File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
: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
. -- Tavix (talk) 20:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- {{no redirect|1 = Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT }} → :Wikipedia:Deletion review (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2017-03-11&end=2017-04-09&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Wikipedia%3ABUNFIGHT stats]) [ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ]
Ok, so as an American I've been rather confused by the apparent sudden proliferation of this term on Wikipedia. Luckily Wiktionary [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bunfight has an entry that explains its meaning]. I wondered if maybe there wasn't some way to clarify this term for the rest of us non-Brits and found this redirect. I think it is obvious it shouldn't point where it does now, why pick just one of the many places where contentious discussions take place? From the edit summaries it seems like this was a long-departed editor's idea of a joke.
So the question is: retarget somewhere that might actually be helpful, or just delete? Beeblebrox (talk) 20:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
:Comment. In my slang, any little argument is a bunfight, like the Bunfight at the OK Corral and so on. So that is the question really. I don't contribute much to Wiktionary, and checked to make sure, but it is certainly not one of mine. WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target and I should say more. A newbie editor would expect to be told what a bunfight is, does not understand it, the policy rationale or how-you=-please does not explain it, this is WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. 21:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
::Now, Bugsy Malone that was a good bunfight. Si Trew (talk) 21:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
::User::Beeblebrox the nom put it clearly, as an American he didn't get it; WP:WORLDWIDE. Even before it proliferated (and I have seen no evidence of that) I assumed it was just schoolboy slang, because it is nowhere in any dictionary I have, and I checked about five years ago on this, not just yesterday, because I log new words as a bit of a sideline in lexicography. As far as I have from my logging, it has always just been British English slang to mean a no-harm-done fight, could nom User:Beeblebrox give me the links, which edit summaries are you talking of? Were they mine, I am not long-departed, but I will tell you if they are mine or not. Si Trew (talk) 22:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
:It could be something nigel molesworth sed, chiz, it could be a chiz, sir, as any fule kno. Si Trew (talk) 22:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
::{{Ping|SimonTrew}} I'm not sure what it is you are asking for. I've seen this term used in a few discussions lately, I don't recall any of them involving you specifically. The "long-departed" comment was in reference to the user who created this redirect back in 2008, they made a few edits in 2015 but otherwise have been inactive since 2011. All of that is really neither here nor there as the point is determining if we should retain this redirect, and if so where it should point. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
