March 14

Redirects to1000 (number)

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasno consensus. There's an obvious split of opinion between those supporting deletion because these particular numbers aren't discussed in the target article, and those who support keeping because there's nowhere else for these numbers to target to. Relisting continues to give a roughly even split of opinion.Deryck C.08:26, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• 1003 (number)1003 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1004 (number)1004 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1006 (number)1006 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1007 (number)1007 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1011 (number)1011 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1012 (number)1012 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1021 (number)1021 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1022 (number)1022 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1025 (number)1025 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1039 (number)1039 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1061 (number)1061 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1063 (number)1063 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1069 (number)1069 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1097 (number)1097 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1100 (number)1100 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1109 (number)1109 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1111 (number)1111 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1117 (number)1117 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1129 (number)1129 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1151 (number)1151 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1163 (number)1163 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1171 (number)1171 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1181 (number)1181 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1193 (number)1193 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1213 (number)1213 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1226 (number)1226 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1231 (number)1231 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1237 (number)1237 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1240 (number)1240 (number) →1000 (number)#1001–1249 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1250 (number)1250 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1277 (number)1277 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1303 (number)1303 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1313 (number)1313 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1321 (number)1321 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1361 (number)1361 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1373 (number)1373 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1399 (number)1399 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1423 (number)1423 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1427 (number)1427 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1429 (number)1429 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1447 (number)1447 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1453 (number)1453 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1459 (number)1459 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1483 (number)1483 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1489 (number)1489 (number) →1000 (number)#1250–1499 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1549 (number)1549 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1553 (number)1553 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1567 (number)1567 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1571 (number)1571 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1579 (number)1579 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1607 (number)1607 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1609 (number)1609 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1613 (number)1613 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1621 (number)1621 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1627 (number)1627 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1637 (number)1637 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1663 (number)1663 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1667 (number)1667 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1669 (number)1669 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1693 (number)1693 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1697 (number)1697 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1699 (number)1699 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1713 (number)1713 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1721 (number)1721 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1723 (number)1723 (number) →1000 (number)#1500–1749 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1759 (number)1759 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1777 (number)1777 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1783 (number)1783 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1787 (number)1787 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1789 (number)1789 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1831 (number)1831 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1847 (number)1847 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1867 (number)1867 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1871 (number)1871 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1873 (number)1873 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1877 (number)1877 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1879 (number)1879 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1913 (number)1913 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1920 (number)1920 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1949 (number)1949 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1990 (number)1990 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1991 (number)1991 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1992 (number)1992 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1993 (number)1993 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1994 (number)1994 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1995 (number)1995 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1996 (number)1996 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1998 (number)1998 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• 1999 (number)1999 (number) →1000 (number)#1750–1999 (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

None of these numbers are mentioned in the target article. This could cause potential harm for readers trying to find information about these specific numbers.Steel1943 (talk)03:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep all to prevent creation of unnecessary number articles. They are part of a range, so go to the right target. --70.51.46.39 (talk)04:47, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I actually believe that the whole "1000 (number)#Selected numbers in the thousands (1001–1999)" section should be removed (or, at the very least, just keep the numbers that are actual articles andnot redirects to these sections [which are all that I have nominated]) since there are some numbers in 1000-1999 that seem to have their own articles. Also, there is the fact that nearly none of the mentioned numbers in this list have references that could cement their usefulness on this makeshift list, and most times, the number entries do not have any references at all.Steel1943 (talk)04:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, I agree completely with Steel1943. It doesn't make any sense to have redirects for numbers that aren't mentioned at the target. --Tavix^(talk)12:17, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all, there is nothing interesting to say about them, which is coveered at theLeast interesting numberLeast interesting number ->Interesting number paradox. And I imagine it would be absurd to retarget them all there. Quod erat and all that,Si Trew (talk)13:19, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

and lo and behold, for1423 (number)1423 (number) which I plucked at random (my screen scrolls slowly) there is exactlynothing said at the target, so that one (orone thousand four hundred and twenty three or if you prefer American Englishone thousand four hundred twenty three or if you want variations on a shoestring belive me I tried em all we have exactlyzero to say about at least one of these numbers.Si Trew (talk)13:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• et cetera ad nauseam. As far as I can tell,none of these redirects listed here, from a front back and mid sample, occurs anywhere at the target, not even as a list entry. I am guessing in good faith that they were created exactly to do so, but as I said above, since there is no least interesting number,WP:REDLINK to let the article be created, in the meantimeWP:RFD#D2 confusing since none I have tried is even mentiondat all at the target.Si Trew (talk)13:45, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. These provide no information to the user beyond what is implied in the title (literally "this is a number").Ivanvector 🍁 (talk)14:01, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (number) is not part of the title, or at least another thinks so in a previous RfD. Not sure if it is nor not, meself.Si Trew (talk)15:46, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is, if you were to write the number 1913, or pipe it to1913 (number), we've provided exactly the same information to the reader, because there is nothing more via the redirect. So whether my page says "there were 1,913 paper airplanes" or "there were1,913 paper airplanes" I've provided identical information; the bluelink is useless.Ivanvector 🍁 (talk)16:32, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects have uses other than links. All the best:Rich Farmbrough,16:23, 9 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]

*Comment 1000 numbers not per nom. --忍者ポップ (talk)15:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @忍者ポップ: I'm unclear on what you mean by that comment. What do you mean?Steel1943 (talk)16:56, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

忍者ポップ is a globally locked sockpuppet. See my comments atRaymond Terrace Roosters above. --AussieLegend (✉)06:41, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The potential "harm" is much exaggerated. All the best:Rich Farmbrough,16:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]
  
• Keep The reason for delete ' This could cause potential harm for readers trying to find information about these specific numbers' is invalid. Wikipedia is not censored - potential harm to readers by information or lack of it in Wikipedia is not our concern.Dmcq (talk)18:00, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an astonishing statement, though I suspect you don't know what "harm" is meant in this case. It's about not misleading readers into thinking we have coverage where we don't. It's not about protecting anyone's feelings or anything. If you're suggesting this has anything to do with censorship, that's really quite outrageous. --BDD (talk)18:14, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. If we don't have any information on some of these numbers, we shouldn't suggest otherwise. I trust readers will be able to deduce that they're between 1001 and 1999 without our help. --BDD (talk)13:34, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and that these are years, and represent other things. The search term1100 (number) (for example) is not meaningful and there is nothing you can really say about this number or most of the others other then "its a number between x and y".Legacypac (talk)16:09, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. --BasBibi (talk)18:07, 5 April 2016 (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.

Gold mine (slang)

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)18:34, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Gold mine (slang) →Gold mining (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete perWP:SLANG. Other option is soft redir to wikt, which as parenthetic doesn't seem useful. OldAfD here.Widefox;talk19:33, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd say either delete or redirect togold farming, though I don't have particularly strong feelings about this. --Notecardforfree (talk)04:12, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Content from this page wasmerged to the articleGold mining in December 2006 and finally removed inAugust 2008, and so I think the page must be kept to preserve attribution (seeWikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and marked as{{R from merge}}. If the page does not need to be retained for attribution, however, then I think the clarifying link toGold farming in the disambiguation pageGoldmine suffices, and I favor deletion. --Black Falcon^(talk)04:36, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I don't see any strong connection to Gold farming. Instead I consider the slang term 'gold mine' to mean any really profitable opportunity.Legacypac (talk)16:14, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget toNose-picking. If that doesn't work, delete as unclear/ambiguous.Steel1943 (talk)19:00, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Steel1943. This redirect is too ambiguous to be useful. --Tavix^(talk)20:30, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as vague --Lenticel^(talk)00:18, 16 March 2016 (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.

Bluerinse

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasno consensus. --BDD (talk)18:32, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• BluerinseBluerinse →Blue rinse (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete perWP:XY,WP:RFD#D2 confusing, as per previous a month ago.

This was at RfD pn Feb 21 was to delete. (Speedily.) And so it was. On Feb 22 this was recreated to one of the targets I mentioned in the kinda XY rationale, byUser:Rich Farmbrough, who is not wet behind the ears, and assuming good faith it must be coincidence it was created on Feb 22 after being deleted with consensus the day earlier, therefore, I think the earlier consensus to delete should stand.Si Trew (talk)15:10, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy deleteWP:G4. The situation leading to its original deletion has not improved.Ivanvector 🍁 (talk)16:28, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ivanvector: It was speedy deleted G7 last time, which means that the author requested deletion. It was recreated by a different author, so it's not the same situation. I think it's best to let this have a proper discussion. --Tavix^(talk)17:04, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also,WP:G4 pacifically percludes speedy deletions.--67.68.210.65 (talk)03:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see there are three different uses of the term "blurinse" or "Bluerinse", excluding as a nickname or handle,E.G.Bluerinse McNicholl.

1. As an alternative spelling ofbluerinse or "blue-rinse",E.G.engineered to bring thebluerinse shires to their feet at party conference.
2. A typesetting company in Australia, Bluerinse Setting
3. An "experiment" in Lilo and Stich.

I'm pretty sure that typesetting company is irrelevant at the moment,as it is not mentioned on Wikipedia. I would be fairly confident that the primary meaning is the first (indeed the others derive from that) thereforeBlue rinse is a good target.

If a third meaning was mentioned on Wikipedia then a disambiguation page might be appropriate. As it is this looks like the best solution.

And hence:

• Keep.

All the best:Rich Farmbrough,17:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]

• Weak keep{{R from typo}} it certainly is an acceptable typo. If there are no other topics, then this is a usable redirect by omission of a space. If there are other topics, it could still be the primary topic of this, so hatnotes could be built or it coult be turned into a disambiguation page --70.51.46.39 (talk)04:39, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep since it's a reasonable alternative spelling. The only other topic I could find wasList of experiments from Lilo & Stitch, and it seems awfully trivial for a hatnote... --Tavix^(talk)04:52, 8 March 2016 (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 of Tamagotchi Chracters

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete.czar20:40, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• List of Tamagotchi Chracters →Tamagotchi (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's best to delete this, since this isn't a very common typo.71.57.220.68 (talk)10:29, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep while I believe "charcter" is a more common mis-spelling, this redirect is neither new nor harmful. All the best:Rich Farmbrough,12:44, 15 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]
  
• Delete. Besides being a typo, no list of the such is present in the article. And on top of that, the redirect could be seen to have aWP:XY issue: Does this redirect refer to different types of Tamagotchi, or does it refer to all characters in the Tamagotchi multiverse?Steel1943 (talk)02:00, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Steel1943. --Tavix^(talk)02:04, 16 March 2016 (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.

Exacted

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete. We seem to get an even split of opinion between deleting and retargeting toexact (disambiguation) andexactor. As few editors want to keep them as is, I'm defaulting to delete.Deryck C.17:23, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Exacted →Extortion (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Exactress →Extortion (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Exactable →Extortion (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Exacters →Extortion (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Exacter →Extortion (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Exacting →Extortion (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Exacts →Extortion (links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These words have several different meanings then the target, though they are related in some ways. Neelix creations. There isExact (disambiguation) which may be a better target. AlsoExactor exists.Legacypac (talk)00:47, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all. Standard-issue Neelix bollocks.Softlavender (talk)02:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepwP:VERB -Exact redirects toextortion, soexacting,exacted,exacts as various verb forms of "exact" should either point there or toexact (disambiguation) since we have a primary topic of the verb "exact" being "extortion" the verb-forms of "exact" point to the right place --70.51.46.39 (talk)07:52, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Exact has only pointed there since last week, and I don't necessarily agree extortion is the primary topic.[1] I see exact as meaning[2] precise as the primary meaning, but of course it depends on which part of speech it is used as.Legacypac (talk)16:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for point out the recent change. In that case, restoreExact (disambiguation) back toExact and retarget all these verb forms to "exact" disambiguation page --70.51.46.39 (talk)04:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Delete all Exact is an adjective, all these endings are noun endings, none of these even make any sense at all.Oiyarbepsy (talk)04:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment "-ed", "-ing", "-s" are verb endings.wikt:exact is also a verb. --70.51.46.39 (talk)04:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget all toExact (disambiguation) as closely related words. I also agree thatexact should not direct readers toextortion. --Notecardforfree (talk)06:39, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedily redab and retarget per above. All the best:Rich Farmbrough,12:45, 15 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]
  
• Note perthis talk page it seems Exact has pointed to Extortion in the past.

All the best:Rich Farmbrough,12:48, 15 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]

• Comment – please check the history ofExact (disambiguation).sst✈06:01, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• RetargetExacter andExacters toExactor as plausible misspelling.Weak delete the others, basically asWP:NOTDIC Neelix nonsense that shouldn't've been created, and probably wouldn't've been by anyone else. I somewhat expect them to end up at the dab, though. I'm going to argue the dab should be at the base title, though. SeeTalk:Exact (disambiguation) if interested. --BDD (talk)18:30, 25 March 2016 (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.