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 all. Thryduulf (talk) 12:28, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• 71624 → Toronto Pearson International Airport (links to redirect • history • stats)
• 71627 → Montréal-Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport (links to redirect • history • stats)
• 71799 → Victoria International Airport (links to redirect • history • stats)
• 71892 → Vancouver International Airport (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Delete as misleading. Each of these five-digit numbers could indicate a number of different things; in the U.S. it could be a zip code; in some other countries it could be a telephone prefix, postal code or statistical indicator; or it could simply be a number or (less plausibly) a year. Better to send readers to a search page than to an article that may come as a complete surprise to them. R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:30, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Tideflat (talk) 15:35, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Most of the Wikipedia search results for numbers such as these are populations, or numbers in URLs or ISBNs, so the redirects may be useful. They don't seem to be valid zip codes in the US, so the airports may be the main topics for the numbers (although 71892 is one of the postcodes for Frövi, in Sweden). Peter E. James (talk) 15:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

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 Re-targeted to [[Call-recording hardware]]. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:07, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Call recorder → Telephone tapping (links to redirect • history • stats) 

I believe this redirect should be deleted. It does not make sense. Call recorder is not equivalent to Telephone tapping. A call recorder is a hardware device that allows the recording of telephone calls, which may or may not constitute tapping. Paul Robert Murphy (talk) 10:29, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Expand into an article Rather than a redirect, it's a notable type of instrument and should be written as an article. DGG ( talk ) 01:01, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Paul has begun an article at Call-recording hardware which, when referenced and wikified, could possibly be a candidate for replacing this redirect. Andrevan@ 07:02, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• That content should be accessible from this title, so either Retarget this redirect to Call-recording hardware or move that article to this title. Thryduulf (talk) 08:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Call-recording hardware now we have an article. Bridgeplayer (talk) 02:04, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

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 Both re-targeted to Shift_JIS art. -- JLaTondre (talk) 21:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• 1-san → ASCII art (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Previously referred to this, but there are currently no mentions of this obscure little fact in any of our articles on the subjects of ASCII/Shift_JIS art or 2ch. I realise it has a pretty old history, but if there's an appropriate place to retarget this I can't think of it. Also nominating:

• 1さん → ASCII art (links to redirect • history • stats) Closedmouth (talk) 09:34, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Shift JIS art, and add mentions of these things to that article. Add these to Wiktionary, which seems to have a set of them around for English, so should be able to add ones for Japanese. 65.95.13.213 (talk) 04:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't see why any of these little things are worth mentioning individually, but if you can write something that isn't crufty bollocks, more power to you. --Closedmouth (talk) 08:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per above. Thryduulf (talk) 08:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

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 do no retarget. Thryduulf (talk) 11:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Trekker → Trekkie (links to redirect • history • stats) 

Wish to re-target to Trek. Trekker being a legitimate common English word meaning - One who treks; thus a hiker. Therefore, the defult redirect should target the root verb.--Racerx11 (talk) 05:09, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as is-While the nominator's point makes sense, I can't agree. "Trekker" in the sense of "one who treks" is something of an odd phrasing. I think its far more likely that the majority of hits to this redirect are looking for Trekkie. For those few that aren't, the hatnote (which is already there) on Trekkie is sufficient.--Fyre2387 ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The "odd phrasing" One who treks, is a definition from a dictionary entry, which often uses strictly worded phrases in a manner we wouldn't ordinarily write or speak. That being said, I tend to agree now that the current redirect is better. It just surprised me when I ran into it. Racerx11 (talk) 20:18, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose add a hatnote to Trekkie instead. 65.95.13.213 (talk) 04:45, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• In news, this usually refers to "one who treks", but Google books suggests no primary topic. Of the five links, four should probably link to Trekkie, so a disambiguation page would be preferable to a redirect directly to Trek. If there are only two possible topics, the redirect should stay as is, and the disambiguation link should go directly to Trek; if there are more than two then Trekker should become a disambiguation page, or a redirect to Trek (disambiguation). Peter E. James (talk) 16:18, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.