Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Closing instructions

"WP:PM" redirects here. For requesting to move or rename a page, see Wikipedia:Requested moves. For page history mergers, see Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. For the user right for assistance in moving pages, see Wikipedia:Page mover.
Shortcuts

This page lists proposed article mergers as a supplement to the merge categories; it is an index of ongoing discussions of possible mergers, and 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. To see all articles marked for merging, see All articles tagged for merging.

Note[edit]

Mergers of CATEGORIES should not be proposed here. Please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion.
Mergers of TEMPLATES should not be proposed here. Please see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion.
SPLITTING of ARTICLES should not be proposed here. Please see Wikipedia:Proposed article splits.

Merge-arrows.svg

When to propose a merger[edit]

Main page: Wikipedia:Merging

There are three types of mergers on Wikipedia:

1): Mergers that are so obviously necessary and appropriate that no one is expected to object;
2): Mergers that would benefit from discussion with the other editors at the affected articles' Talk page about whether and/or how to perform the merge; and
3): Mergers that are controversial, potentially difficult to carry out, or where at least one affected article is either rated Class B or higher or is over 100K in size will need assistance from uninvolved editor(s) in determining whether to merge the pages.

If the pages that you would like to merge fall into the type 1 group above, then it is not necessary to propose a merger at all. You should boldly do the merger now, without formally proposing it. (In the event that someone unexpectedly objects, then the merger can be undone easily, and you can formally propose the merger for discussion at that time.)

Merge-arrows.svg

How to propose a merger[edit]

Main pages: Wikipedia:Proposed mergers/Merger banners and Wikipedia:Merging

If the merge falls into the type 2 group or type 3 group above, then proposing a merger can be done in three steps (as the proposer, you should still be willing to carry-out a type 2 merge):

  • Step 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 links to them. The section name can be anything that includes the word merge (for example ==Merger discussion==).
  • Step 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).
  • Step 3: If the proposed merge is type 3 (above) follow the directions under #Requests for merge assistance and feedback to add it to the list.

See: Copy and Paste easy merge templates for easy to follow shortcuts of the above procedure.

Merge-arrows.svg

Requests for merge assistance and feedback[edit]

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 knowledgeable people to comment on it. (To find out which Wikiproject the page is associated with, check the associated talk page. It should be tagged with a template, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Ice Hockey.)
  • If there is consensus to merge, but the merge is difficult, request help at Merge Talk for assistance.

For other topics:

  • If you need help with renaming or moving, consult Wikipedia:Moving a page.
  • Cut-and-paste move fixes: If you have moved an article by this deprecated method, then you need to request page histories to be merged; list them at requests for history merge. Please do not perform further moves by cut and paste.

NOTE: Please do not re-list old merge proposals that are already tagged and in the "to Merge" queue (including requests made up to two years ago), as these will be handled as we get to them. -Project Merge

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

Merge-arrows.svg

Merge requests[edit]

Shortcut

Please list new requests at the bottom of New Requests section.

1) Precede your request with *Merge (Copy and Paste it);
2) Enter (at least) a link to the article to be redirected in the edit summary;.
3) Please legitimize your request by signing each listing or comment by typing four tildes (~~~~); remember, unsigned requests may not be honored.
______

NEW REQUESTS[edit]

______

AWAITING CONSENSUS[edit]

Shortcut

After all involved articles are tagged for merger discussion, the request should be added at (or moved to) the bottom of this section. This section can also be used if a proposal needs further discussion due to age or disagreement. All merger comments and discussions should be directed to the Discussion subsection of the targeted articles' talk page, not here. We will also attempt to get more people to comment on proposals.

______
______

ANSWERED REQUESTS[edit]

After discussion concludes, completed requests should be moved below (to the top of this list). Please mark as {{Done}} (or {{merge done}} if merge has actually occurred), {{Not done}}, or {{Working}} when consensus has been reached.

______
  • Merge : I propose merging Object theory into Object language, as the former article is based around a grave misunderstanding of the latter - it seems somebody had confused the phrase "object theory" for being a distinct area of mathematics, rather than merely a theory (in the sense of Model theory) which is the object of a metatheory (in the sense of Object language). Some authors will use the phrases "object language" and "object theory" synonymously, whereas others will only use the former term in reference to the underlying language of the object theory, absent of rules of inference or axioms - in either case, it certainly isn't whatever the author of Object language seems to be suggesting. Discussion here. Jackcrawf3 (talk) 12:49, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done Stale discussion stalled with no clear consensus to merge. GenQuest "scribble" 16:05, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Merging please:
- Ibrahim Ahmad (footballer) into Ibrahim Khalfan
- Mansoor Bakheet into Mansour Muftah
- Salah Eid into Saleh Al-Mehaizaa

There are the same players. --Fayçal.09 (talk) 11:38, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge
- E. Balasubramaniyan to E. Balasubramanian
- A M V Prabhakara Raja to A. M. V. Prabhakara Raja

Reason: both are same

  • Merge Roman Festival Liberalia into Liberalia. They are the same topic. The first is by far the longest but also the most recently created (on 3 December 2020 by User:Kswizzy42, a student editor at Western Washington University). The second is quite short but much older (2005) so I presume more articles directly link to it. It doesn't look like the student editor's contributions were thoroughly checked by their supervisor. I attempted a merge notice on each article, but I found the whole process very confusing. I'm willing to rewrite both articles as one, as the topic is well within my usual purview. Sorry to add one more request to an already long list Haploidavey (talk) 06:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Working No objection to merge, proposer notified. Felix QW (talk) 15:13, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


______

Archives[edit]

Current year archives
Requests answered in June 2022
  • Merge Android 17 and Android 18 into Android 17 and 18. The two fictional characters' pages contain alot of the same content and sources, both characters are connnected to eachother in terms of notability and seperate articles seem redundant. If merged, article length should be roughly the legth of 18's, since a majority of the bloat exists in the "Creation" and "Appearances" sections which restate things that apply to both characters. Discussion can be found here: Talk:Android 18#Second merger proposal
  • Merge Propose merging Canola oil and Colza oil into new article titled Rapeseed oil. "Colza" might be explicitly and only used for non-food-grade rapeseed oil in the US and Canada where the trademark "canola" is genericised for food-grade rapeseed oil, but in many other countries the term colza oil is used for the food-grade oil as well. Some (all English-language!) links to demonstrate this usage, from the first two pages of a Google search for {colza oil}: Swiss producer;Iranian academic and another; French retailer; moroccan pharmacy; Belgian herbalists. Many of these explicitly say that "colza oil" is a synonym for "rapeseed oil" or "canola oil". Additionally a merge would reduce duplication; a certain amount of information is common to both foodgrade and nonfoodgrade rapeseed oils Pseudomonas(talk) 13:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Requests answered in May 2022
  • I agree with Generalrelative that the discussion on the talk page does not provide what we mean by consensus for the purposes of a merge. If you want the move to happen, please explicitly propose a move on one of the talk pages, mention it on the other and give a clear rationale for the move, which can refer to arguments made by others. As it stands this proposed merge should be refused. — Charles Stewart (talk) 10:27, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @TiggyTheTerrible: Please give a rationale for the move here. Then other editors can assist in tagging the pages and formally opening the discussion. Felix QW (talk) 18:41, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Felix QW: Reverse sexism is just sexism according to the dictionary and to the definition of reverse sexism (i.e. sexism, against males). The sexism page should be open to sexism against males being given equal footing, otherwise I would have to question what's going on there. Lack of parity gives - at least - the impression of sexism. Tiggy The Terrible (talk) 20:13, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Renewable energy transition into Energy transition. Discussion is here. Currently we have a detailed Renewable energy transition article in contrast to the short Energy transition article focussing on definition and historic transitions in general. But in almost all appearances, the term is used in the renewable energy context. Users search for "energy transition", not for "renewable energy transition" as you can see in Google trends. The current state of both articles with multiple templates above the introduction does not leave a good impression. A merge could solve the issues. Historic energy transitions remain an interesting aspect. But they can be described in a sub-section. It has been two years since the last merge proposal by User:Chidgk1 ending with no consensus, but with only one opposing vote. It is time for a new approach.Hedgehoque (talk) 12:54, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Furthermore, I also suggest merging Hussein Esmaeel al-Sadr into Hussein Al-Sadr. The latter has more information and references than the former. Similarly, they are both the same person, thus making a merger appropriate. Ali313korosh (talk) 07:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion. Discussion is >>>HERE<<<. Richard3120 (talk) 16:05, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Done Closed as merge, but blanked and redirected since source page contained no additional content. Felix QW (talk) 17:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Kogut-Susskind fermion into staggered fermion. These are just two names for the same lattice fermion, with the latter name being the more commonly used one in recent literature. OpenScience709 (talk) 22:58, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This merger should be a trivial thing now that the staggered fermion article has been rewritten and the Kogut-Susskind article has nothing new to add. All that is needed to be done is to make the Kogut-Susskind article into a redirect. Can someone please look into doing this? OpenScience709 (talk) 09:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Older archives

Starting with new proposals received after December 2015, the proposal is filed by month when finally answered.

Merge-arrows.svg

All articles tagged for merging[edit]

This section is updated by Merge bot.
Merge-arrows.svg

Additional articles to be merged lists[edit]

See also[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Proposed_article_mergers&oldid=1097107447"