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) 19:40, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• The Irishman (2010 film) → Kill the Irishman  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete per WP:RFD#D2. There is no film titled "The Irishman" released in 2010. Not only is there no evidence the target film was ever specifically titled "The Irishman," but it was also released in 2011. -- Wikipedical (talk) 20:23, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Not seeing where this was ever a title. That film refers to Bulletproof Gangster instead for an alternative title. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:28, 17 July 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) 03:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• 0486275574 → Romeo and Juliet  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete I don't know what these digits are, but I can't imagine anyone would search on them to find the target. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It's the ISBN 10 for Romeo and Juliet. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  18:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Normally ISBNs are not set up as redirects. I'll sitck with my delete. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:17, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Particular ISBN numbers are not notable. And Romeo and Juliet has a wide number of different publications and formats. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:03, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no one needs this. Legacypac (talk) 10:34, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There's no such thing as the ISBN for Romeo and Juliet (really, check the article's References section for the sheer number of editions, and that's just what we actually cite). --Xover (talk) 11:45, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - There's a large number of different editions of the story, as stated above, and deletion looks like the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:07, 19 July 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) 19:40, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• AA771 → Afriqiyah Airways Flight 771  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

There is an actual flight with this number unrelated to the target page, almost all the search results are about that flight [1], thus WP:R#DELETE confusing. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 11:02, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Note Delete - AA(L) is the airline code for American Airlines. Afriqiyah Airways' airline code is 8U or AAW. If we were to have a redirect like this, it should be AAW771 → Afriqiyah Airways Flight 771 and/or 8U771 → Afriqiyah Airways Flight 771. (I just realised that these already exist) --George AKA Caliburn · (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) 12:47, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom as confusing as most searches will point to the American Airlines flight number, which does not have an article here. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:28, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as misleading. Legacypac (talk) 10:35, 18 July 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) 19:41, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Squint eyed Southerner → Half-orc  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

The article mentions no such creature, no sources. Kleuske (talk) 19:18, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It comes from JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Rings trilogy. The name was given by the residents of the Shire to the orc-men sent there by Saruman to industrialise Sandyman's mill. In the Fellowship of the Ring, Butterbur also refers to a Squint at the Prancing Pony in Bree. See Half-orc#Tolkien's half-orcs. Osama57 (talk) 20:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Osama57 added the quote containing the phrase to the Half-orc section around the time of the post. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unlikely search selection. PKT(alk) 21:09, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Anyone familiar with the books or movie trilogy would associate this term with half-orcs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osama57 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Chinese Argentines :-) Seriously, delete. The phrase in Book I Chapter 10 is "a squint-eyed ill-favoured fellow", and the phrase in Book VI Chapter 8 is "a great squint-eyed brute like a huge Orc". Nyttend (talk) 00:33, 26 July 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) 03:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• AGAR MALWA → Agar Malwa district  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ] 

Delete per WP:RCAPS. UnitedStatesian (talk) 00:03, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:05, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Deb (talk) 14:31, 17 July 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) 03:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Fetish (Selena Gomez album) → Selena Gomez discography  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: //delete ]

This is a non-existent album.-_Stanajra (talk) 13:38, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this is a single, not an album. Fetish (song) and Fetish (Selena Gomez song) already exist. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:30, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as misleading. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  18:12, 16 July 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.