User talk:Dogbert66

Hi, I declined your speedy deletion request for the above redirect. For the most part, article-space redirects don't fall under G6 (except for {{db-move}} cases), and the redirect has existed for a few years now, so criterion R3 does not apply either. Your best bet would be to nominate the page at redirects for discussion. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-04T03:53:00.000Z","author":"Dabomb87","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Dabomb87-2010-11-04T03:53:00.000Z-Schwinger_variational_principle","replies":["c-Dogbert66-2010-11-04T07:47:00.000Z-Dabomb87-2010-11-04T03:53:00.000Z"]}}-->

Hi Dabomb, I changed the lemma Schwinger's variational principle (with the apostrophe s) to Schwinger's quantum action principle. The version Schwinger variational principle (without the apostrophe s) was a mere redirect, but had been used twice or three times as indirect link from Julian Schwinger and others. Since I corrected the double redirects from Schwinger via the version without apostrophe s and the version with apostrophe s to direct links, I do not see any necessity for the version without apostrophe s any more (unlinked redirect with grammatically wrong spelling). Therefore, for me it was a question of cleaning up after the move to ask for deletion of a page that became superfluous by my action. But you are the native speaker and also know more than I about the habits within the English Wikipedia and I trust you entirely re this matter: if you see any reason to keep this page (the one without the apostrophe s!!) then please keep it, otherwise just remove it. --Dogbert66 (talk) 07:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2010-11-04T07:47:00.000Z","author":"Dogbert66","type":"comment","level":2,"id":"c-Dogbert66-2010-11-04T07:47:00.000Z-Dabomb87-2010-11-04T03:53:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->