[WikiEN-l] When did RfD Become Toxic?

[Fred Bauder]

I did a redirect the other day. They got after me because there was "no article". So I ended up protecting the redirect. I did write a half-assed article eventually, but did that under duress. I can see no problem having a redirect to a red link, if the redirect is to the best title. When did a red link become an offense, anyway?

Fred

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Phil Sandifer [mailto:Snowspinner at gmail.com]
>Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:34 PM
>To: 'English Wikipedia'
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] When did RfD Become Toxic?
>
>Can anyone quickly get me up to speed on when Redirects for 
>Deletion... sorry. Redirects for "discussion" became a toxic hellhole 
>of idiocy that makes the rest of our deletion procedures look sane?
>
>Seriously. People are nominating perfectly sane if misguided 
>redirects for deletion because no articles use them. Things like 
>[[Cammy (Street Fighter)]] are up because there's no other Cammy 
>articles. Which is fine, but someone who doesn't know that and is 
>trying to guess our naming conventions could type in. Similarly, we 
>have people seriously suggesting that [[The Twilight Zone (pinball)]] 
>is not a reasonable redirect for [[Twilight Zone (pinball)]].
>
>Seriously. When did we begin purging redirects, which are possibly 
>the most harmless thing imaginable on Wikipedia. These are not 
>offensive or POV redirects. They're sensible things that people might 
>well guess when trying to type in an article name.
>
>-Phil
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>