Talk:Alberni–Clayoquot Regional District

Non-needed redirect, should be deleted
This redirect is not even needed and should just be deleted, along with its sister dashed versions of these titles; they only exist because they were changed (without consensus) from their original hyphenated forms. NO ONE is ever going to search for them using an endash, repeat, NO ONE. They are just junk left over from a junk decision/action. Any instances of these links remaining in articles have already been botted out of existence. Cluttering up redirect pages with templates may seem like fun to some, but it serves no purpose at all, nor does this redirect or others like it - forms which no one will ever search for, and which are not alternative names needing redirects. All redirects in this series should just be deleted (speedily, in the same way they were created).Skookum1 (talk) 19:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Change all the links in "What links here".
 * post at the top of the page
 * Profit!
 * I would do it myself, but, uh, I have, eh, arthrosis in my mouse finger. Yeah, that's it. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * How is arthrosis different from arthritis? Aside from that, this afternoon after posting that and doing my running-around, it did occur to me that keeping these redirects is a way of preventing ad hoc "corrections" allegedly based on MOS from being perpetrated on these again without admin approval, or an RM (which they should have faced originally, rather than the other way around).Skookum1 (talk) 01:32, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I doubt this would be speedily deleted. It would be best taken to an WP:RFD.  McLerristarr &#124;  Mclay1  04:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, leaving this redirect in place would prevent more well-intentioned WP:DASH moves. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, leaving this redirect in place would prevent more well-intentioned WP:DASH moves. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)