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 all. There is no consensus to delete them. Ruslik_Zero 15:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Radio in Canada → Category:Public radio in Canada (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]  removed from discussion see bellow.Moxy (talk) 22:49, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Monuments of Canada → Category:Buildings and structures in Canada (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 
• Performing arts of Canada → Category:Performing arts in Canada (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 
• Mythology of Canada → Category:Canadian mythology (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 
• Folklore of Canada → Category:Canadian folklore (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 
• Traditions of Canada → Category:Canadian traditions (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Inappropriate cross-namespace redirect. Redirects to a category made for a nav template to bypass our red link policy (WP:REDNOT). Moxy (talk) 18:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Every one of these redirects has an identical history in users, dates and tags. Merging nominations. Rossami (talk) 20:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I boldly redirected Radio in Canada to List of radio stations in Canada. - Eureka Lott 20:57, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Just to clarify a couple of things, I did NOT create these redirects in order to bypass our redlink policy. On the contrary, I created them in order to let User:Moxy see how easy it is to deal with those (former) redlinks. The user didn't like the fact that I'd create a series sidebar that included redlinks but, when I pointed out how easy the redlink "problem" is to fix, the user didn't seem to understand. Hence, I created these and other redirects as an example. My purpose was merely educational. See the discussion at Template talk:Culture of region#Concerns. Secondly, as I pointed out here, the REDNOT policy cited above quite clearly did NOT apply to the sidebar in question, making it unnecessary to "bypass". And the fact these redirects were created after that sidebar ceased to exist makes the claim that I tried to bypass policy very bizarre.

Regarding this RfD, redirecting from article space to category space is not, in itself, cause for deletion. WP:CNR makes it clear that there is no consensus, and is supported by the long, long list at Category:Cross-namespace redirects. Also, I may simply be looking in the wrong place, but I'm buggered if I can find any policy or guideline prohibiting (or even just recommending against) cross-namespace redirects. Having said that, I don't mind whether these redirects stay or go. I created them partly to educate but mainly to appease User:Moxy, but evidently he or she doesn't like them as either red links or blue links (despite explicitly stating here that s/he likes the category links). Otherwise, I have no problem with them being red links. ClaretAsh 12:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CNR is only an essay - We have separate name spaces for a reason - and sorry if it sounded like i was implying malice on the part of these edits - was not my intent - all was done in good faithMoxy (talk) 23:48, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was the most relevant I could find. I'm happy for you to cite an actual policy, though, because, at the moment, your nom has no basis other than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. ClaretAsh 00:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Redirect#Purposes of redirects does any of these apply?Moxy (talk) 00:21, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Question Moxy? Can we remove Radio in Canada from this debate? With Eureka Lott's change we have a perfectly viable, non-cross-namespace target for that one. And thus for that one at least, your original deletion rational appears to me to be moot. Removing it will prevent the need for "Delete all except..." or "Keep all, but leave retargeted..." type of !Votes. - TexasAndroid (talk) 18:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done.Moxy (talk) 22:49, 22 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 Delete If someone wants to create another article here fine.--Salix (talk): 19:48, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Thoughts for happy editing → User:Ed Poor (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

This eight-year-old cross-namespace redirect is to a section on a user page that was removed by the user in August 2004 (just a few months after the redirect was created). It is unused and, by now, obsolete. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 05:53, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: this redirect doesn't serve any purpose is in Wikipedia namespace, where purpose is the absolute requirement for existence. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. This could be a useful index to the various pages we have along similar lines, e.g. WP:TEA, WP:KIND, WP:COOL, WP:WIKILOVE, WP:FUN, WP:RELAX, etc. If one already exists it should point there, but I've not found one. Thryduulf (talk) 15:58, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's an original idea. It could be repurposed into such an index as there are plenty of such pages. My only concern is that it would probably end up including a good deal of Category:Wikipedia civility essays, all of Category:Wikipedia essays supporting editor endurance, and a number of other essays, campaigns and projects. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 17:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm, I don't think it would include all of them but they'd be good see alsos. I've not looked at every page there in detail but many essays tend to focus quite specifically and I was more thinking of quite a general page. Thryduulf (talk) 18:57, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • This purpose would be better served by category. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 17:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Along the lines of WP:CLN I see this page as being complementary to a category rather than duplicate of one. The idea isn't to list every page, but to link with context to the more general ones for each area of focus (civility in general, cooling down when things get hot, stopping things getting hot, avoiding burnout, etc). Thryduulf (talk) 18:57, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you want to undertake it, I will happily change my vote to re-purpose (or whatever it should be called then). — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 19:35, 23 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 Delete. Ruslik_Zero 18:16, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The Blah Story → List of longest novels (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: this is a title of a book by Nigel Tomm, which can be seen attributed as the longest novels. As long as we don't have neither the article on this book, nor on its author, this redirect is misleading. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 23:32, 21 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. (non-admin closure) Jenks24 (talk) 04:09, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Cherry Beach Sports Fields → Cherry Beach (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

This redirect was created in violation of WP:POINT, by a partcipant in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unwin Avenue who obfuscated their identity behind an IP, who I believe created this redirection solely to effect that AFD. In spite of the name the soccer pitch's official address in on Unwin Avenue, it is accessed via Unwin Avenue, and it is is, in fact, on Unwin Avenue. Geo Swan (talk) 02:39, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It is common for City of Toronto parks to have multiple facilities with different addresses and entrances from several streets. There are many examples more complex than this; a beach, a park and sports fields. I added Cherry Beach Sports Fields to the Cherry Beach article on 23 September 2011, long before you even knew the facility existed. Subsequently I created the redirect, under my user name, because it would obviously become useful in linking from other articles, as has been done, or for search purposes. Any further edits to Cherry Beach or the redirect have been by other editors. Secondarywaltz (talk) 10:26, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I changed the redirect when not logged. It goes to section heading "Cherry Beach Sports Fields". That is the right thing to do. Why do you do this? Do you have the problem? Martin Morin (talk) 16:13, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Regardless of why it was created, it currently points to the content we have on the topic, so it's useful. As there are no other articles that I can find that either should be at this title or should be the target of a redirect from here, it's not harmful. Together with WP:CHEAP this is a clear keep. Thryduulf (talk) 20:45, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, use edit button to make article. Unwin Avenue has been deleted. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 16:59, 24 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.