"In distress", my ass.
Additionally, depending on the coding difficulty perhaps making it so that the server software won't allow it unless it's the only thing on the page. A page here or two that was later redirected has the redirect code and the original content, which throws off "Related to..." searches for wiki cleaning.
Yeah, redirect pages can still be edited (assuming no page lock, which is where I ran into problems with helping carry out one of the rename threads), but if it's not too big a burden on Fast Eddie's copious free time not allowing it in the first place strikes me as less-wrong than having to manually edit the URL to get to the edit stage so as to remove the extraneous text.
All your safe space are belong to Trump
Lost in Space
It might work better in the long term if you can't make a redirect by editing the page, but rather by setting the type explicitly to "redirect" and entering the article to point it at.
This would also allow for a sanity check, such as redirecting to an extant page and blocking circular redirects.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Hi
Bump...if this is still a thing, then it definitely needs to go to either Wishlist or Bugs as a fix.
I am not aware of any change to this.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
It's been pointed out
(and probably more than once) that if you type a [[redirect: ]] code ANYWHERE on a wiki article, it turns the entire page into a redirect. Whoops!
The redirect tag really needs a restriction that it can only appear as the first line in the article's source code. This is already the case for (guessing) virtually all redirect articles, but it would help prevent occasional mistakes (or worse, abuse) caused by the markup.
An Ear Worm is like a Rickroll: It is never going to give you up.