User:TeleComNasSprVen/redirects
Based on the 8 statements proposed by @John Vandenberg: earlier and subsequent comments I present the following statements (organised slightly differently) that I think approximate the current state of consensus about CNRs and PNRs from the main namespace. CNRs from other namespaces (e.g. Help: to Wikipedia:) are not considered here.
A: Cross-namespace redirects (CNRs) from the main (article) namespace, other than Pseudo-namespace redirects (PNRs):
- Examples of CNRs: About Wikipedia → Wikipedia:About
- New CNRs are usually discouraged
- Discussion of new CNRs before they are created is strongly encouraged.
- The talk page of the proposed target or the talk page of a relevant WikiProject are often a good locations for such discussion.
- Retargetting a CNR so it is no longer cross-namespace can be done WP:RFD
B: Pseudo-namspace redirects (PNRs) from the main (article) namespace and WP and WT namespace aliases.
- Examples of PNRs: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is Not
- PNRs are composed of a prefix, a separator and a suffix
- New PNRs without a suffix are not permitted without prior consensus
- New PNRs with unapproved prefixes (i.e. ones not listed on WP:SHORTCUT(guideline)) are not permitted without prior consensus.
- PNR prefixes are case sensitive, i.e. "MOS", "MoS" and "mos" are three different prefixes.
- New PNRs with separators other than ":" are not permitted
- New PNRs that use an existing prefix followed by ":" may be created freely, but it is strongly encouraged for suffixes that are shortcuts or acronyms to be in ALLCAPS without spaces
- A shortcut PNRs not listed on the target page may indicate that it is not endorsed, but this is not always true.
- Prefix_talk:FOO must refer to the talkpage of the page Prefix:FOO links to (e.g. WT:CSD must link to Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion).
- If you find mismatched pairs they should be listed for discussion at WP:RFD.
- If you find mismatched pairs they should be listed for discussion at
- In most cases Prefix:FOO and Namespace:FOO should refer to the same target, but there are exceptions. New PNRs should usually avoid creating mismatched pairs as they can be controversial.
C: All CNRs and PNRs from the main (article) namespace and WP and WT namespace aliases:
- Deletion of CNRs and PNRs that do not meet the letter of the WP:RFD.
- Simply being a CNR or PNR is not a reason on its own to delete a redirect.
- As with all redirects, having few or no internal links is not a reason on its own to delete a CNR or PNR.
- Converting an existing redirect to a CNR or PNR should be discussed at WP:RFDfirst, except following a page move.
- The status of the target page may be taken into account when discussing a redirect. Inactive pages and failed proposals often (but not always) make poorer targets than active, highly visited pages for example.
- New CNRs or PNRs to inactive pages, failed proposals and similar pages should not normally be created without discussion at an active page.
- Notifying the target and/or a relevant WikiProject of discussions at RfD is encouraged. For retargettings it is encouraged to noitfy the proposed target as well.
- Tagging the talk page of CNRs and PNRs with the banners of WikiProjects associated with the target page (using using the "class=redirect" parameter) is encouraged (except where an individual WikiProject objects).
- This means they will be listed on the relevant Article alerts page if they are nominated at RfD for any reason.
I know this is a lot, and includes things not really discussed here yet, but the idea is to try and avoid statements that people partly agree and partly disagree with (and I'm generally a fan of long lists of simple criteria over short lists of complicated ones). I intend this as part of the discussion, not necessarily as a final conclusion. Thryduulf (talk) 13:30, 8 January 2014 (UTC)