Talk:Thicket

message: As part of wp:DPL disambiguating work, I was trying to disambiguate incoming links from mainspace articles to the Briar disambiguation page, when those links had intended meaning of "briar" as any kind of thorny plants that make thickets.  Specifically there are the following articles, for example, where "briar" was wikilinked that way:
*Milton, Florida
*Botanomancy
*Brier
*Sir Lionel
But disambiguation pages can't have incoming links.  Nonetheless it is reasonable for general articles to wikilink the term briar sometimes.  It seems to me that this short Thicket article can cover both the concept of a thicket and also the concept of a briar, I don't see why not, and can serve as the target.  So I modified this article and set up a redirect from Briar (thicket) to here.  I added "Briar (thicket)" as an option at the Briar disambiguation page.  The articles above now link to here, via that redirect.
However another editor has PRODed the redirect, and I removed the PROD, and ask for discussion here.  Do let's discuss.  Please note, if the concept "Briar" meaning thorny plants is going to be covered somewhere, it is useful to have the multiple pages pointing to the redirect.  If this Thicket article will not continue to serve as a permanent target, it would be easy to retarget the redirect to somewhere else, keeping the four articles, plus any new ones to be added, connected to where they should be connected.  So, I ask for the redirect to be preserved for now, until some other temporary or permanent target can be worked out.  Also, please note that it is routine for redirects to go to anchors or sections in other articles.  In this short Thicket article, I did not set up a wp:anchor or a section for Briars specifically but that could be done if it removes someone's concern.  The issue is whether Briars can be covered in this article or not.  Another possibility is to create a new "plant common name" article at Briar (thorny plant) or the like.  However, an article of quality equivalent to this Thicket article on that topic would probably not be accepted nowadays, it would be PRODed and possibly deleted.  I don't have knowledge and time to create a great article with references on the plant common name, myself.  So I think the solution I set up is okay for now.  Please do comment. --doncram 07:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Also,  correctly pointed out that my modification of the Briar disambiguation page was imperfect;  I just tried implementing more what I intended, yielding this overall diff.  To Bgwhite, please understand that I was trying to create, here, an okay coverage of "briar" in common plant sense, so that there would be someplace that incomings could go to, without violating restriction that disambiguation pages cannot receive incoming links from articles.  Note I moved some detail from the dab page to here.  I am not at all insistent that my intended way to handle the situation was best.  Please suggest an alternative.  Do you think that a) this is okay, b) a separate article on common name plant "briar", at "Briar (thorny plant)" or "Briar (common plant name)" or the like, is needed, or c) that the previous treatment at the dab page was best AND that all incoming links should simply be delinked.  Personally I think there's need for a good treatment in an article, not just the lede of a dab page, so the treatment can include images, references, other development beyond what is allowed in a dab page, and so that incoming links will be allowed. --doncram 06:23, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  covering "Briar" here too