Talk:V.A.M.P. (G.I. Joe)

Requested move 26 September 2016

 * 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: Closing as no consensus. (non-admin closure) — Andy W.  ( talk  · ctb) 20:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

V.A.M.P. (G.I. Joe) → V.A.M.P. – Unnecessary disambiguation. – Gorobay (talk) 15:54, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


 * There are various VAMP abbreviations. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:14, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Is there anything else called V.A.M.P. though? Gorobay (talk) 17:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose "V.A.M.P." should redirect to the disambiguation page, since using English grammar rules, several of the items can be properly spelled that way. -- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 05:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose, see disambiguation page. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:22, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and this RfC. Note that V.A.M.P currently redirects here. P p p er y 19:54, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * support - It doesn't make sense for V.A.M.P to redirect here instead of vice versa. The article could use a For other uses see hatnote pointing at the DAB page. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:33, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Support only topic consistently used with this styling. SST  flyer  09:42, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose due to multiple entries using the "VAMP" acronym on the disambiguation page. Since every capitalized letter in the acronym discussed here is followed by a period, the stylization is not distinct enough to distinguish itself from entries on the disambiguation page that are also all-caps acronyms. (For example, if the stylization of this subject was "VA.MP" or "V.AM.P", my rationale regarding the title's ambiguous stylization would not apply.) Steel1943  (talk) 20:09, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.