Wikipedia talk:Lugstubs 2 list

Latest comment: 3 days ago by Sammyrice in topic D potential issues

Time frame? edit

Any idea of the time frame for this process. I've looked at a few which immediately suggest alternate action would be more efficient than creating a draft which will also kick around. Blue Square Thing (talk) 17:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

There's no rush; I'm happy to wait a month or even two. BilledMammal (talk) 07:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Might take a bit longer than that I'm afraid - things are busy and I'm editing here a lot less than I was. I'd rather have a chance to check them all, but once they're checked that can be dealt with I think. A small number might be better off taken off the list for a while and passed back to potentially interested parties. Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:41, 28 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

D potential issues edit

I'm starting at the bottom of the list... I'll keep adding to here - and I'll keep them in the same order so I'll add to the top. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

As an indication of why redirection is the better option, the draft process without a manual review leads to articles such as Draft:Haswell Wilson being drafted. A quick look at Olympia suggests notability - and a short search finds multiple obituaries including in The Lancet and a *six page obit* in The Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology. He's clearly notable. Which was obvious from a manual check but I doubt very much that anyone did one because of the overwhelming number of articles nominated. With the list below as of this time stamp I have 69 articles I'd at least redirect and nine I'd draft. There's a probably skew in that because there aren't a huge amount of non-anglophone names in the bottom 78 articles on the list and out coverage of lists is better for English*, Australian and New Zealand cricketers, but it does suggest we should redirect a bunch simply rather than go through the redundancy of creating a draft and then moving that back and then redirecting from there. Which would be interesting but inevitably pretty futile. Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Just a comment; obvious redirects I will be working out with Quarry queries, so no need to list them here - the only question is whether you would prefer them to be moved to draft space and then the redirect created, or just the redirect directly created and no draft space article created? BilledMammal (talk) 07:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Literally just added that above! The redundancy from a draft article existing is obvious. Much more efficient to simply redirect. They prob do need to be listed because it's not clear in every case where to redirect to. Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I was wondering if it might be more efficient for me to simply do the redirections whilst I'm working through? Would that work or would it cause more problems? I don't think any of the ones I've come across so far are particularly controversial. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I've expanded David Dempsey to show that he was quite a prominent player in his time. A definite keep! Sammyrice (talk) 11:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
And the same now with Delroy Morgan. Sammyrice (talk) 11:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply