the quotation marks are discouraged, keeping them is not without precedent (see [1], although none of the nominees actually start with quotes). 147.70.242.40 (talk) 20:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those nickname links were justified via their linking in article lists, however I can think of no possible circumstance where 'Barry' Obama would be linked by a wikipedia article. Perhaps if it was Barack 'Barry' Obama, and even then that's pushing it. –– Lid^(Talk) 23:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is a possibility a user can link from that kind of name. Reasons for not deletion for RFD says "They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in the article texts because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links."
    • Reasons for deleting says "If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful. Implausible typos or misnomers are potential candidates for speedy deletion, if recently created." - The style 'Barry' Obama is not particularly obscure or implausible. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely search term. -- how do you turn this on 14:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The section about this says "If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful. Implausible typos or misnomers are potential candidates for speedy deletion, if recently created." - 'Barry' Obama is not an obscure synonym. This is not an implausible typo (see the French news article). WhisperToMe (talk) 14:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • That article also uses his actual name. Sorry I disagree it's a likely search term (and it's certainly not a typo.) -- how do you turn this on 14:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's that WP:RFD has a list of reasons for deletion and I don't see how this fits any of the general reasons to delete at WP:RFD. Redirects can be kept at lower standards than articles (i.e. there are less reasons and circumstances that can be used for deleting redirects than for articles). I find redirects from every plausible alternative name possible (i.e. Barry Obama, etc.) to be useful and I think this fits "Someone finds them useful." as in I find it useful in preventing alternate articles from being created - I have seen some times when duplicate articles were created from different romanizations and spellings so I like to create redirects to cover these bases. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • OK, well, I don't think having it in quotes is a searchable quote. -- how do you turn this on 14:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Well, some people may create articles without trying to search for them. Also the RFD reason list doesn't necessarily say anything about "unlikely search terms" - instead it has a reason to delete as an "unlikely typo" WhisperToMe (talk) 15:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
            • Actually it does, to a degree. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful. Implausible typos or misnomers are potential candidates for speedy deletion, if recently created. The reference to typos is in regards to speedy deletion, the first part is in reference to obscure synonyms which is what this would fall under. –– Lid^(Talk) 07:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
              • Sort of, but it is well known that Barack Obama's childhood nickname is Barry so the synonym is not obscure. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment while redirects are cheap, this thing has quotes on it, so it's exceedingly unlikely (and why single instead of double quotes?) BUT "Barry Obama" is _not_ an uncommon way to call him, and crops up in every single one of the bios every news channel aired on him. 70.51.8.75 (talk) 05:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is true, and why I haven't put Barry Obama up here. I am well aware of the usage, the problem I have with this one is that it would require such a precise search term to be useful in the first place, and if one were searching for it it would always be in reference to Barack. –– Lid^(Talk) 07:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • As long as we see reliable sources, like this French newspaper article, use precisely the "`," then this is a useful redirect. If someone out there does it, and that someone happens to be a newspaper, then I don't see how this is not useful. People do make new articles in places where redirects should be (for instance see this revision http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Minutes_from_Disaster&diff=223196095&oldid=223196028 ) WhisperToMe (talk) 05:06, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I don't believe anyone would type with the Apostrophe, a far more likely search would be without the apostrophe. CTJF83Talk 05:55, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Some people do, or could use that apostrophe. Look at the French newspaper article; if nobody used (typed or otherwise) that apostrophe, why is it being used here? Barry Obama, whether with one style of apostrophe or another, is a known alias of Barack Obama. This does not match the common reasons for deletion. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Obscure pet names have no encyclopedic relevance at all. Academie (talk) 18:46, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was Delete. Lenticel ^(talk) 23:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous, and probably not a useful search term even if it wasn't. The redirector knows that Masonic Lodge is what he wants the redir to point to, but there are plenty of other fraternal groups, real (Elks) and fictional (Water Buffalo from the Flintstones) that call themselves Lodges and meet as such. MSJapan (talk) 15:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Mike R (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - could be said about someone meeting in sweat lodge or even a group of frat-boys (see Lodge). WegianWarrior (talk) 17:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete given the possibility of confusion with Orange Lodges etc. EJF (talk) 18:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious Delete - too many kinds of "Lodge". Blueboar (talk) 18:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• If this were a problem then redirect to Lodge. Otherwise keep. JASpencer (talk) 21:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - it is usually a bad idea to redirect a very general topic to a specific topic. In this case, there are too many potential targets for this term. Even Lodge, with its multitude of meanings might not be an appropriate target (it's a dab page now). 147.70.242.40 (talk) 22:18, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete What about the BPOE, the Loyal Order of Moose, that lodge Fred Flintstone went to etc... Beeblebrox (talk) 07:55, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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