Erik Moeller wrote in part:
Long articles have several advantages:
- The same goes for links: The less articles there are, the less double
redirects, the less links that need to be manually edited and so on
Actually, I think that long articles will cause more redirects. Consider [[en:Neighbourhood (topology)]]. Since the only material on this topic is a short definition, it has no proper article but is listed on [[Topology glossary]]. So [[Neighbourhood (topology)]] redirects to [[Topology glossary]].
But what about [[Neighorhood (topology)]] (with the US spelling)? If I hadn't created this redirect as well, then somebody else might have come along (following a red link), redirected the alternate spelling to [[Neighbourhood (topology)]], seen (from the resulting blue link) that this page did indeed exist, but didn't look at it to discover that it was just a redirect.
Also, when [[Topology Glossary]] was moved to [[Topology glossary]], a whole bunch of double redirects were created -- two examples above.
Despite all of this, I *don't* think that [[Neighbourhood (topology)]] should be separated out. Not because a long article couldn't be written (it could, and I intend to write one when I get around to it, as I intend to write articles on every term in that glossary), but because the article would be only a single sentence *now*. I think that your 20KB suggestion is too long for a minimum size, like others here, but I do basically agree with your main point. I write this to emphasise that everybody -- in this situation and others -- should take time out to think about redirects and how the actions that we take may impact them or require them.
-- Toby