This article is within the scope of WikiProject Requested articles, because it is used for the administration of the Requested articles process or it was formerly listed at Requested articles.Requested articlesWikipedia:WikiProject Requested articlesTemplate:WikiProject Requested articlesRequested articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
The proposed merge with the catastrophic failure article seems fine with me. Howeve, iI would suggest merging the entire article, otherwise it would be left with a very short lede and nothing else over there. The lede could simply be another section here, but I think it should also provide a little information and links to articles about failures that are not catastrophic (ie: normal wear and tear, slow and steady loss of usability) to give some contrast. Zaereth (talk) 01:01, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
