Whilst the redirection of wholism might have happened in accordance with the rules the rules are dishonest When the deletion notice was put on the page the page held very little information All the delete redirect votes were based on the page as it then stood The delete notice quite clearly stated that the page could be added to I spent a considerable amount of time putting references links and further information on the page over the subsequent days These quite clearly demonstrated that wholism and holism are not the same thing The only vote that was made subsequent to this information being in place was a request for an edit to add a comparison between wholism and holism and a link between them The earlier votes simply did not refer to the page as it stood when it was redirected The voting process is dishonest and based more on some editors prejudices than on the weighing of the evidence presented Wholism is not holism whether my analysis of wholism is acceptable to wiki or not and it should not be redirected to holism Neither is the word whole the same as holism In consequence the word whole should also not be redirected to holism as it is at present The words wholism and whole should stand alone in their own right even if they remain blank pages