Talk:Iris Rides Out

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who articles

Radio: UK

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

This page is within the scope of the UK Radio taskforce. New members are always welcome!

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

Notability

While I agree that this audio may not in fact be notable in Wikipedia terms, a redirect witout tagging seems counter-productive. As the editor who did the revert did not even investigate the subject enough to realise that this is an audio play on cd, not a novel, it might be better if other, more knowledgable editors looked at the article? StuartDouglas (talk) 09:58, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is no requirement that an article be tagged for 6 years years without sources before the policies and guidelines are applied. repeatedly recreating articles without any attempt to show WP:N has been meet is not helpful either and is against policy WP:BURDEN. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody mentioned 6 years, so I'm something of a loss - not for the first time - as to what you think you're saying. StuartDouglas (talk) 12:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive, possibly malicious editing

Given that RedPenofDoom obiviously knows nothing about the subject of this article and did not even trouble himself to check for basic notability before re-directing - and equally seems to believe that other editors who do know about the subject should not be given some time to add sources proving such, it is becoming increasingly difficult to AGF about his edits. I have reverted this article to one tagged for notabiliy, as per common practice on Wikipedia in contentious redirects, deletions etc this should be left in place for a few days to allow other ediors to contribute. Worth noting that the editor in question seems to have taken it upon himself to edit several similar articules, all linked by one character, who he has already tried to have redirected as non-notable in spite of multiple sources from multiple other editors (and about whom he clearly has no knowledge) StuartDouglas (talk) 12:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

If enough reliable source citations can be found for this article to demonstrate notability, that's great, but I suspect that might be difficult. It would seem to me more sensible to consider merging this (short) article with some related others, so that collectively they can demonstrate notability. Bondegezou (talk) 15:20, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]