Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 January 23

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. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 08:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Planned presidential transition of Hillary Clinton → Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Describes an event that never happened/is not planned to happen. Basically this article was created way too soon and nominated for deletion. The result of that discussion was redirect. But now clearly the event has not happened and never will so no purpose in still having a redirect. Rusf10 (talk) 23:48, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I see some mentioning of this at Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2016#People. Even though, of course, she was not elected President, whom she chose to associate with and pick as her core team was news during 2016 and had some effects in the national political discussion. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:23, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural keep -- It was known during the AfD that this transition "would never happen." Since this nomination provides no new evidence since the last XfD, I see no reason to overturn its result. --NYKevin 21:58, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per nom. A redirect with no real function. --Calton | Talk 03:52, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per NYKevin, and because the topic is at least (minimally) mentioned at the target and the redirect continues to get a few hits per day. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 08:49, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -The fact that it did not happen did not expunge it from history. It is still plausible redirect with no harm and didn't meet any criteria for redirect deletion. –Ammarpad (talk) 18:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Redirects purpose to direct to whatever information there is if there is, which is true in this case Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:09, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) 14:26, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Mezo Bombs → List of recurring Mario franchise enemies#Bob-omb  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Besides not being mentioned at the target, the redirect is also misspelled; the correct spelling for this subject is "Mezzo bomb", a enemy character in Super Mario RPG. This subject's mention on Wikipedia would be the equivalent of a WP:GAMEGUIDE violation due to being a unnotable variation in a RPG video game. Steel1943 (talk) 23:37, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I agree. This doesn't seem useful at all. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:13, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) 14:25, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Blarrg → List of recurring Mario franchise enemies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Blarrrg → List of recurring Mario franchise enemies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Blargg → List of recurring Mario franchise enemies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target article. In addition, these redirects are probably misspellings for "Blargg", a enemy character in the Mario series that is not mentioned on Wikipedia. Steel1943 (talk) 23:34, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Based on pageviews, it seems pointless to keep these._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. Especially the second, which is an implausible misspelling since it has three consecutive r’s, which never occurs in English. I’ve added Blargg, which now goes to the same target (see #Blarg). LaundryPizza03 (talk) 05:46, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 redirect to Wiktionary. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 08:35, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Snift → List of recurring Mario franchise enemies#Shy Guy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely misspelling of "Snifit". Readers searching for "snift" may arrive at this redirect's current tiarget as a WP:SURPRISE. Also, Wiktionary:snift exists. Steel1943 (talk) 23:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Re-redirect to Wiktionary per nom._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 01:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to en:wikt:snift per nom. Dancter (talk) 18:03, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. In other news, Dorrie has been created (with no relation to the Super Mario 64 character). -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Dorrie (Super Mario 64) → List of Mario franchise characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. Ironically, Dorrie doesn't exist. Steel1943 (talk) 21:00, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - extremely minor character in game, not likely to deserve a mention anywhere. Sergecross73 msg me 21:13, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Had a good chance of being mentioned in Super Mario Odyssey which is what news reviews have mentioned, but it isn't even there. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:48, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) 14:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Ukkikis → List of Mario franchise characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target page. This redirect is probably meant to represent the plural form of "Ukiki"; however, that does not exist. The only mention of this subject is at List of fictional primates in video games, but I don't believe the redirect should be retargeted there since the redirect is plural, misspelled, and because no other redirects other than List of fictional apes in video games target that page. Steel1943 (talk) 19:50, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete - I don't have a strong opinion here. Apparently, these creatures have had a variety of names both officially and unofficially (see here), and have been in a bunch of games so far (though, never in a prominent role). The misspelled redirect doesn't seem particularly helpful to me, however. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:26, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 22:23, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Mass relay → Mass Effect  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Overly vague to redirect anywhere. Should be left up to the search function. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 02:06, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep seeing the number of Google hits for "mass relay" that refer to this video game (that I have never heard of before today...#notagamer...) dating back quite a few years I think that it may well be a term that would be searched for in WP and that should point to Mass Effect. The search engine turns up Mass Effect quite low down in the list. Domdeparis (talk) 17:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I'm seeing this refer to other things, such as a musical group, and the general concept is something that's common across a bunch of sci-fi works (the whole 'wormhole station' theory that I've seen on Stargate SG-1, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Thor: The Dark World, et cetera). CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Dabify or keep - Multiple meanings is not a reason to delete something. This is discussed at the target article, so there should be a path for searchers to find it. --NYKevin 22:00, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  What else would go on a dab page? There's no Wikipedia coverage of the musical group, and none of the other sci-fi works articles MOS:DABMENTION "mass relay". -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't care. If we have enough different meanings for a dab page, then make a dab page, otherwise don't. But either way, something needs to exist at this title since there is at least one plausible meaning here. --NYKevin 08:05, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Search function shows only Mass-Effect-related viable topics. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:56, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- common search term and this is the only plausible target for it. Reyk _YO! 14:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) 14:56, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Dachola → Metroid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Yet another random alien that isn't mentioned in the article. Unnecessary redirect - delete. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:46, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Characters_in_the_Metroid_series#Etecoons_and_Dachora and tag as alternative spelling or typo. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. The likelihood of the subject of this redirect being misspelled in this manner is very unlikely. Steel1943 (talk) 20:55, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - unlikely typo of an unlikely search term to begin with. Sergecross73 msg me 21:14, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) 14:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Aqua Lakitu → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Fishin' Lakitu → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Lakipea → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Lakithunder → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Lakitu in a Pipe → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Pipe Lakitu → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Princess Lakitu → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Thunder Lakitu → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wall Lakitu → Lakitu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

None of these subjects and/or variations are mentioned at the target. In addition, "Princess Lakitu" isn't even a Nintendo invention: Apparently, it was created by a fan for DeviantArt. Steel1943 (talk) 13:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete pernom. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 13:47, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I added Aqua Lakitu to this discussion at this time. (Pinging Arthistorian1977 to let them know since I added the redirect after their comment.) Steel1943 (talk) 15:08, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am still positive it's delete. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 19:51, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per nom. Unlikely search terms. Sergecross73 msg me 18:31, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I just added Lakipea to this discussion as it seems to be another unmentioned variation of the target page's subject. Steel1943 (talk) 23:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• @Arthistorian1977 and Sergecross73: I stand corrected: It turns out that Lakithunder is mentioned at the target. I'm not sure if that's enough to keep it though since it's just mentioned in passing. Steel1943 (talk) 23:59, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree and still support deletion. Honestly, looking through the article, I kind of doubt Lakitu itself is even notable - the sourcing is weak and appears to largely be based around passing mentions - though I know of course that we can't decide to delete the article itself at this venue. If you could, I would though. Sergecross73 msg me 00:08, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all Basically fancruft._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 05:38, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  @Zxcvbnm: Those aren't fancruft. The question is whether the target article mentions them or not. ToThAc (talk) 18:17, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: {Steel1943, is it possible to add a section on the Lakitu page briefly describing derivative Lakitus? ToThAc (talk) 18:20, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ToThAc: The only way which I could see that occurring and still meeting essentially all WP:NOT guidelines is if Lakitu itself were redirected to List of recurring Mario franchise enemies#Lakitu, and then mention/redirect them all there. With Lakitu currently being an article, leaving the redirects in place could set the false expectation that the variations are notable, bur redirecting the terms to List of recurring Mario franchise enemies#Lakitu while Lakitu is an article is problematic since they should target Lakitu if it exists, but are not as notable as say variations of Goomba or Koopa Troopa, and in my opinion, really don't need to be in the article at all. In fact, the current state of Lakitu seems more geared towards Lakitu as a unique character rather than a recurring enemy in the Mario series. Essentially, this is a double-edged sword that I'm not wanting to wield, and honestly believe that in the current state of these pages, deletion of these redirects is the best option for our readers. In fact, I'm now on the fence on nominating Lakitu for WP:AFD. (Pinging Sergecross73 since after writing all of that, I now more strongly believe their thoughts regarding Lakitu have merit.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:13, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I support sending it to AFD, and would likely be your first delete !vote. Sergecross73 msg me 19:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • What would a section like that realistically look like though? They're all essentially the same thing and self explanatory. "Fishin' Lakitu is a Lakitu who has a fishing pole and fishes." "Thunder Lakitu has the power of electricity". "Pipe Lakitu comes out of a pipe." "Princess Lakitu is a female Lakitu in a dress". It's not like they have rich backstories or any real-life significance to the video game industry. They're just little extras that jump out at Mario in games. Sergecross73 msg me 19:36, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 22:20, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• 2018 government shutdown → United States federal government shutdown of 2018  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

government shutdown can happen at many country as part of budget or any other process. I think this should be a disambiguation page, but not redirect to US topic. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 13:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Keep, or repurpose, but do NOT delete. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:48, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Unless there are other government shutdowns in 2018, no need to dabify... Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:13, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  And there's also no way to dabify. We can't "disambiguate" on Wikipedia something that's not ambiguous on Wikipedia. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:46, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reply - Then we can keep the redirect per WP:CHEAP. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per my reply above. TO make my !vote clear. :-) -- JHunterJ (talk) 14:13, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because I'm not convinced there's any WP:GLOBALISE issue here in the first place. The term "government shutdown" appears to be specifically-American political jargon (it even redirects to Government shutdowns in the United States since four years ago), and I struggle to find examples of reliable sources using it to describe a budget crisis or loss of supply in other countries. (Even in other presidential systems, I think what usually happens in the event of failure to pass a budget is automatic reversion either to last year's budget or to the executive's proposal.) See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 July 6#Assault weapons legislation for a similar debate. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 11:24, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per 59. Yeah I think only America is incompetent enough to actually shutdown its government :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:11, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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) 04:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Shitdown → Shutdown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is clearly a typo. Having a typo as redirect is not a proper one. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 13:37, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Keep per WP:CHEAP as a plausible typo. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:50, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and the counterargument of WP:COSTLY. Possible yes, but unlikely to actually happen. SkyWarrior 14:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Possible but I wouldn't say actually happens much. I wouldn't say it is a plausible typo Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not particularly plausible outside of redirecting every single possible way someone could use the wrong vowel in the spelling of a word (which we should not do, to be clear.) Sergecross73 msg me 18:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Gratuitously offensive and loaded. Unlikely and implausible search term. Sjakkalle (Check!) 20:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Sounds like made-up slang for taking a dump, and I'm sure some may look up this term expecting to find the same. Steel1943 (talk) 21:26, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - The "U" and the "I" are right next to one another on a QWERTY keyboard. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete doesn't seem plausible or appropriate for an encyclopedia. Lepricavark (talk) 16:37, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Far cry from plausible; I simply can't see how this redirect could be objectively useful. ToThAc (talk) 01:06, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as attempted WP:NEO AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:00, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not a plausible typo, either attempted WP:NEO or just a juvenile attempt at humour. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 02:28, 29 January 2018 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete- just because the U and the I are adjacent on the keyboard does not make this a plausible typo. Nobody would consider making Shutdoqn a redirect. Or any of the other 16 similar typos. Reyk _YO! 06:50, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 retargeted to List of Billboard number-one country albums of 2018. -- Tavix ^(talk) 04:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• List of number-one country albums of 2018 (U.S.) → Lists of number-one albums  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RED, was previously linked at 2018 in country music bit I have since removed it. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 04:47, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have now filled out List of Billboard number-one country albums of 2018 and pointed it there. I created this per the logic of those who created List of number-one country albums of 2016 (U.S.) and previous, as I believe it used to be the naming scheme of these pages. Ss112 05:00, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Close Has been fixed so it points to an appropriate target. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Killiondude (talk) 06:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Rob-omb → List of recurring Mario franchise enemies#Bob-omb  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target. The subject of the redirect is a variation of the subject in Super Mario RPG as a random minor enemy, so minor that its mention in Wikipedia probably fails WP:GAMEGUIDE. Steel1943 (talk) 04:16, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It's too bad it wasn't Robomb since then it could be a retarget to Andrew Romine who used this as his nickname during the MLB Players Weekend promotion. [1] [2]. If it were described at the characters article with decent coverage in reliable sources, then reconsider. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:10, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Killiondude (talk) 06:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Bob-ombs. → List of recurring Mario franchise enemies#Bob-omb  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The period at the end makes the redirect unlikely and WP:COSTLY. Steel1943 (talk) 04:10, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - This seems harmless, but I also can't see it as truly helpful either. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:47, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete housekeeping for the extra period. Not stylized that way. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:12, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Killiondude (talk) 06:43, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• H&N → Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• N&H → Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Vague: searching using these terms did not lend a strong connection to the target. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as vague.or extremely obscure usage. --Animalparty! (talk) 04:37, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as confusing with H&M Also some other various companies like this egg producer: [3] Conversely, N&H refers to a number of non-notable companies [4] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:12, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Could either of these possibly go to NH and HN, both being disambiguation pages? I'm seeing links to various articles that might be labeled as _&_ at some point. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:01, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That would imply there are multiple entries at those respective disambiguation pages that could reasonably go by "H&N" or "N&H". That does not seem plausible to me, but I'm interested if you have different findings. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. No indication that the targets are connected with those abbreviations. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:51, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 as unopposed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Robert William Thomson (journalist) → Robert James Thomson  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

An incorrect name, moved to Robert James Thomson (=Robert Thomson (journalist) = Robert Thomson (executive)). There is no valid redirect target from what I can see, and no use perpetuating incorrect names. --Animalparty! (talk) 02:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Killiondude (talk) 06:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Martin Garrix (Martin Garrix album) → Martin Garrix  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

According to his discography, Martin Garrix does not have an album entitled "Martin Garrix". -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Delete, unless there is proof of such an album. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, no official self-titled album. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:58, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Garrix does have an official album known both as The Martin Garrix Collection and simply Martin Garrix Collection (see here and here). Maybe this is where the confusion comes from? CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:34, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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. Killiondude (talk) 06:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• "I am not a racist" → Racial views of Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• I am not a racist → Racial views of Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Donald Trump is far from the only person to deny that he is a racist. In fact, this exact quote is also mentioned at Wade Boggs, Marc Faber, Rob Ford, Mark Steyn, and several others. It's best to delete this in favor of search engine results. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, also as per {{R from quotation}}, there is no 'best-known' source for this quotation given its ambiguity. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 04:50, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. = paul2520 (talk) 21:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Even if the term is strongly associated with Trump right now, still, from a broader historical and political perspective this sort of statement gets made many times by prominent figures. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Ridiculous attack redirect. Johnuniq (talk) 00:40, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete since frankly most covert racists say this, and it's clearly not exclusive to Trump. 10:43, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. SkyWarrior 03:45, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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 moved. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:42, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Peugeot Motocycles → Peugeot Motorcycles  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

8 years ago the article Peugeot Motocycles was moved to Peugeot Motorcycles because the editor thought that Motocycles was a spelling mistake. Peugeot Motocycles is the actual name of the company as it can be seen from their official website or by a google search. Please delete the redirect so I can move the page back Chris Ssk _talk 21:09, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I speedied the move, so this has already been resolved. The listing can be closed now._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 18:51, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.