Talk:Clowns: Difference between revisions
From Hattrick
Jump to navigationJump to search
Mr Wednesday (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I meant, why was the article created in the first place? It doesn't look like anything links to it. I agree that the redirect is the right thing to do with it, but I think ultimately it should be deleted. --[[User:Mr Wednesday|Mr Wednesday]] 20:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | I meant, why was the article created in the first place? It doesn't look like anything links to it. I agree that the redirect is the right thing to do with it, but I think ultimately it should be deleted. --[[User:Mr Wednesday|Mr Wednesday]] 20:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | ||
One of Wikipedia policies says that articles in plural ([[Clowns]]) should be redirects to their singular counterparts ([[Clown]]). I see nothing wrong in having such redirects here also. --[[User:Jhattara|Jhattara]] 08:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 08:03, 1 May 2006
Why is this redirect needed? --Mr Wednesday 19:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
If an article consists only a single link to another article, then the link could as well be a redirect. --Jhattara 20:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
I meant, why was the article created in the first place? It doesn't look like anything links to it. I agree that the redirect is the right thing to do with it, but I think ultimately it should be deleted. --Mr Wednesday 20:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
One of Wikipedia policies says that articles in plural (Clowns) should be redirects to their singular counterparts (Clown). I see nothing wrong in having such redirects here also. --Jhattara 08:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
