Wikipedia talk:Redirects are cheap
This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
What is this???
[edit]Seriously, this article contradicts itself every paragraph, and it looks more like a talk page than anything. Wow. Steel1943 (talk) 02:49, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
- Absolutely, I agree. Moreover, it draws a number of conclusions based on false premises. It is essentially worthless. — QuicksilverT @ 14:28, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
A related essay
[edit]I read this essay along with WP:COSTLY and wrote a third in response: User:Teratix/Discussions about redirects are costly. I would be interested in any comments. – Teratix ₵ 07:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Support
[edit]Editors should make their articles as easy to find as possible, particularly for other editors. I have several times worked on a biography article, only to find (when creating a redirect ?!) that another, usually better, article already exists. For that reason alone, a redirect should be created for any way that name is written in readily available references. I exempt spelling errors, where a redirect can increase confusion, but if common should be noted in the lede. Doug butler (talk) 02:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC)