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. JohnCD (talk) 23:06, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Patrick Lumumba → Murder of Meredith Kercher (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

He's never been elegible for an own page, he was famous for a brief time frame after the murder of Meredith Kercher. I propose to delete the redirect and its page. I dont see any confusion with Patrice Lumumba, so I wouldnt redirect to that page either. See also WP:BLP. Grifomaniacs (talk) 17:11, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Notability is not temporary, even the limited notability that this man has. Where a person is not notable enough for an article of their own, but is notable in the context of another person/event then it is standard practice to redirect their name to the article where they are mentioned (see WP:BLP1E). Patrick Lumumba's name is mentioned in several places through the article, so the association is clearly there, and the redirect was used 60 times in September so people are clearly desirous of information about him. Thryduulf (talk) 17:57, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Well he wasnt notable (he didnt have an own page), he was only famous for a short time. About the news that 60 people searched for him sounds surprising to me. Consider that there is a redirect notice at the top of the murder of Meredith Kercher page so that could pull people to search about him. Could you please add your comments also about the needs of a clarification tag to avoid confusion with Patrice Lumumba? --Grifomaniacs (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • He is notable enough in the context of the event to be mentioned several times in the article, therefore it is right that there should be a redirect from his name to that article. The length of time he was in the news is irrelevant. As for the hatnote, it's doing no harm so I'm inclined to keep it. Thryduulf (talk) 09:48, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Lumumba played a very active part in the Knox case. Right to the end he and his lawyer were involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.161.55 (talk) 19:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Being eligible for their own page is not a requirement for having a redirect to another article. From looking at the article, Patrick Lumumba, is an integral part of the case. The length of time he was famous has no bearing on whether a redirect to the article that mentions him is needed. This is a useful redirect and redirects are cheap. There are no BLP concerns as the article that this redirects to does discuss him and explains how he is connected to the subject of the article. GB fan 22:05, 27 October 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 as retargeted. JohnCD (talk) 23:11, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Smart Covers → IPad (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

This page should redirect to iPad accessories#Smart Cover and not the iPad page. Astros4477 (talk) 13:07, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Changed. However, we already have Smart Cover (singular) so there's an argument that this page should be flat out deleted. But I'm fine with it now. This is a definite improvement so thank you for bringing it to my attention. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 14:51, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as retargetted, even with the existence of the singular term the plural is a very likely search term (c.f. ((R from plural))). Thryduulf (talk) 18:01, 27 October 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.