The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Ruslik_Zero 08:27, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Taganrog Governorate → Governor of Taganrog (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

This redirect was created in Feb 2008. A few days ago, Ezhiki attempted to speedy-delete the redirect with the reasoning that it redirects to a related, but distinctly different concept. The age of the redirect makes this ineligible under CSD#R3. This is a courtesy nomination to evaluate whether regular-deletion is appropriate. Rossami (talk) 20:20, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep: the current target is actually related to the redirect's name closely enough that I'm not sure whether the articles on both names could possibly co-exist. Second closest target is History of the administrative division of Russia (though currently it completely lacks the information on topic) and the third one is History of Taganrog, which is a way to general. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 20:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Lenticel ^(talk) 00:53, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Death's Shadow (Midsomer Murders) → List of Midsomer Murders episodes (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

This page has been redirected to simply a list of the episodes of the show. Originally, it was a full description of the episode (although poorly sourced). I don't know anything about the show and I'm not sure if it warrants its own article, so I figured I'd take it to RfD for some help from the general community. Inks.LWC (talk) 05:10, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep because the history on the two pages suggests that some of the content was merged into the target page. The history of the redirect is necessary to satisfy the attribution requirements of GFDL and CC-BY-SA. No opinion on whether the content should be restored over top of the redirect but that would be an ordinary-editor debate that should be worked out on the articles' Talk pages by folks more familiar with the show. The discussion here suggests a consensus for individual episode articles but also recognizes some difficulties in that approach. This episode's Talk page notes that the then-current content was more original research than valid encyclopedic content. Rossami (talk) 19:45, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: if it warrants the article, it will get one at its time – overwriting redirect with an article is a non-administrative task everyone can accomplish. As no valid deletion rationale is present and the current target is OK, we just have no choice but keep this redirect. – Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 19:58, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as standard practice, it's standard to redirect episode names to lists of episode, the standard makes sense, and there's no reason to delete. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was RESULT. Lenticel ^(talk) 00:52, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• International Telecoms Week (ITW) → International Telecoms Week (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete per WP:COSTLYREDIR. There needs to be a firm policy on these redirs. The admins are deleting them and and others are restoring them. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:02, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Identical reasoning as the nomination below for "Jorge Amado University Center (UNIJORGE)" except that the content existed at the old title since Dec 2010. Rossami (talk) 19:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: lack of valid deletion rationale automatically resolves to keep vote. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Have you ever clicked on a link only to be presented with a page not found error? Didn't that piss you off? Do we want Wikipedia to piss people off like that? Of course not. The page has existed at the old title since the middle of 2010, so there probably hundreds of links to it, and we don't kill links. Remember, a dead link is always the fault of the site that has one, and never the fault of the person linking to it. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep. Lenticel ^(talk) 00:51, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The Integral Satcom Initiative (ISI) → Integral Satcom Initiative (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete per WP:COSTLYREDIR -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Identical reasoning as the nomination immediately below for "Jorge Amado University Center (UNIJORGE)" except that the content existed at the old title for over 2 years. Rossami (talk) 19:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: lack of valid deletion rationale automatically resolves to keep vote. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Have you ever clicked on a link only to be presented with a page not found error? Didn't that piss you off? Do we want Wikipedia to piss people off like that? Of course not. The page has existed at the old title since the middle of 2010, so there probably hundreds of links to it, and we don't kill links. Remember, a dead link is always the fault of the site that has one, and never the fault of the person linking to it. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Keep Lenticel ^(talk) 00:50, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Jorge Amado University Center (UNIJORGE) → Jorge Amado University Center (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete per WP:COSTLYREDIR -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 05:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Redirect is the result of a pagemove. Content existed at the title for 10 months prior to the move. The new title is in better compliance with the MoS but the old title was neither harmful nor confusing to readers. WP:COSTLYREDIR cites no policy-based reason for deletion. Avoiding link rot, on the other hand, is an explicit reason to keep these unharmful redirects. Rossami (talk) 19:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: lack of valid deletion rationale automatically resolves to keep vote. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 19:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Have you ever clicked on a link only to be presented with a page not found error? Didn't that piss you off? Do we want Wikipedia to piss people off like that? Of course not. The page has existed at the old title for a while, so there probably hundreds of links to it, and we don't kill links. Remember, a dead link is always the fault of the site that has one, and never the fault of the person linking to it. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:31, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.