Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Colour contrast

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was:  Keep: withdrawn by nominator. Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 19:01, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Colour contrast


Page's status is unclear, and its content is largely redundant with that at WP:COLOR. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  03:34, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Question If this is deleted, what are you suggesting should be done with all the pages linking here? This is a very real question for me because, for some of the pages linking, I can't even find where the link is being made. Presumably in some template(s). Thincat (talk) 07:52, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I was thinking redirect to WP:COLOR, but I wasn't sure whether that should be mentioned in the nomination. 10:31, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The nominated page provides a simple, plain-language alternative to the jargon-laden section of the very long page at WP:COLOR. Also, remarkably, Mandruss says on my talk page that he wishes to delete this page in favour of "a new subpage that I am sandboxing at User:Mandruss/sandbox2". That's not how we work. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No, that is not what I said at all. It would have been remarkable if I had said that, yes. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  11:07, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * [ec; extended my comment] Your comment remains on my talk page for all to see. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Addition of new and useful information is a Good Thing. I believe that that subpage will facilitate compliance with WP:SIGAPPa well-known problemand it will be useful for other use of text-on-white as well. Removal of redundant information is another Good Thing and, as I said on your talk page, any small amount of non-redundant information could easily be merged. When the two activities occur at the same time, that doesn't mean that the new page is replacing the other. There is no overlap between the new subpage and the page nominated for deletion here. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  11:44, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep There needs to be discussion before any such change is made and MFD is an unsatisfactory venue because deletion is not seriously being proposed. Thincat (talk) 11:33, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I confess that this is my first MfD nom, but I've read and !voted in MfDs and AfDs. I thought this is the discussion, and I thought MfD is the appropriate way to propose redirection and partial-merge of an existing page outside mainspace. If I have any of that wrong, my apologies. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  12:05, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, the position is confusing and in some ways incoherent. In some XfDs the D stands for discussion and for others (like MFD) it is deletion. That doesn't mean "redirect" can't be a conclusion but it should not be the reason for a nomination. However, WP:SKCRIT (which I thought about invoking under #1) says it does not apply for deletion or redirect nominations. I think WP:ATD-R may be a starting point for suggestions. Thincat (talk) 12:22, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * First you say that redirect shouldn't be a reason for nomination. In the next sentence, you refer to "deletion or redirect nominations". I'm no less confused than before. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  13:15, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Look at the instructions at wp:mfd and you'll see that only deletion, and not redirection, is catered for. So you were in the wrong place. However, I could not vote "speedy keep" because, when you explained, you said you wanted redirection. I am saying that our procedures are incoherent, not trying to explain that they are not so. Thincat (talk) 14:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn due to incoherent procedures, and this will likely be my last XfD nomination until procedures are made coherent. Procedures are unclear as to whether I need to do something besides add this comment. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  14:40, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.