Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion‎ | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tavix (talk | contribs) at 20:45, 7 February 2019 (→‎'Gilets jaunes' protestation: Closed as soft delete (XFDcloser)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

January 29

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 29, 2019.

The dufflebag

This redirect is a combination of (1) the inferior spelling "duffle" for "duffel", the origin of which is Duffel, (2) made into a closed compound word as a misspelling, and (3) with a definite article, "the", prefixed. This amount of error makes this an unworthy redirect, and thus I propose it should be deleted. (Prior history: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 11#The dufflebag) Bsherr (talk) 22:27, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Googol Megaplex

Unsure of whether this redirect refers to Googolplex or something else. Maybe it should be deleted? Jalen D. Folf (talk) 19:19, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep: A quick check using the appropriate search engine shows that this term has been used to define a very large number, though the author of the definition is not known. The article creator insisted that the term came about in May 2009 (the same month the article was created), but the large number wikia points the origin back to 2004. The terms "Googol megaplex" and "Googolmegaplex" appear to be valid in numerology. Paper Luigi T • C 22:24, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, along with Googol Hyperplex and Googol Gigaplex for the same reasons. They were all created at the same time by Xplane80. They were later redirected to Googol by Ironholds with the edit summary "WP:NFT". I can't comprehend why it was redirected instead of deleted—if Wikipedia is truly not for things made up in one day, why would you want the made up term to continue to exist on Wikipedia as a redirect? Even if these are legitimate terms, they aren't mentioned at the target so someone wanting specific information on these numbers will not find it at the target. -- Tavix (talk) 20:44, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Windows Genuine Disadvantage

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 6#Windows Genuine Disadvantage

Patch (computing

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect which omits the closing bracket is not at all useful. Also, this is WP:RDAB. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:50, 29 January 2019 (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.

Aluminium poisoning

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 to Aluminium#Biology. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 03:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Topic doesn't seem to be mentioned or identified in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 17:28, 29 January 2019 (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.

Walt DisneyY

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 Thryduulf (talk) 10:39, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely useless. No one is going to type another capital "Y" at the end of Walt Disney. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:14, 29 January 2019 (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.

Nobel Peace Prixe

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) 20:21, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a useless redirect. There have been only 9 pageviews and people can find what they are look for when they type "Nobel Peace". This makes this redirect useless and it doesn't even appear in the search bar. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:11, 29 January 2019 (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.

Cameroom

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) 03:48, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is useless. People can find what they are looking for by typing "Cameroo". The "m" at the end doesn't make this redirect any useful. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:08, 29 January 2019 (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 withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:44, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These are very strange looking brackets. I copied and pages these brackets into Google and there are no hits online. It is unlikely that someone will search a rarely used brackets as the common brackets are "()". The redirect for those is at (). The 15 pageviews suggests that this isn't a worthy redirect. I don't know how to type these brackets myself but this is clearly a complicated unicode character. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:04, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And there are no mainspace links. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:17, 29 January 2019 (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.

AIuminum

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely mispelling. The second letter is a capital "i". Steel1943 (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Pollutes the searchbox when "Aiu" is entered. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:31, 29 January 2019 (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.

List WorldChampionship Summerbiathlon

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. Thryduulf (talk) 10:40, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Bad phrasing, spacing and caps make this a very unlikely search term. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:56, 29 January 2019 (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.

Same (album)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 7#Same (album)

List of toy mechanisms

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) 20:20, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. PROD was declined by redirecting. But the subject is not discussed in the target article. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:33, 29 January 2019 (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.

Adam Pava

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. This WP:REDLINKs the title if anyone is able to scrounge up the sources to create an article, while also revealing search results so his other credits will appear when he is searched for. -- Tavix (talk) 20:19, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This man has more than just the one credit. I want to write an article about him, but there isn't much to be found. Still, this redirect target seems inappropriate. Paper Luigi T • C 12:48, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:JUSTDOIT. Turning redirects into articles is positively encouraged. 94.21.204.175 (talk) 13:41, 29 January 2019 (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.

Off-White™

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) 20:18, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any specific policy against using "™" in a page title. WP:TITLETM doesn't prohibit it, MOS:TM says "Do not use the ™ and ® symbols, or similar, in either article text or citations" but doesn't say not to use it in page titles. I thought the article title was considered part of the article text, but can't find anywhere that says that. I still say Delete this because it can't be used in running text, it is unlikely to be typed, has no incoming links, and has had no views in the last 30 days. (It also breaks the Page Views tool when clicked from "Page Information" - but not from here.) 94.21.204.175 (talk) 12:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is a related mass-nomination from four days ago going on here. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:06, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that's a coincidence. I guess it's too late to combine it into that mass-nomination. I did some WP:BEFORE but intitle:™ search brings up 0 results, otherwise I would have noted it there. (I've just tried with a regex search, which does work, but times out.) 94.21.204.175 (talk) 02:05, 30 January 2019 (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.

Correct knowledge

No mention of "Correct knowledge" in target article. Search results are generally not about Vidya. Possible POV. Certes (talk) 12:24, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I found the phrase in an old version of a duplicate article Vidyā, but I still don't think it justifies the redirect. Certes (talk) 16:35, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as impossibly vague. There are all sorts page that refer to "correct knowledge" but none significantly or as a term of art that I can see. Thryduulf (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's unlikely that a native English speaker would type this phrase in the search box, but it seems to me very plausible that an ESL speaker could do so. I'd assume they were looking for an article about how scholars evaluate the truth of a proposition. In other words, I think this search term should point to philosophical articles about truth values. Consider whether the outcome could be, for example, disambiguate between Validity (logic), Truth table and List of fallacies?—S Marshall T/C 18:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network (Netherlands and Flanders)

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. This was a leftover redirect from content deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of programs broadcast by Cartoon Network (Netherlands). -- Tavix (talk) 20:12, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this redirect has relevance on the English Wikipedia for this particular target...unless I'm missing something. Paper Luigi T • C 12:17, 29 January 2019 (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.

Cartoon Network Original Series

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 6#Cartoon Network Original Series

Cartoon Network Original Series and Movies

Delete as redundant. A better redirect already exists. No need for grammatically incorrect caps. Paper Luigi T • C 12:15, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cartoon network original series and movies

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 6#Cartoon network original series and movies

All That (television series)

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) 03:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary disambiguation. Paper Luigi T • C 12:11, 29 January 2019 (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.

Nickeloden's All That

Nickelodeon's All That? I can't find this official title anywhere. Might as well have redirects for Nickelodeon's Drake & Josh, Nickelodeon's CatDog, and Nickelodeon's SpongeBob SquarePants too. Paper Luigi T • C 12:10, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was so hasty with this that I didn't even notice the misspelling! Another reason to delete this. Paper Luigi T • C 22:27, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Toys In The Attic (Rugrats Episode)

Delete as redundant. Toys In The Attic (Rugrats episode) already exists, and it doesn't even follow capitalization conventions. Paper Luigi T • C 11:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The tryicycle thief/ rhinoceritis

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 6#The tryicycle thief/ rhinoceritis

Rug Rats (Pilot)

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) 20:11, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This was never the name of the pilot episode. Edit history is garbage. Paper Luigi T • C 11:57, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. If this were "(pilot episode)" or "(Pilot Episode)" or something like that, then I'd say to probably keep it, but as it is I'm uncertain given the wide variety of meanings "pilot" can have. Thryduulf (talk) 13:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Combination of a (1) misspelling by way of separating the compound word, (2) incorrect name for the pilot episode, (3) ambiguous and therefore unlikely disambiguator, and (4) miscapitalized disambiguator. This makes for an undesirable redirect. --Bsherr (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2019 (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.

New Kid in Town (Nicktoons episode)

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) 20:10, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as redundant because New Kid in Town (Rugrats episode) already exists. Paper Luigi T • C 11:56, 29 January 2019 (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.

At the Movies (Rugrats episodes)

Delete as implausible redirect. Disambiguation contains "episodes" when "episode" would suffice. Paper Luigi T • C 11:54, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rugrats (Vacation)

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:50, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Improper redirect written in an unusual format (series with episode name in parenthesis). Delete as implausible redirect. Paper Luigi T • C 11:52, 29 January 2019 (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.

THEORY OF SOCIAL RESPONSE: COMPUTERS ARE SOCIAL ACTORS

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 6#THEORY OF SOCIAL RESPONSE: COMPUTERS ARE SOCIAL ACTORS

Diet Dark Knight

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 per G7 by Athaenara. -- Tavix (talk) 14:10, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Phrase does not seem like a likely search phrase. Has no incomming links, is not mentioned in the article and does not appear in google search results (at least not in the first two pages, not even when adding "arrow". Gonnym (talk) 11:14, 29 January 2019 (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.

Mommy Fearest (Powerpuff Girls episode)

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) 03:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible. "Mommy Fearest" already exists and points to the same target. The disambiguation is totally unnecessary. Paper Luigi T • C 10:24, 29 January 2019 (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.

Geshundfight (The Powerpuff Girls episode)

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) 03:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible. "Geshundfight" already exists and points to the same target. The disambiguation is entirely unnecessary. EDIT: And it seems I'm actually the one who created this redirect... Paper Luigi T • C 10:22, 29 January 2019 (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.

Powerpuff Bluff (Powerpuff Girls episode)

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) 03:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible. "Powerpuff Bluff" already exists and has the same redirect target. Paper Luigi T • C 10:21, 29 January 2019 (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.

Mommy Fearest...

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 soft delete. -- Tavix (talk) 20:05, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible. "Mommy Fearest" already redirects to the episode list. The title with ellipses has never been the official episode title. Paper Luigi T • C 10:19, 29 January 2019 (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.

Octi Evil (Powerpuff Girls episodes)

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) 03:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible. The redirect for "Octi Evil" already exists. Paper Luigi T • C 10:18, 29 January 2019 (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.

Powerpuff Bluff(Powerpuff Girls episode)

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) 20:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The whole reason this redirect exists is because someone forgot the spacing over 10 years ago. I say it should be deleted as implausible. Paper Luigi T • C 10:16, 29 January 2019 (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.

Mineralogical Magazine

Mineralogical Abstracts was a supplement to Mineralogical Magazine and Journal of the Mineralogical Society. It makes no sense to redirect the larger organizations to the side-product. This should be deleted per WP:REDLINK. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 06:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I created the redirect in 2013. It's true that Mineralogical Abstracts was a supplement to Mineralogical Magazine and Journal of the Mineralogical Society. However, in WP there is no page (that I know of), that conveys more info on Mineralogical Magazine than the Mineralogical Abstracts page. Therefore I consider the redirect serves a useful function, until a Mineralogical Magazine page is created. DadaNeem (talk) 11:47, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great French War

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) 03:49, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as neologism unused or little-used outside Wikipedia (criterion #8); see Google Books and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Great French War, where an article on the neologism was deleted. Ribbet32 (talk) 05:24, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Not a neologism, certainly, since used by 19th-century historians: [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14] and so on. Hits from the Google Books search, but not -wikipedia. No need to be deleting this. Charles Matthews (talk) 05:56, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, though I notice many of those use lower case (as in, not a WP:PROPERNAME). Google Books indicates the term has been used loosely for various conflicts, most not the Revolutionary Wars (a few more for the Napoleonic Wars, actually). Ribbet32 (talk) 00:12, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
{{redirect|Great French War}} can be used in a hatnote for some further clarification, somewhere. It is forgivable, surely, to ignore the Peace of Amiens and see there as being a single conflict. In any case the term has a certain traditional standing. Charles Matthews (talk) 11:51, 31 January 2019 (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.

'Gilets jaunes' protestation

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 soft delete. -- Tavix (talk) 20:45, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary for the ' B dash (talk) 00:17, 29 January 2019 (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.

Government shutdown (version 2)

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 per WP:G6. -- Tavix (talk) 19:21, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary and implausible redirect B dash (talk) 00:10, 29 January 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_January_29&oldid=882254830"