Jump to content

Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
more maint
Line 95: Line 95:


<!--------------- DO NOT PUT BRAND NEW REQUESTS IN THE ^^^^ABOVE SECTION^^^^ They will be missed ----------------->
<!--------------- DO NOT PUT BRAND NEW REQUESTS IN THE ^^^^ABOVE SECTION^^^^ They will be missed ----------------->
* [[Joseph-François Charpentier de Cossigny]] and [[Joseph-François Charpentier de Cossigny de Palma]] are the same person. Also mess with Interlanguage links.--[[User:Vicpeters|Vicpeters]] ([[User talk:Vicpeters|talk]]) 13:01, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

===Completed requests===
===Completed requests===
<!--------MOVE REQUEST RIGHT BELOW THIS LINE WHEN THE MERGE IS EITHER 'AGREED TO' OR 'REJECTED'-------->
<!--------MOVE REQUEST RIGHT BELOW THIS LINE WHEN THE MERGE IS EITHER 'AGREED TO' OR 'REJECTED'-------->

Revision as of 13:01, 8 June 2013

Closing instructions

"WP:PM" redirects here. For requesting to move or rename a page, see Wikipedia:Requested moves. For page history mergers, see Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen.
Shortcuts

The discussion about merging at the village pump is now archived (here). The vast majority of those who expressed an opinion considered the system based on the current templates and this process (Wikipedia:Proposed mergers) to be inadequate.

The implementation of a new automated system is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Merge#Automation of merge proposals. More participation in that discussion is welcome.

This page lists proposed article mergers as a supplement to the merge categories and templates; it does not replace any of the other steps in the merger process. Please add the appropriate merger tag(s) to the articles before listing them here.

Category mergers should not be proposed here. Please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.

Template mergers should not be proposed here. Please see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.

How to propose a merger

Main page: Help:Merging

Proposing a merger can be done in three steps:

  1. Create a place for discussion. Go to the Talk Page (also known as the discussion page) of the TARGET ARTICLE (the one you want to merge to) and create a section (eg: "Merger proposal") to discuss the merger. If there's already a discussion on the talk page regarding the merger, you can omit this step. Whether the discussion is new or old, make sure the discussion section names all articles involved and link to them. The section name can be anything that includes the word merge (for example ==Proposed merger==).
  2. Put one of the merger tags at the top of the articles you wish to be merged. The templates {{Merge from}} and {{Merge to}}, or {{merge}} are the most common ones. Remember to make sure that the Discuss link in each tag points to the section you've created in step 1 (this is to prevent having two separate discussions on different talk pages).
  3. If the proposed merge is controversial or potentially difficult to carry out, follow the directions under #Requests for assistance and feedback to add it to the list.

Requests for assistance and feedback

If you need outside feedback regarding mergers that are either tricky or of a controversial nature, please do the following:

  • Tag the article as shown above
  • Create a discussion as shown above
  • Notify the talk page of the appropriate Wikiproject to get knowledgable people to comment on it.
  • If there is consensus to merge, but the merge is difficult, contact Wikipedia:WikiProject Merge for assistance.

For other topics:

Don't post here if you are not willing to do the merge yourself. We will provide you assistance in how to complete the merge if you are unsure how to do it.

Current requests

If you need assistance with proposing a merge, list it below and someone will make sure it's properly listed. Note that this will not get the merge completed, as there is a large merge backlog. This can also be used if an old proposal needs more discussion. We will attempt to get more people to comment on it.

Once a merge is listed properly, move it to the "Completed requests" or "Awaiting consensus" sections below as appropriate.

Please list new requests at the BOTTOM of this section. Use the edit summary–List at least one of the articles' titles. Please remember to sign each listing or comment by typing: ~~~~

Awaiting consensus

  • Ditto: my first merge proposal. I think I tagged it right (followed WP:Merge) but would just like to have someone experienced look it over. Merge Beyond Ex-Gay into Ex-ex-gay. I also plan to check History and notify prominent past editors (if any) on their Talk pages, but other than that, I'm done I think. Feedback (if needed) to my Talk page, thanks! Mathglot (talk) 21:11, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
>>>Discussion here<<<. Seems non-controversial and probably should happen. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:30, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tagged and awaiting consensus.
Appears non-controversial. Proposer should proceed per own request. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:30, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion >>>here<<<.

Completed requests

Appears correct. Proposer, or someone knowledgeable about the subject, should proceed. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:30, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:57, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hans Hopfen and Hans von Hopfen are two articles about the same person and content on exactly the same topic. So, I believe they should be merged. I've put the templates described in WP:Merge, but, as I'm not contributor of the English Wikipedia I don't think I will be able to follow this proposal. Can someone takes care about it, please? Tpt (talk) 09:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Non controversial and should happen. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:30, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Finished incomplete merger. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:57, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Only input after relisting is opposed. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 18:58, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed that the Awake (TV series) character articles be merged together to a character list article or main article:

The discussion is >>>here<<< 65.94.76.126 (talk) 00:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done No consensus to merge at this time. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 18:58, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

History of Palestinian nationality → History of the Palestinian people (>>>discuss<<<): proposal submitted more than a year ago, but received no responses from editors (neither support or opposition).Greyshark09 (talk) 08:35, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - No consensus to merge at this time. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 19:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done no consensus to merge. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 19:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done No consensus to merge. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 19:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done by consensus (WP:Snow). GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:16, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Archives

May 2013
Seems a straightforward merge is in order into the "History" section of United Continental Holdings. Same company, different name now. Go ahead. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 00:31, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect were reversed. Need further input for consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 22:17, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Stale proposal with no interest to merge. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:16, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 04:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

April 2013
 Not done "Not a cover..." GenQuest "Talk to Me" 15:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Consensus is no merge (WP:Snow). GenQuest "Talk to Me" 15:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would like to request the merging of the various pages about the National Assembly of Pakistan into the article History of Pakistan National Assembly. I know that articles exist about the 3th, 4th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th and 11th National Assembly of Pakistan. Please consider it. Thank you. NeoFriskus (talk) 7:26, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
These should all be merged. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 22:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 15:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus is growing to NOT MERGE to the proposed target. Ideas welcome. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 00:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done by consensus. List of proposed states of the United States merged into 51st state. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 22:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged, awaiting consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:31, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. This proposal involves converting a list into a full-blown article. There are problems with this in that the list is transcluded into List of newspapers in the United States#Wyoming. Note the comment on the top of that file--a similar comment is on other analogous state lists as well:

!-- Note to future editors: this article is copied by transclusion into the article "List of newspapers in the United States". Only include links here unless you plan to rewrite that article to use part of the list here, such as for listing only major papers on the main page. Include anything relevant to this page only - things that should only show on this page and not be carried back to the main article - by placing it between blocks. Also, make sure there is nothing - no CR - before a if one is not to be included in the upstream article, or occurs after the , or an extra blank line will be sent back to the calling article

This proposal should be made on a global 50-state basis, not on a single state, to maintain consistency across states. Wbm1058 (talk) 16:28, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have tagged. Awaiting consensus or a bold merge by someone more familiar with these subjects. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Partial consolidation of the articles involved have now taken place (Multani dialect→Multani language; Thalochi→Thalochi dialect). Additional input, however, will be required for finding consensus for the rest. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:12, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed several broken and reverted Redirects that involved sockpuppetry and blocked editors. It's a mess. NOTE: I crossed out what's already been merged. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 19:06, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Closing this as done. The original proposal is 80% complete, and no further movement on the remaining two items seems evident. (They can be re-proposed if needed in the future.) GenQuest "Talk to Me" 03:38, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged, awaiting consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:13, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Article creator (and merge requester) withdrew the proposal. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:41, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 04:08, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
tagged and awaiting consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge now taking place. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 08:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Working The incomplete merge was made by an IP (95.141.31.4) on March 3, 2013. Since then, the merger was reversed with the discussion continuing here. There will need to be administrative or supervisory input to close this apparently divisive proposal. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 04:03, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Boldly by an IP. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:22, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
tagged and awaiting consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: requested further input from Wikipedia:WikiProject Miami {{WikiProject Miami tasks}} – Wbm1058 (talk) 18:55, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus seems to favor the merge. Someone familiar with the subject should go ahead and do it. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done – Neighborhoods where notability has not been established were not merged. Wbm1058 (talk) 05:26, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I suspect you were looking at the redirect. The original redirect was accomplished nearly a year ago; however, another stub-version of the redirected article reappeared recently. It has since been redirected. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
March 2013
Tagged awaiting consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 05:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Requested additional input from WP:Sports. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:32, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged awaiting consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus appears to have developed to merge. Go ahead. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 00:36, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
Tagged awaiting discussion. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 05:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seems non-controversial. Go ahead and merge. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:15, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Straightforward. Go ahead and proceed. (No need to list here unless you can't do the merge yourself.) Do you need help? GenQuest "Talk to Me" 15:21, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, still new to this whole thing. Pages have been merged. Thanks. ToastyMallows (talk) 16:38, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • A merge request between Wuffa of East Anglia and Wuffingas was proposed, without the normal procedure being followed. Several editors have opposed or commented on the proposed merge. I have closed the discussion as nothing has been added to it for several weeks. Please can an experienced administrator help reach a consensus? Hel-hama (talk) 09:32, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sent to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Requests_for_closure#Article_namespace for closure request. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done No consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 01:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Probable situation where you can be bold and just do it, especially if no one is objecting. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Has turned into a divisive proposal with no consensus to merge, redirect, or delete. Good luck. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 00:59, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Requested additional input from Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music#Noticeboard. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this appears to have been discussed about 4 years ago, also.
 Not done per consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged, awaiting consensus; and requested further input from WikiProject Sports and Television. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 01:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done No consensus reached after almost two months. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done This noticeboard is for help with the actual merging process, not a discussion forum. That takes place on the target article Talk page. Anyway, the merger is already a done deal. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The merge discussion has not been closed. Proposed mergers can be used if an old proposal needs more discussion (see Wikipedia:Proposed_mergers#Current_requests, which it what Help Desk recommended, and Kkk posted an opinion in the merge disucssion, so Kkk has a conflict with performing the merge. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 11:06, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged; should be non-controversial; go ahead and merge, Dipralb. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 08:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Notified as  Done by Dipralb. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
February 2013
Tagged awaiting consensus.
Stalled and needs further input. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 02:51, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Requested additional comments from WP:TV. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 06:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done no consensus to merge "At This Time." GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:01, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge low budget films article: [Discussion moved from Village pump (proposals):] I propose that the low-budget film article be merged into the Z movie and B movie articles, but not the z movie and b movie articles. Could someone please propose this for merger for me, since I am an IP address or else I would do it myself. Thanks! :-) --Able
Discussion Here (B Movie) and Here (Z Movie)
I don't quite follow. Do you want to propose merging Low-budget film into Z movie and B movie, but keep Z movie and B movie separate? If you go to the talk page (I will watch all three for a while) and add you reasoning I will add the templates. AIRcorn (talk) 09:28, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have copied this request/discussion to the Wikipedia:Proposed mergers notice-board. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 04:18, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Requested additional comments from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 06:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done no support. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 22:54, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note to everyone involved Eng.Bandara has been indef blocked as a sock as per this Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Distributor108.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:51, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done No action due to nom POV-pushing by sock-puppetry. May be re-introduced by another editor. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:32, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
tagged and awaiting consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge now taking place. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 08:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The apparently reverted merge and re-opened discussion is duplicated above (in March 2013).
  • Mattel v. MCA Records should be merged with Barbie Girl - A WP:BOLD merge was undone by User:TJRC, citing "court case is more than song, also defamation; having a separate article allows legal issues to be discussed that would be off-topic here." This is an invalid rationale being that the lawsuit happened as a direct result of the song making fun of Barbie and bearing its name. Had the song been named something else, it would not have happened. Since the lawsuit has been settled, it is very unlikely that any new information will come up in the near future (even if that was the case, a merge can easily be undone). Starting a discussing would be rather pointless because Mattel v. MCA Records is a low class article not watched by many editors and had minimal edits since its creation over three years ago. This is how the merged article looks like and it seems perfectly okay by me. Before it is done again, though, I suggest you speak one-on-one with User:TJRC because he will likely revert it, being the only editor opposing a merge of any kind. The Legendary Ranger (talk) 22:02, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably the wrong noticeboard for your request, as the merge has already happened (even though it was subsequently reversed). Have/Did you start(ed) a discussion along these lines at the article Talk? That should be a first step, then you would have Third Opinion or Comment requests available to you. From the results of that forum, the article can be brought to Mediation, Arbitration, or even AfD if warranted. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 00:45, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
MOOT This is a simple move request, and the wrong spot to post it. Use the article's talk page or use the "Move" button on the article. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 05:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done The "merge" has apparently already taken place by Cut 'N Paste. Marking as completed. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 06:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Requested input from WikiProject United States members. GenQuest (talk) 14:23, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done, not enough input, no consensus. Proposal withdrawn. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 02:45, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 02:22, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus reached to go ahead and merge. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:32, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done
Both articles started the same day by the same person, who may have a vested interest in them (re: User:The N factor). I have tagged for merge proposal, but they may well be AfD candidates as well. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 12:50, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done non-contentious/controversial merges; renamed and redirected; complete. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 01:16, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is a discussion on talk page: Talk:Araeomolis#Merger_Proposal. I strongly oppose merger. Ruigeroeland (talk) 15:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit conflict] This seems to be a contentious proposal as a near edit-war has broken out over just tagging the articles for discussion. I started to tag the articles, and then realized they had already been tagged several times, each having been subsequently removed. I'm not going to waste my time to further tag them all. I posted a list of the affected articles at the discussion sight. (It may be better to take this to AfD.) GenQuest "Talk to Me" 15:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, discussion closed, see Talk:Araeomolis#Merger_Proposal. I will remove the tags. Ruigeroeland (talk) 15:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done nominator withdrew request by consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 01:16, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Proposal tagged since 2009, just posted here as of December 2012; Need further input to confirm these are the same guy. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 15:41, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done marked for merge to take place by Felbick.
DISCUSSION.GenQuest "Talk to Me" 01:16, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As I told you, German user Felbick needs help. I dont understand how to merge.Felbick (talk) 21:51, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Taking place at User:Felbick/Lorenz Christoph Mizler GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:42, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
January 2013
Go ahead and merge. They are the same thing. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 03:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done
Tagged and awaiting consensus. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 21:51, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done There is no consensus to merge at this time; and the 2012 Central African Republic rebellion article is now huge and well referenced. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 03:28, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GenQuest "Talk to Me" 01:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mona Sikhs into Sikh(discuss). The former is a subsect of the latter, and while the former's article is short on detail, history, etc., the latter's article is quite complete and well-rounded, and would benefit greatly from a more complete and thorough coverage of the subject, while reducing effort and minimizing duplication of work. besiegedtalk 23:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't see a reason not to do it–both articles are about the same procedure/process. Go ahead and proceed. Non-contentious. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 20:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Already  Done
Could this be closed now? Thank you. It's a minority interest, the discussion is unlikely to gain any more contributors but appears to fall to the 'oppose' side. --Iyo-farm (talk) 06:57, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done; Consensus is opposed to merging
 Not done; no consensus
  • Merged to refined sub-article instead of over-arching League article as requested – made more sense.
 Done
Agreed, Obviously same person. Non-contentious. Go ahead and merge. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 16:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
December 2012
 Done non-contentious; went ahead and merged. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 04:25, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
November 2012
  • Yes, please can an admin history merge the sandbox into the article? We took a copy into the sandbox and edited it there with the intent to dump it back at the end, but in the end multiple editors were involved in the sandbox editing. By the way, well done finding this page MoonSwan999! --99of9 (talk) 03:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done technically the wrong venue use {{histmerge}} --Salix (talk): 09:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's why I thought I'd better explain it. But finding this is not bad for a beginner. Thanks. --99of9 (talk) 09:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
October 2012
Complete concesus reached on talk page. Thanks for all the input. -- :- ) Don 16:12, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012

• I need help moving the Controversy section of the Joan Juliet Buck into either the Asma al-Assad article and/or the Criticism section of Vogue. It overwhelms the profile. Buck seems to have been commissioned for the piece by Vogue, al-Assad's husband is responsible for many atrocities in his own county, and these points that are lost by keeping it in under Joan Juliet Buck.--Aichikawa (talk) 18:17, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Essentially, what we are trying to do here is create a new master page, or super-categorisation, for all two cylinder engines leading to sub- or child pages for individual configurations.

The intention here is to resolve a problem that has arisen relating to the three main groups of 'non-V' or 'non-flat' twins, i.e. transverse or parallel twins, inline or longitudinal twins, and tandem twins. At present three configurations are being shoehorned into a single article called "Straight-two engine", which arguably is a far more obscure and minor terminology for some engine configurations and not used widely by manufacturers. The previously unreferenced topic being started by a non-native English speaker, sometime ago and the preponderance of references suggesting this does not meet Wikipedia naming conventions, as per WP:NAME; Recognizability, Naturalness, Precision, Conciseness, Consistency, English language use etc.
The idea is as sufficient content arises, new child page can be developed off the new parent. --Bridge Boy (talk) 19:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please note that Bridge Boy has been blocked indefinitely for disruptive editing, etc. It is generally held by involved editors that this merger proposal was an element of his disruptiveness (is that a word?). I suggest that these merger talks be closed with the decision not to merge. Thank you. Ebikeguy (talk) 22:55, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Proposed by blocked user in violation of block. Ego White Tray (talk) 01:17, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012

Tagged articles

This section is updated by Merge bot.

See also

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Proposed_article_mergers&oldid=558904259"