October 1

The Shiny Diamonds controversy

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 adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasDelete.Ruslik_Zero16:44, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The Shiny Diamonds controversy →Wikipedia(links to redirect •history •stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

This was originally merged toCriticism of Wikipedia after an AfD, but that article was itself merged four years later. Since the new target doesn't contain any mention of this incident (and would seem unlikely ever to do so), the redirect is just confusing now. It also has no incoming links from mainspace, and was viewed byfour people last month, so deleting it won't cause any trouble in that direction.Alzarian16 (talk)17:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - nothing in the target so any readers would find the redirect confusing. Also there are no GFDL implications from deletion since only links, and no creative writing, were merged,here.Bridgeplayer (talk)19:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as the target is not related to the term in any useful way.Zickel (talk)20:37, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - There's no good place to redirect this to anymore. The current redirect can only serve to confuse folks. —mako๛18:31, 6 October 2011 (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.