Jump to content

Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

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.)

How to propose a merger

[edit]
Main pages: Wikipedia:Proposed article 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 Merge Request Banners (MRB) at the top of the articles you wish to be merged. The merge request templates {{Merge from}} and {{Merge to}}, or {{merge}} are the most common banners used. Remember to make sure that the Discuss link in each tag points to the same section you've created in step 1 (this is to prevent having two separate discussions going on at two different talk pages). (Merge Request Banners should NEVER be placed on article TalkPages.
  • 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.

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 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 be ignored.
4) Please consider helping the project and completing a merge request from one of the categories list at the bottom of this page. Thank you.

New requests

[edit]
______
  • Merge: Hoping someone can advise, as not sure on this one. I cleaned up Americana Music Association a little recently, but realised later there was a very similar page just for their annual conference/festival- Americana Music Festival & Conference. Most of the content on Americana Music Association was about the conference so I felt maybe they could be merged. There's not a great deal of sources just on the Association so expanding that page didn't seem likely. I then realised there's a third page on their Music Honors & Awards (an event that takes place as part of their conference)- which actually seems to have more sources than the other two- Americana Music Honors & Awards. So now I'm really not sure of best thing to do- three way merge? Or just keep separate and assume they can grow and become more distinct over time? Thanks. Editing84 (talk) 10:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge: Chicago Board Options Exchange into Cboe Global Markets. These two articles are referring to the same entity. The Chicago Board Options Exchange became CBOE Holdings at the time of its IPO in 2010. In 2017, CBOE Holdings rebranded as Cboe Global Markets. At that point the Chicago Board Options Exchange / CBOE stopped existing. There is no separate CBOE exchange or legal entity, and there are no accurate contemporary media mentions of "Chicago Board Options Exchange" because, again, that entity doesn't exist anymore. To be clear, I work for Cboe and have been making article edits requests on the Cboe Global Markets Talk page. I have a pending request there about updating the History section that would further clarify this issue. Spencer at Cboe (talk) 21:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Outgames into World_Outgames. They are both referring to the same organization, but the Outgames page appears to be created for a school project in 2012, while the World Outgames page was created in 2006 and contains much more information. Probably uncontroversial, but I've hit the limits of my editing knowledge just getting this request put in! Raccoon428 (talk) 21:04, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Semi-metro into Premetro.Consensus was largely reached as preferred solution for merger. Also discussed was discussed merger with Light rail but Premetro deemed more appropriate. Difference is largely a matter of terminology. Both terms describe transit systems with features that overlap significantly Unique and valuable content from the Semi-metro article should be preserved and integrated into the Premetro article. Lea 4545 (talk) 14:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For consensus, first of all discussion need to take place. However, none of my concerns have been addressed in the past two weeks. Besides that, the difference is that both terms have their own definition. Both the definitions have plenty inline citations from secondary sources. KatVanHuis (talk) 08:08, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


______

Awaiting consensus

[edit]
Shortcut

After all involved articles are tagged for merger discussion: the request should be added 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 can also attempt to get more people to comment on proposals.

______
______

Answered requests

[edit]

After the associated merge discussion has been closed, please move the request at the top of one of the three following subsections, with the corresponding marking:

  • {{Working}} (shows as  Working) if the merge has been approved but not done yet. Once it has been done it can be moved to the following subsection;
  • {{Merge done}} (shows as   checkY Merger complete. ) if the merger has been approved and completed;
  • {{Not done}} (shows as  Not done) if there was consensus against merging or no consensus.
______

Successful requests, merger pending

[edit]

You can help by following instructions at WP:Merging#How to merge


I disagree with this merge , but it has been posted for more than one month and only i have answered. AlexBobCharles (talk) 07:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an AfD, not a merge discussion. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Successful requests, articles merged

[edit]
@Voorts: Hey there. I took it upon myself to complete the merge after closing the discussion. Hopefully, I completed all the necessary steps. This is only the second time I've performed a merge. I only merged a small portion of the text into the target page. The reason being (1) Much of it was already covered in the target page. (2) A lot of the content on the page that was to be redirected was unsourced, or the references cited were bogus in that they did not verify the cited text. I would say it was even liberal to merge the text that I did. I will leave it up to the rest of the community to decide if anything more should be added or removed. Cheers. --Griboski (talk) 02:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  checkY Merger complete. Thanks! voorts (talk/contributions) 02:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Geomatic engineering into Geomatics. This is the 2nd time the merge has been proposed, and the discussion has stagnated with one in favor in addition to the one who proposed the merge (me), and one against. I have requested feedback from users of both Wikiproject maps and Wikiproject geography. Merge is proving controversial and would need assistance from uninvolved editor(s) in determining whether to merge the pages. The merge discussion has been open since December, I don't want to act on a consensus of just two against one. Please note that there are potential plagiarism and source issues on the geomatics engineering page.

Unsuccessful requests

[edit]
______

Archives

[edit]
Current year archives
Older archives

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

All articles tagged for merging

[edit]
This section is updated by Merge bot.

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=1258761305"