Talk:Tatu (disambiguation)

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Iffy in topic Requested move 19 July 2019
WikiProject iconDisambiguation
WikiProject iconThis disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.

Untitled

edit

Stop vandalizing this page. This page is only to be linked from t.A.T.u. and has been approved by a lot of users; please stop before you get warnings. --Shandris 18:25, 5 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 19 July 2019

edit
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, the arguments that t.A.T.u. is still the primary topic for the redirect Tatu are more convincing than the arguments against. (non-admin closure) IffyChat -- 10:36, 28 July 2019 (UTC)Reply



Tatu (disambiguation)Tatu – Given that t.A.T.u. has been defunct for nearly 7 years, and the fact that Tatu, California and the other terms on the disambiguation page exist, I propose that the disambiguation page be moved to the base name so that readers can determine for themselves which subject they are attempting to locate. Steel1943 (talk) 20:20, 19 July 2019 (UTC)Reply


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

I have to say "not moved" is a bit of a stretch. Red Slash 03:15, 30 July 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Red Slash: If I saw any merit in the support !voter's arguments, I'd have closed as no consensus instead, but the end result would be the same. IffyChat -- 08:17, 30 July 2019 (UTC)Reply