Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 9#WP:Pr
=[[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 9|June 9]]=
==WP:PR==
: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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
:The result of the discussion was keep
- {{no redirect|1 = WP:PR }} → :Wikipedia:Peer review (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:PR&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2018-05-10&end=2018-06-08&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Wikipedia%3APR stats])
[ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:WP:PR|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#WP:PR closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:WP:PR|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#WP:PR closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:WP:PR|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#WP:PR closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ]
- {{no redirect|1 = WP:Pr }} → :Wikipedia:Peer review (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Pr&action=history history] · [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews?start=2018-05-10&end=2018-06-08&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=Wikipedia%3APr stats])
[ Closure: {{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|(@subpage)|[{{fullurl:WP:Pr|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#WP:Pr closed as keep}}}} keep]/[{{fullurl:WP:Pr|action=edit&summary={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#WP:Pr closed as retarget}}}} retarget]/[{{fullurl:WP:Pr|action=delete&wpReason={{Urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}#WP:Pr closed as delete}}&wpMovetalk=1}} delete]}} ]
PR is more commonly used to mean press releases. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:39, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- Strong keep. Retargetting shortcuts needs to be done very carefully as you risk breaking many incoming links and changing the meaning of discussions. Shortcuts that are commonly used will also gain new uses to the orginal target by people who don't know the target has changed, while people who do know will use it for the new meaning resulting in confusion and people talking past each other. In this case, the redirects have existed pointing to Wikipedia:Peer review for 14 and 13 years and have many incomming links (multiple thousands in the case of WP:PR) and get massive amounts of use - WP:PR has been averaging 10-20 hits a day this year. So unless you have objective evidence that most (not just some) links to WP:PR are incorrectly assuming it goes to the press release page (which I'm not seeing from a spot check) then retargetting will be massively disruptive for little benefit. Thryduulf (talk) 00:20, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep: WP shortcuts have no connection to {{em|off-site}} jargon, and the nominator's rationale isn't even right in that that regard (off-site use generally means "public relations", which includes press releases and much else. But it also stands for Puerto Rico, and and many other things. It's simply irrelevant. {{em|Most}} of our shortcuts stand also for something else, somewhere else. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 06:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Strong Keep per those above. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 22:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Strongly keep. In addition to the above arguments, I'd imagine {{slink|WP:Identifying and using independent sources|Press releases}} is only useful in two cases: when explaining the obvious to a paid editor, and when talking about churnalism, which is covered more extensively in WP:CHURN. So even if WP:Peer review didn't exist, I don't think this section merits such a short redirect. What about other options, like WP:Press releases, WP:Public relations, and WP:Public relations (essay)?. The first one is inactive, the second one is itself a redirect to WP:Contact us (to which I obviously wouldn't redirect WP:PR), and the third one is an essay; a good one, but I wouldn't modify a useful redirect for an essay. By the way, I got here by using the said redirect, and I indeed tried to get to WP:Peer review. Professor Proof (talk) 15:47, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per Thryduulf. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:36, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per Thryduulf. --Tom (LT) (talk) 18:23, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.