Wikipedia:Deletion by redirection

This is an essay.

It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcut

WP:D-R

Deletion by redirection occurs when an editor

WP:ATD-R

). This is perhaps a policy that hasn't been widely discussed, so this is the point of this page.

Some points are worth noting:

This is different from
merging an article
, where content from the redirected article is merged (copied) into one or more target articles. No permission is needed for uncontroversial mergers; just do it. Controversial and potentially controversial mergers should be discussed on the relevant talk page before execution.
Unlike
administrators
can execute (though anyone can propose), anyone can delete an article by redirection.
The article is preserved in the redirect page's history.
Deletion by redirection might be considered vandalism in some circumstances. These redirects should be promptly reverted.
Any editor can
local consensus cannot be reached, take it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
and achieve consensus rather than unilaterally taking action.

Redirecting an article is often an appropriate course of action to be taken when an article clearly fails to meet the

WP:MUSIC

states that "most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article". In most instances, such articles should redirect to the album on which the song first appeared.

If a redirected article is reverted with proper reasoning, consensus should be achieved on the talk page. If disagreement centers on whether and which information should be merged to a target article, the appropriate process to follow is a

nominated for deletion

. In some instances, editors take offense to their articles being redirected. In such cases, the motive behind the redirect should be explained clearly and calmly. Persistent reversion of redirects is disruptive, and if the reasoning for the redirect is not accepted, the issue can be resolved by a merger proposal or perhaps, if there is nothing that conceivably can be merged, a nomination for deletion.

See also