Beefart has no strong feelings about whether Phaik Tan stays or goes. He does note, however, that if the criterion of lack of notability is to be enforced uniformly across Wikipedia, then tens of thousands of articles will have to go...Captainbeefart 02:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- This may well be true. 1000 or so articles are deleted from wikipedia each day. If you know of a trove of articles on non-notable subjects, please assist us by proposing them for deletion. --Xyzzyplugh 15:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Actually...
editActually this is an incorrect spelling of a notable book and it already has an extensive WP article at the correct spelling Phaic Tăn. I'm leaving the prod tag on because I don't think this article has any mergeable content or that we need a redirect. —Blotwell 02:36, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
Beefart says: Now we are getting somewhere. The problem is that many people will have heard about the book (say on the radio as I did) but will not know how to spell the title. It is not intuitively obvious. They will start at Google with Fake Tan and get nowhere and then try Phaik Tan. They will score hits. On Google the book is referred to by some as Phaik Tan. Beefart proposes that the article Phaik Tan be deleted but that a redirection link (if that is the right expression) be left so that poor spelerz or sundy folk misinformed by Google (shock horror) will be directed to Phaic Tan when they type in Phaik Tan. Beefart does not yet know enough about Wikipedia to attempt to achieve these ends. Beefart is deeply disappointed to learn that a thousand articles are deleted from Wikipedia every day. It is not nearly enough.... Captainbeefart 03:04, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with Beefart, there's nothing wrong with putting in a redirect here, so, I've done so. Agnte 18:40, 27 February 2006 (UTC)