| Revision as of 21:28, 22 August 2006 editFang Aili (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users24,572 edits →Eh?: yeah← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:59, 1 September 2006 edit undoJahiegel (talk | contribs)13,228 edits →Eh?: agree with FangNext edit → | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| :Look what I came across: ]. ] 21:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | :Look what I came across: ]. ] 21:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::Yeah, I saw that too. It just seems really nonsensical to use something that might actually be searched for and used, when there are an infinite number of lesser-possible choices. But it looks like this whole thing has been debated up and down already, and I'd rather not get into it. --] <sup>]</sup> 21:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | ::Yeah, I saw that too. It just seems really nonsensical to use something that might actually be searched for and used, when there are an infinite number of lesser-possible choices. But it looks like this whole thing has been debated up and down already, and I'd rather not get into it. --] <sup>]</sup> 21:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :::I agree with Fang, but I do think ''The weather in London'' to be an exceedingly unlikely search, so I imagine there's very little harm here. ] 03:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:59, 1 September 2006
WARNING: Do NOT create the corresponding article. Do NOT delete this page.The weather in London has been deleted many times. Do not insert nonsense nor the template {{deletedpage}}. It must remain as a red link.
Note to admins: Do NOT delete this talk page, even if it is orphaned. It is kept as a warning against re-creation.
The weather in London is used as an example of a broken link and a deleted page: see what links there. A serious article about weather in London could be at London weather or Climate of London. Nonsense or unhelpful substubs such as "it usually rains" can be deleted: see Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/The weather in London. Serious articles can be moved and the automatic redirect deleted.--Henrygb 10:09, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
- Then why not lock the article against editing and remove the little blurb from the top of the page that says, "this article is locked?" Cernen 10:17, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- Unfortunatelty an administrator can only lock (="protect") a page if it exists. In this case, in order to protect the page it would need to be created first - making it a blue (rather than red) link.--Commander Keane 10:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- Not anymore is it being used as a red link example. See WP:VPR#End the edit war once and for all: Stop using noun phrases for red link examples: A title that sounds like a potential article subject does not make a good red link example: it's too tempting to good-faith editors, and someone might actually search for it.
SeahenNeonMerlin 03:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
A new guideline on intentionally permanent red links is being discussed. Please DO NOT delete this redirect before discussing it at Misplaced Pages talk:Choosing intentional red links.
Also, do not insert the template {{deletedpage}} onto the article, as that would still make it count as a real page and therefore appear as a blue link. The weather in London is supposed to appear as a red link on purpose. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 18:17, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Why not just use red, underlined text for the link? Bart133 22:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- We seem to prefer real examples rather than HTML coding. And it is now a historical non-page. It seems to now have an average lifetime of about 30 minutes. --Henrygb 22:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Please do not delete this talk page, even if it's an orphan talk page, to keep the warnings above visible to other sysops. --cesarb 01:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Eh?
What is this??? Why not create some nonsensical article title as a redlink example, instead of something someone might (and obviously did) search for? --Fang Aili 21:04, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Look what I came across: Misplaced Pages:Intentionally permanent red link. Salad Days 21:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I saw that too. It just seems really nonsensical to use something that might actually be searched for and used, when there are an infinite number of lesser-possible choices. But it looks like this whole thing has been debated up and down already, and I'd rather not get into it. --Fang Aili 21:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with Fang, but I do think The weather in London to be an exceedingly unlikely search, so I imagine there's very little harm here. Joe 03:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I saw that too. It just seems really nonsensical to use something that might actually be searched for and used, when there are an infinite number of lesser-possible choices. But it looks like this whole thing has been debated up and down already, and I'd rather not get into it. --Fang Aili 21:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)