User:Rossami/sandbox

Draft of a Centralized Discussion proposal
Current Wikipedia precedent is to generally avoid permanent page protection (WP:SALTing the title) unless there is repeated abuse. Redirects are often used to more "gently" point users to a title where their contributions are more likely to be appreciated. This is common for non- or semi-notable topics which are redirected to a more notable parent. Is this practice still necessary and should this preference of outcome continue? 

Until a few years ago, it was not possible to protect a title without any content. Pages that were repeatedly created and deleted had to be carefully monitored to ensure that the objectionable content did not reappear. As a workaround, some pages would be created with placeholder content (usually a redirect) and then locked against further editing. The ability to protect a title without content was added in ___. Nevertheless, the practice of creating (and sometimes locking) a redirect at a repeatedly re-created title continued, in part because it gave us a place to put a comment about the prior deletions and a Talk page where the prior history could be exposed to all. In __, the software was again changed such that users attempting to create a new article at a title which has been previously deleted will be presented with the deletion log of the title.

Lay out the advantages and disadvantages of each

Re-pose the question