March 26

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 26, 2017.

Metro-North Railroad redirects, Part 1

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 split decision. I find no consensus for M.n.r.r. and M.n.c.r.; the rest will be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 00:27, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typos (spaces and punctuation inside acronyms). — Train2104 (t • c) 23:41, 26 March 2017 (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.

Metro-North Railroad redirects, Part 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 retarget to MN. --BDD (talk) 16:11, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too generic - propose retargeting to MN (disambiguation). — Train2104 (t • c) 23:41, 26 March 2017 (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.

Metro de la Ciudad Nueva York

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. --BDD (talk) 16:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORRED, no particular affinity for Spanish. — Train2104 (t • c) 22:52, 26 March 2017 (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.

History of the United States (1991–present)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 7#History of the United States (1991–present)

Skiagraphy

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 4#Skiagraphy

Dubya See Dubya

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. -- Tavix (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Target is not known by this name, see Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_February_19#Dee_dee_are. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:15, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 10:50, 26 March 2017 (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.

Roosevelt Republican

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. --BDD (talk) 16:12, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target, unsure if this is a notable term or not, also Roosevelt is ambiguous. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 10:06, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't; in the latter case a "Roosevelt Republican" could be akin to a Blue Grit. Although I see now that's a Canadian invention. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:42, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't the popular concept of a "Roosevelt Republican" be the opposite of a "Blue Grit" kind of politician? Socially traditionalist in terms of restrictive immigration, increased defense spending, and proud nationalism coupled with a centrist, somewhat Keynesian-esque economic policy having a strong welfare state... I suppose 'communitarian' or 'populist' fit better to describe the underlying TR philosophy. This is somewhat of a tangent, though. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:38, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:41, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see your argument, but I can't quite agree since the general concept and specific term of "Roosevelt Republican" preceded the existence of that group by years. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:38, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Then I think the best result would be a new section in the target article on historical factions. The article includes some history, but mostly just starting in the New Deal era, and it's presented as the history of individual factions rather than now defunct factions like the Roosevelt Republicans. --BDD (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 10:47, 26 March 2017 (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.

MT GDF Suez Neprune

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 delete per WP:CSD#G7 as both people who have contributed to the redirect want it deleted and nobody has expressed an opinion otherwise. Thryduulf (talk) 14:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

deletion due to mistyped title CeeGee 04:00, 26 March 2017 (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.

RWBY: Grim Eclipse

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 and refine to RWBY#Video game. (non-admin closure) Uanfala (talk) 20:01, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelled redirect (probably just an ((R from misspelling)), but might as well list it)  ONR  (talk)  07:11, 26 March 2017 (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.