Talk:Miserable failure
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Paine Ellsworth in topic Protected edit request, December 2015
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page: • Political Google bombs in the 2004 U.S. presidential election Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:Political Google bombs in the 2004 U.S. presidential election |
Protected edit request, December 2015
edit | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
For purposes of redirect categorization, please add {{redr|from subtopic}}. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 00:32, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- Is "from subtopic" the best choice here? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- Pinging the redirect template expert for his suggestions — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:36, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- How exactly is it not a subtopic, given that the target article discusses two Google bombs (the second one being "waffles")? There has never been any objection to similar use from me. Anyway, I will wait for Paine Ellsworth to answer. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 16:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- I would agree that this is a subtopic of the target article, and along with that rcat, I would suggest removing the "hard" cat and adding rcats as follows:
- Go from this...
#REDIRECT [[Political Google bombs in the 2004 U.S. Presidential election]] [[Category:Protected redirects]]
- to this...
#REDIRECT [[Political Google bombs in the 2004 U.S. Presidential election]]
{{Redr|from subtopic|with history|printworthy}}
- The editing history is substantive enough to warrant either R from merge or R with history, and I don't see in the history where this page was actually merged, just redirected. As a good search term, it should also be deemed printable. Also, as you probably know, Redr will automatically sense the protection level(s). Happy holidays! Paine 12:08, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- PS. To editors Martin and SoledadKabocha: (forgot to ping)
- Okay
Done. By the way, pings don't work unless you sign at the same time. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:24, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you, Martin, I forgot. (re-ping) Paine 15:05, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks everyone. I understand the sense in which it is important for us to get the categorization right in one try given that the redirect is protected for good reason (that is, to avoid the need for one of us to file another {{editprotected}}). I didn't mean to sound too defensive; I understand that MSGJ was questioning the completeness of my request rather than its correctness. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 22:54, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- Yo, SK, it's all good – every little bit helps. I'm just deeply thankful you and Martin are here! Happy holidays! Paine 03:01, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks everyone. I understand the sense in which it is important for us to get the categorization right in one try given that the redirect is protected for good reason (that is, to avoid the need for one of us to file another {{editprotected}}). I didn't mean to sound too defensive; I understand that MSGJ was questioning the completeness of my request rather than its correctness. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 22:54, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you, Martin, I forgot. (re-ping) Paine 15:05, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- Okay
