Talk:Clion

Valid entry CLion

(following on from discussion at Talk:JetBrains)...
User:Walter Görlitz An entry for CLion was valid either way:

• With a redlink while there was a redlink in the article per MOS:DABRL (a redlink was used in another article, so shoring up the target with a redlink to enable a redlink here was prudent)
  • Without the redlink in the article per WP:DABMENTION

This removal [1] has two issues:

• It removed a valid entry
  • The edit summary "redlink" doesn't cover why - redlinks are allowed in dab pages per above, and even without the redlink it's a valid entry per above. Edit warring removing a valid/desirable redlink at the target and then removing the entry here isn't helpful to readers or correct per DABMENTION.
• It left the dab with all geo items, so if leaving like that, should have restored the {{geodis}}.

Moving on, I created a redirect with possibilities, as the item has demonstrably at least two RS. Widefox; talk 08:49, 4 April 2015 (UTC) Nominating for deletion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Redlinks are valid, redirects are also valid (both given the correct qualifiers). It's a valid entry, and a valid redirect. Competing products are notable, so there's nothing unusual (although the product seems a bit early). Widefox; talk 18:28, 4 April 2015 (UTC)