Talk:Intimidator

Requested move 27 March 2018

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: pages moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 21:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

– Is a nickname really enough to create a primary topic? It seems to me there is no primary topic here. Intimidators should also redirect here. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 11:36, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The thing is, the articles listed on the disambig page all relate in some way to the person this article directs to (which also happens to get several 1000 daily views). There aren't actually any other unrelated topics/article that the disambig page lists (the articles listed are so named because of the late driver's nickname "Intimidator"). Whilst you rightly note that a nickname is typically not usually sufficient enough to create a primary topic from, there are not any other articles that would necessarily benefit from the change. I take a neutral POV on it for that reason. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:39, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support both good call In ictu oculi (talk) 14:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. No primary topic. No need for qualifier "(disambiguation)". Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 21:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support, primary topic is the term for a person who employs intimidation. I've expanded the DAB to include several other finds. -- Netoholic @ 06:23, 2 April 2018 (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.