The result of the debate was Kept. While it's an actor to a character redirect, redirects are cheap and this one causes no harm. -- JLaTondre 01:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original article was redirected (AfD), but now there is a redirect for an actor pointing to a list of characters. I propose one of two solutions:

1. Having an article at Happy (dog actor), or
2. Deleting the redirect altogether.

Either one works for me. —Zachary ^talk 04:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This is a common thing to do with redirects from merges, and I don't see why this would be an exception.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 16:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I looked through the section about Happy on the List of characters article, and saw no information out-of-universe about the dog actor named "Happy" that played a dog character coincidentally also named "Happy". —Zachary ^talk 21:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Happy is a character in the 7th Heaven TV series, in the vein of Mr. Muggles from Heroes (in this case, Mr. Muggles is redirected to his owner (Mrs. Bennet).) Also, his opening credits is "Happy as 'Happy'." --Howard the Duck 07:02, 27 January 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 One kept & one re-targeted. Yngwie J. Malmsteen/War to End All Wars re-targeted to War to End All Wars (album). -- JLaTondre 01:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Yngwie J. Malmsteen/War to End All Wars → World War I
• Hitler War → World War II this is listed in the section directly below this one (#Redirects to World War II) —Zachary ^talk 04:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• War World I → World War I

Pointless and unrelated redirects. Delete. Floaterfluss ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as implausible search terms. - Koweja (talk) 02:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nevermind, apparently they are legit. - Koweja (talk) 02:27, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget Yngwie J. Malmsteen/War to End All Wars. The early versions of this page (that is, before it was turned into the redirect) document the pagemove and contribution history of content that was eventually merged into War to End All Wars (album)). The content move pre-dates all the features that moved history. The title itself dates back to the earliest days of the project when we were still experimenting with Wikipedia:sub-pages. No opinion on the other two. Rossami (talk) 03:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I made the War World I redirect because I came across an article that had it written it that way (see the links to the page). I assumed that there is a chance of that repeating itself. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 20:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep War World I, I created the WW2 equivalent because I accidentally typed it that way once looking for the World War 2 article. Googling shows I'm not the only one. So, I believe it complies with the WP:REDIRECT reasons to create a redirect. -- Ash Lux ^{(talk | contribs)} 22:00, 16 January 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 Two kept, one re-targeted, and remainder deleted. War World II & War World 2 kept. WO2 re-targeted to Warrant Officer. -- JLaTondre 01:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• WO2 → World War II
• World war 1+1 → World War II
• War World II → World War II
• War World 2 → World War II
• World war 2 once → World War II
• The War After the War to End All Wars → World War II
• Hitler War → World War II

Pointless and unrelated redirects. Delete. Floaterfluss ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as implausible search terms. - Koweja (talk) 02:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. I haven't heard any of these in any kind of serious use.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 17:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment WO2 is the normal Dutch abbreviation (= WW2 in English) of the war. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/Keep/Redirect:
  • Delete World war 1+1, World war 2 once, The War After the War to End All Wars I don't see any references to these with google searching, and they don't really make sense.
  • Redirect WO2 to Warrant_Officer, W02 is an English abbreviation for Warrant Officer Class II.
  • Keep War World II, War World 2, I created War World II and War World 2 because I typed one of those before looking for the World War 2 article. Stupid? Perhaps. But helpful for silly mistakes like that. A Google search shows I'm not the only idiot out there to mix up the name like this. brewcrewer (see above for WWI redirects) created War World I because he found the term before. -- Ash Lux ^{(talk | contribs)} 21:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC) Therefore these two comply with WP:REDIRECT reasons for creating a redirect. -- Ash Lux ^{(talk | contribs)} 21:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all, especially Hitler War which is misleading. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:43, 17 January 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 speedy deleted per #G10 —Zachary ^talk 04:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know how the two are related in any way. Marlith ^T/C 00:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete as redirect created for attack purposes. Terraxos (talk) 02:16, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as attack. - Koweja (talk) 02:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as attack as well. Floaterfluss ^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was Kept. In print, "0" & "O" are close enough that someone can mistake the two so it's a reasonable search term. -- JLaTondre 01:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect from a number to a letter. This should either be made into it's own disambiguation page, redirected to 2002 or deleted. We shouldn't have zero redirect to the letter O in any redirects. RightGot (talk) 01:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per discussion below on other numeric deletions. In any case, it definitely shouldn't point to the letter. - Koweja (talk) 02:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Well, the very first line on the o2 disambiguation page is a link to 2002. I think that makes this one different from the ones below. O and 0 are also very close on a qwerty keyboard and not easy to notice if you mistype. Seems like a plausible typo and a marginally helpful destination to me. Rossami (talk) 03:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Nominated as a WP:POINTed objection to other redirects created by the nominator. But it's a plausible confusion, and at least one of the O2 pointers is also referred to as 02. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Arthur Rubin. Potentially valuable redirect.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 16:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as separate disambiguation page similar to 01 through 08. We shouldn't be mixing zero with the letter 0. Note how the disambiguation page O1 is total separate from 01. RightGot (talk) 20:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment. Yes, that's probably a mistake. O1 and 01 should link to one another in the headnotes of the disambiguation pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthur Rubin (talk • contribs) 20:28, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment On and 0n now linked for all digits n for which both articles exist. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 08:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Here, we have a really odd one, in that O2 (O-Town album) should be in both 02 and O2 if they were to be split. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:32, 21 January 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 speedy deleted by SkierRMH as vandalism (CSD G3). WjBscribe 03:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

This is a joke--just take a look at the creator's contributions. Same goes for Megan dunbar.P4k (talk) 07:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy-delete both as confirmed vandalism. Rossami (talk) 14:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

The result of the debate was Kept. -- JLaTondre 01:30, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term now given that the album has a name and has been released. Was created when the album's name had not been revealed. No one is going to type this at this stage. There are probably other similar redirects still existent like this from album articles created before the title was known, but I don't know if anyone's ever discussed them before.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 23:15, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Despite it probably not going to be searched very much, there is no other article that could be created in this spot, nor if this was searched, would it pull up anything but In Rainbows as the result. — Save_Us † 19:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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