[Wikipedia-l] Re: Moving vs. redirecting (sysop application)

[Poor, Edmund W]

>> It has come to my attention that the preferred way to change the
>> name of an article (when such a change is in fact warranted) is to
>> MOVE the article rather than use the clunky old REDIRECT feature.
>>
>> May I please become a sysop, so I can use the MOVE feature?
>
>Actually I just made that feature available to non-sysops as well,
>but I also have no problem making you a sysop to you can head off
>vandals and such.
>
>And "move" is not an alternative to redirects--in fact it makes one.
>It just also moves the article history to the new title instead of
>leaving it under the redirect.

Thanks, Lee.

Was it you who added the Move Article History feature? To me, that's an essential part of changing an article title. I've never been comfortable with simply REDIRECTing an article without copying the talk page, either.

I don't think our anarchic cooperative can function properly without a full, detailed audit trail. As a (former) bookkeeper and (current) SQL Server 7.0 programmer, I rely HEAVILY on backups, transaction history, et al. 

As a Wikipedian, I routinely view the History and Diff pages, so I can judge whether a given change is NPOV. Now I might not be the world's best judge of that, but in recent months I think I've improved. My aim is not to start edit wars but to find a way to resolve them peacefully.

Ed Poor