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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:52, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Flag of the District of Columbia. → Flag of Washington, D.C.  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The title ends with a period, but there is already a redirect at Flag of the District of Columbia. The period would suggest that this is an abbreviation, but it is not. And if this were linked at the end of a sentence, the period should not be in the link itself. GeoffreyT2000 ^{(talk, contribs)} 20:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as an implausible redirect. It was apparently created by an inexperienced user who either didn't realize they had added a period, or because they weren't able to move it the page to the correct title without the period. - BilCat (talk) 00:54, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • You can delete this redirect, this was a redirect error because it was not an abbreviation. Napleabeau (talk) 21:16, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• About Flag of Washington, D.C. I think that the name of the article should be changed to Flag of the District of Columbia because it is the legal name of the flag, as seen in: Talk:Flag_of_Washington,_D.C.#Requested_move_6_October_2016. Napleabeau (talk) 21:27, 25 November 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.

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. No consensus to delete/consensus to keep. Retargeting "Back and to the left" to JFK (film) with no prejudice towards changing it. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Back and to the left → Assassination of John F. Kennedy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Back, and to the left → JFK (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was flagged for a merge, but it appears the title was only redirected. It's very unlikely that a reader could use this search term and learn more than he or she already knew about the phrase. It's not used in either article, and since the film article is a GA and the assassination article is quite extensive, I doubt there's much to be said in either place about this movie line. Note that the "Back and to the left" article was never much more than a list of references to the phrase in pop culture. --BDD (talk) 13:45, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - it's an iconic phrase, that clearly refers only to the assassination of JFK. It is mentioned in Oliver Stone's film JFK, as well as a Seinfeld episode, and so on. - Richard Cavell (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to JFK (film) as the specific phrase is used in the film IndieWire article JFKonline.com, showing transcript of film where Costner's character repeats it like a mantra. I don't see the phrase used among general transcripts for the assassination, so it wouldn't be appropriate to put it there until sources are provided to indicate otherwise. The use in Seinfeld is based on that film [1] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:25, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Apologies for my sloppy copy-paste job; the variant with a comma already targets the film article. I want to stress, however, that if we don't mention the quote there, it's little more than an easter egg. --BDD (talk) 21:19, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Question: Can this be redirected to a specific section on the Assassination article, that then would also have a link to the specific section on the film article? Thanks, warshy ^(¥¥) 15:31, 22 November 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.

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. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 22:33, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• 5 Star Wrestling → PlayStation 3  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

5 Star Wrestling currently redirects to PlayStation 3; and whilst there is a game for the console by this name; it's not discussed in the article, nor is it a notable product in of itself. The pro wrestling company that created it; could well be considered notable; due to it's current TV deal with FreeSports.^[1] However, the redirect seems to be erronous to point to PS3, as the game was also released for PS4. Lee Vilenski(talk) 10:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support This redirect is way to unlikley to be helpful.★Trekker (talk) 14:21, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete to make way for an article if notable. It has coverage and criticism by some of the video game websites, just not a lot. And while it was originally a PS3 exclusive it wasn't made by PS3. There was also a ReGenesis version for PS4 released in 2016. [2] [3] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:22, 22 November 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.

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) 18:51, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Hitachi--magic--wand.com → Hitachi Magic Wand  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

? feminist 06:36, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete double dashes are highly unlikely, not discussed in article the name, and the official website is not at this site. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:24, 22 November 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.