Talk:2019 in music

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Years Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page was nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion on 16 September 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contested deletion

This redirect should not be speedy deleted as an implausible typo or misnomer, because... (your reason here) --~SML • TP 14:46, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Z0: What typo? What misnomer? ~SML • TP 14:46, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirecting to 2018 in music is fairly a misnomer and there is also a draft for this at Draft:2019 in music. The editor whose username is Z0 15:40, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I redirected it to list of years in music. And I don’t see there being a draft as an excuse to delete the article. ~SML • TP 16:14, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything about 2019 in music in that list? If not, it is a misnomer. The editor whose username is Z0 16:28, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Z0: I redirected it to list of years in music because it’s temporary until someone removes the redirect and starts it. And I don’t see there being a draft as an excuse to delete the article. There’s really no reason to tag it anymore, you can see your talk page with examples of Ss112 accusing you of fooling newcomers. ~SML • TP 16:14, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sixty Minute Limit, well, the edit history of Draft:2019 in music should be preserved and when someone starts the article over this redirect, the right way forward is to histmerge the draft into this article. It is not appropriate to create implausible redirects just as a temporary location for potential articles. The editor whose username is Z0 16:39, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Z0 I don’t agree. May I see the guideline? ~SML • TP 16:47, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: Is there any guideline saying that “misnomers” should be deleted? You know that it is a wildly used method of creating pages first, a lot of them started out that way. May be you could clarify, without taking sides (Ss112 has accused Z0 as “weaponising” you and other administrators in Z0’s talk page).

There's a general belief that redirects should exist if they're target doesn't say anything about the search term. (So in this example, if "list of years in music doesn't saying anything about the year 2019, then 2019 in music probably shouldn't redirect there. That being said, if that can be fixed (as in, literally any 2019 factoid being added to the list of year in music) then that argument is generally deemed invalid. The fact that there is a draft has no bearing on a redirect's validity, so I have no idea what they're driving at there. Sergecross73 msg me 20:49, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]