Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvard Psilocyban Project
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was ALREADY REDIRECTED and, since there was no debate I have not copied this to the talk page. Splash 01:53, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Harvard Psilocyban Project
Misspelling of the title. All the contenent megerd in Harvard Psilocybin Project pippo2001 15:57, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
The page is Harvard Psilocyban Project
- The last step in the merger of duplicate articles is not deletion. Redirect. Uncle G 16:14:03, 2005-07-27 (UTC)
- I didn't make myself clear. This page says Psilocyban while it is Psilocybin. It is just a wrong spelling. --pippo2001 19:30, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- You did make yourself clear. You made yourself clear that you took the text from the one article and added it to the other. You've merged the articles, thereby preventing the deletion of the one that you merged from. Uncle G 08:11:15, 2005-07-28 (UTC)
- I didn't make myself clear. This page says Psilocyban while it is Psilocybin. It is just a wrong spelling. --pippo2001 19:30, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- I just went ahead and redirected it. Pippo - all you need to do is write #redirect [[Article title]] in an article to redirect people to the proper place. :) --Tothebarricades 20:12, July 27, 2005 (UTC)
- Do you mean that you keep all the possible wrong spellings that pop up when you search? --pippo2001 22:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- Yes. It makes it easier to use the encyclopedia without having to have your spelling spot-on. I personally am unconvinced by this argument because it gets taken to extremes like Sammich → Sandwich. -Splash 01:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- But then there's a deletion process for redirects, for which I think "Sammich" would be an excellent candidate. --Tothebarricades 04:02, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
- It has already been nominated, discussed, and kept. Uncle G 10:29:13, 2005-07-28 (UTC)
- But then there's a deletion process for redirects, for which I think "Sammich" would be an excellent candidate. --Tothebarricades 04:02, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Yes. It makes it easier to use the encyclopedia without having to have your spelling spot-on. I personally am unconvinced by this argument because it gets taken to extremes like Sammich → Sandwich. -Splash 01:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
- Do you mean that you keep all the possible wrong spellings that pop up when you search? --pippo2001 22:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
- 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 (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
