Judson Dunn wrote:
Seems like something a bot could weed out pretty
easily. Redirects to
pages that don't include the redirect text in the article. Sometimes
they are synonyms, misspellings etc, so a human might have to review.
As long as the method of fixing the problem isn't to delete the
redirect, mind you. Otherwise the stealthy deletion of material via
conversion to redirect will become even more prevalent and permanent.
What I'd like is some kind of report that lists redirects that have long
edit histories, that seems like a good way to find "hidden" and "lost"
material for eventual rescue.