Category talk:Redirects to an article without mention

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Redirect, a collaborative effort to improve the standard of redirects and their categorization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Note: This banner should be placed on the talk pages of project, template and category pages that exist and operate to maintain redirects.
This banner is not designed to be placed on the talk pages of most redirects and almost never on the talk pages of mainspace redirects. For more information see the template documentation.RedirectWikipedia:WikiProject RedirectTemplate:WikiProject Redirectredirect pages

R from merge/R with history[edit]

This category doesn’t currently refer to an redirect being an {{R from merge}} or an {{R with history}} as a reason for keeping it when it would otherwise be deleted (as a redirect without mention). Do other editors think something mentioning this be added? I’m asking as it’s my understanding that this is a valid reason for keeping such a redirect, as such redirects need to be kept in order to preserve edit history/former content/attributions (I could be mistaken though so please correct me if I’m wrong!). Best, ^user:A smart kitten_meow 20:55, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to agree with you, but there may be other things to consider which we have not thought of yet. I do think that where possible and appropriate the fix of putting in some relevant mention is good. A redirect to section is generally desirable, but not always appropriate, but leaving the article without any recognisable reason for the redirect is confusing and to be avoided. I also cannot see offhand how a merge could result in a total absence of relevant mention. Not so clear on R with history, and an example would be useful to clarify. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 06:11, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Imagine that a name-brand product gets merged into a generic subject. The editors of the general article might, over time, remove the name-brand information ("Wonderpam will make you wonder!"), but keep some other, more appropriately encyclopedic contents ("invented in Ruritania in 1935").

If they removed all of it, I'm not sure whether we'd need to keep the page history (so that we have page history to support prior revisions, or in case anyone reverted the removed content back into the page), but I suspect that we might. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:00, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, a tricky one. Probably better to keep until a definitive position can be found. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 07:16, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]