Eclecticology (Ray Saintonge) wrote in part:
Toby Bartels wrote:
>Once we move the article to a more convenient
name,
>then the long name is harmless and it's ''OK'' to leave it alone.
>OTOH, if it exists for a month, then it will get archived,
>so there is a reason, assuming that you didn't catch it immediately,
>why it's ''good'' to leave it alone.
I don't think we really have a big difference here.
All that would be
left to delete after a month is a redirecting article with a long title
that is too long to be something that would be used in a search.
It's not the search that matters; if the title is long and awful,
then it's unlikely to ever be typed in again by anybody.
Except ... that if it's been sitting around for a month,
then it might be saved by somebody (not only Google).
So we should keep it ... since it's cheap in the memory:
I know the argument that redirect articles take up
minimal space in the DB.
Ultimately deleting the orphaned redirecting remnant
was really the least
important element in my proposal.
And that's why we don't really have a big difference here:
you'll be relatively willing to give that bit up. ^_^
-- Toby