Talk:Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Victimology
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Victimology

Canada

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles

Crime and Criminal Biography

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles

Law

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Deletion log[edit]

19:02, 8 December 2009 Gogo Dodo talk contribs deleted page Office of the Federal Ombudsman for Victims of Crime (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottawahitech (talk • contribs) 00:49, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion log message means that, before this title was created as a redirect, it was speedy deleted on the grounds that the content was no more than spam. That means the content was deleted without discussion. Without requesting that the original text be undeleted, or undertaking a deletion review, it is difficult to assess if the original content was worthwhile keeping in the first place. However, assuming it was not worth keeping, there appears to be no barrier to creating a new article with text written from a neutral point of view, provided this subject is notable, and the new content is not just a reinstatement of the content that was previously deleted. To me, that means this redirect should have the R with possibilities template added as a redirect category to the redirect page. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 23:59, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]