Jump to content

Talk:The International Man: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
mNo edit summary
→‎Merger Proposal: new section
Line 11: Line 11:
I disagree profoundly that this page should be deleted. The book is an important work worth having its own entry. I see that other books have their own entries and would suggest that if you don't see the need for this book to then it is because you haven't read it nor do you see the increasing significance of the internationalism movement.
I disagree profoundly that this page should be deleted. The book is an important work worth having its own entry. I see that other books have their own entries and would suggest that if you don't see the need for this book to then it is because you haven't read it nor do you see the increasing significance of the internationalism movement.
Robert13 00:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Robert13 00:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

== Merger Proposal ==

{{Discussion top|1=The result of this discussion was to merge the page with the primary entry}}

Consensus to merge.

{{Discussion bottom}}



{{Old merge full|otherpage=Doug Casey|date=March 2010|result=Merger|talk=International Man}}

Revision as of 23:08, 20 October 2014

The book itself and the many different situations that occurred to make it popular at the time in my opinion cannot be given the required level of detail if the article was to be merged with the Doug Casey entry. While it is related due to Doug Casey being the author, that fact alone is not enough for merging. The standalone article also discusses what the book has done and how it has continued to live as an on-going project. My personal vote would be for it to stay as it's own entity as it has more value that way. Crispy Beef (talk) 17:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Out of Print and Dated - Primarily used for Marketing

This entry supports the marketing effort of Doug Casey using Wikipedia as a tool for that purpose.

Entry does not need to be merged with Casey, it needs to occupy one line within the Casey Bio as a published work.

Lfrankbalm (talk) 02:52, 29 September 2014 (UTC)lfrankbalmLfrankbalm (talk) 02:52, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree profoundly that this page should be deleted. The book is an important work worth having its own entry. I see that other books have their own entries and would suggest that if you don't see the need for this book to then it is because you haven't read it nor do you see the increasing significance of the internationalism movement. Robert13 00:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Merger Proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge the page with the primary entry

Consensus to merge.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.