File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
: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 Delete 2, no consensus on 1
. Editors disagree on whether Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church is helpful due to its history, having considered other targets, but agree to delete the other spellings. signed, Rosguill talk 03:35, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
This is not a WP:OUTLINE. I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
:Looking at the histories, evidently Outline of Heresies in Catholicism was created first, then moved to Outline of heresies in the Catholic Church amending the case and making it more consistent with other titles, then it was moved again to Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church to make it "more concise", and then finally merged (apparently after this discussion) with the current target of all these redirects.
:Keep Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church and delete the other two, as they no longer serve a purpose. Might also be worth including the draft-stage redirects in this discussion (I think they can also be safely deleted now too).
:If content from the merge survives at the target then Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church needs to be kept to preserve the history. The only significant history pertaining to the other two is that they were moved, but this is redundantly recorded in the history of Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church along with a number of other moves (from Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of Catholic Ecumenical Councils, Wikipedia:WikiProject Outlines/Drafts/Outline of Heresies in Catholicism, and Draft:Outline of Heresies in Catholicism), so nothing important would be lost by deleting them. Some old links buried in a few archives might be affected, but it might be better if the stopped working anyway since they're misleading (they imply that an outline article exists; it doesn't). – Scyrme (talk) 00:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
:
{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 08:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
::{{re|Scyrme}} What do you think about the discussion that followed the relist? Jay 💬 17:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
:::Heresy in the Catholic Church is a prose article not an outline. ({{slink|Wikipedia:Outlines#What an outline is not}}) Redirecting from a format with a particular function to an article that doesn't have that function seems to me to be misleading and unhelpful. In this case "closest" to what the reader wants isn't good enough; that same rationale could be used to justify treating every prose article as an "outline" of its topic. It disrupts an intentional pattern and undermines reader expectations regarding what "outline of..." articles are and how they should be structured and used. Neither target is ideal, but a list article is closer in function than a prose article.
:::Additionally, the reason for keeping these is to preserve the history, but retargetting would break the connection between the history and the relevant destination. While a template could be placed on the talk page to note the connection, I don't think the case for retargetting is strong enough to break the direct connection. – Scyrme (talk) 17:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Outline of heresy in the Catholic Church as a redirect with history. It is a reasonable redirect to a related topic. The other two are reasonable search terms as well. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:39, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- {{strikethrough|Keep;}} even if not truly an outline, this is the closest to what a reader is looking for when searching this. An anonymous username, not my real name 16:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- :{{ping|Red-tailed hawk|An anonymous username, not my real name}} what about the article Heresy in the Catholic Church? Veverve (talk) 22:43, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- ::{{re|Veverve}} Are you suggesting a retarget now? Jay 💬 10:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- :::{{ping|Jay}} No, I was asking those users (re-ping: {{ping|Red-tailed hawk|An anonymous username, not my real name}}) why they believed a list of heresies declared as such by the Catholic Church was considered an outline, but not :Heresy in the Catholic Church which is the article that details a Catholic vision of what a heresy is.
- :::I could accept a retarget to :Heresy in the Catholic Church as a second choice. Veverve (talk) 10:49, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- :::In that case, I change my vote to retarget per about. An anonymous username, not my real name 17:09, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- ::I would also be OK with retargeting to Heresy in the Catholic Church. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- :::{{reply|Red-tailed hawk|An anonymous username, not my real name}} Although neither is truly an "outline", isn't a list closer in function than a prose article? And why break the direct connection between the redirect and the article with which it was merged? – Scyrme (talk) 00:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- ::::I'm fine with either — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 00:17, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- ::::I too have no preference. An anonymous username, not my real name 01:02, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete I'm not convinced either proposed target is suitable - the search term "outline of" means one is clearly looking for an outline, not some other type of article, and thus a redirect to something else is more confusing that helpful. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
:
{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- {{reply|Pppery}} To clarify, does your delete also apply to the redirect with substantial history or only to the two without said history? Or do you feel the history doesn't warrant preserving in this case? – Scyrme (talk) 23:44, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- : I'm not convinced of the need to preserve history when the entire significant content was written by just two editors: The Transhumanist and Marikafragen * Pppery * it has begun... 23:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. The targets are not Outlines. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).