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 speedy deleted, R3, by RHaworth. (non-admin closure) -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:06, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• The big W → Wikipedia  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Do people actually say this? Regardless, it's a poor redirect because there are many other "big W"s that aren't Wikipedia. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 17:00, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete WP:R3. Tagged. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:51, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• It's at the old Woodwards site in Vancouver. Legacypac (talk) 23:18, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, a film whose Macguffin is a "big W". I don't think anyone calls Wikipedia "The Big W". 64.105.98.115 (talk) 02:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC) 64.105.98.115 (talk) 02:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 delete. --BDD (talk) 16:22, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Going to the bathroom → Defecation  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

This could plausibly redirect to many things. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 16:56, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as inaccurate (and therefore misleading), unnecessary, and unencyclopedic. Softlavender (talk) 06:14, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Nonsense. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:59, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as just crap. Legacypac (talk) 04:48, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 retarget. Since persondata is deprecated, I'm very tempted not to have a hatnote back there, but for now, I'll include it. --BDD (talk) 16:19, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:PERSON → Wikipedia:Persondata  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

A vast number of uses seem to indicate that when people reference this redirect they are really referring to WP:NPERSON. I'm wondering if that's a more suitable target for that reason, as well as the fact that its current target is no longer going to be used on Wikipedia. Izno (talk) 16:35, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support retarget to Wikipedia:Notability (people), so long as a hatnote refers back to the current target. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:53, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• retarget to Wikipedia:Notability (people) per nom but leaving a hatnote pointing to original target per Ivanvector --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:11, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 speedy deleted by RHaworth, criterion R3. Procedural close. (non-admin closure) Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:54, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Big Hero 6 hijacking → Lufthansa Flight 181  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Redirect makes absolutely no sense, why would it be called the "Big Hero 6 hijacking" Supercell121 (talk) 16:13, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• delete - agree with nominator, this is a nonsense redirect. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:14, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 delete. There's some indication that this could be a standalone article as well. --BDD (talk) 16:17, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Too soon → The Aristocrats (film)#Friars Club roast footage  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Request deletion of the redirect. It's a somewhat common 'joke' phrase that is directing to a very specific use, which is a sub-section of another article. Confusing. There'll probably never be a WP article for this, but perhaps should be a wiktionary article. Wittylama 13:34, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - agree with nom. Target doesn't explain what the "too soon" interjection means, just gives one extremely obscure example of it. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 16:00, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I created this redirect 8 years ago next month, and this is the first complaint I've heard. Far from being an "obscure example", it in fact redirects to what is perhaps the seminal use of the phrase in the English speaking world as documented by the film, i.e. the comedian Gilbert Gottfried joking, on stage, in New York City, about the 9/11 attacks very shortly after they happened, and cries of "too soon" being the audience's general response. As such, I fail to understand the nominator's self-professed confusion. If the nom thinks there should be a wiktionary article, they should go create one; that's a different project and it doesn't involve us. The nominator also makes a specious and unsupported claim that the meaning of the term has somehow evolved since 2001, but I will note that the first google hit for the term at the Urban Dictionary disagrees. -- Kendrick7^talk 05:07, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Heh, ran across this on Reddit today.[1] Via a discussion about an octopus using as coconut for shelter (which I was not in any way a part of), of all things.[2] So yes, the connection is still a thing. -- Kendrick7^talk 04:47, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as completely misleading. Spam. Softlavender (talk) 06:15, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spam? What? Why? Because it redirects to a subsection of an award winning documentary? I suppose it could just as easily be redirected to Gilbert_Gottfried#September_11_joke with some adjustments if that's your concern. I assure you, I wasn't a spammer 8 years ago, and I'm not one now. -- Kendrick7^talk 06:29, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete misleading, per Ivanvector -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 06:55, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per others. Legacypac (talk) 11:31, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm not sure a full-on delete is necessary since the phrase has certainly crept into popular culture, but I also don't think the present target (or any related to it) are the correct location for this phrase. --Izno (talk) 14:29, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Hey, @Izno:, I'm not quite the hipster I used to be so I'm not up on the latest pop culture. Could you explain what you think the correct target would be otherwise? -- Kendrick7^talk 18:04, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  Off the cuff, I can't think of anything. There are any handful of usages (World of Warcraft, Steve Irwin, 9/11 apparently) where it's been applied, which goes the WP:NEO route as being problematic (as in, problematic having a whole article on the subject). Pointing it to any one of the phrases certainly isn't right. --Izno (talk) 21:54, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps writing a stub on the subject could fix this? -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:23, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm starting to think maybe I could stub this out, given refs like:

• Katsilometes, John (February 23, 2011). "In retrospect, Gilbert Gottfried's 9/11 joke was maybe 'too soon'". Las Vegas Sun.

• But I honestly think the existing redirect is doing the job just fine as it is. -- Kendrick7^talk 05:14, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I still don't get it; the 9/11 Gottfried incident (2001) predates the invention of World of Warcraft (2004) and the death of Steve Irwin (2006) and is arguably the genesis of the term in popular culture to begin with. I don't think too soon deserves an article either, but I'm having a hard time understanding the animosity towards this 8 year old redirect. "We don't know where to redirect it so therefore let's not redirect it to anything" is a Loki's Wager fallacy. -- Kendrick7^talk 22:52, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 stubbified by Siuenti; no longer a redirect. (non-admin closure) Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 17:02, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Haizhu Square → Haizhu Square Station  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Haizhu Square is not the station. Cwek (talk) 03:03, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or stubbify the station is at the square, so is a subtopic, and is referred to as that, so a short form name. It'd be easier to just write a one-line stub instead of deleting it, and an additional line to indicate the station. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 07:11, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Stubbify using the content at Talk:Haizhu_Square#Translated content... not sure how to do it myself with the rfd notice there. Siuenti (talk) 20:03, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural close as it's already been turned into a sourced stub by Siuenti, and the topic appears to have notability independent of the station. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 13:16, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.