Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Merge

NOTE: To Make a formal Merge Request; please go to the Proposed Article Mergers page
Individual article merge discussions SHOULD NOT be started on this page.

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Merge request for Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India and it's corridors articles

Dedicated freight corridors in India → Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India

The Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India is the owner and the operator of the Dedicated freight corridors in India, having two articles on same subject is confusing.

Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India is a govt. undertaking company that owns, operates the freight corridors. I highly recommend on merging this article with Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India.

Editors can mention about the corridors that DFCCIL operates in that article itself. Thewikizoomer (talk) 10:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I posted this on the talk page, will the discussion be held here or on the talk page, requesting any editor to confirm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dedicated_freight_corridors_in_India&oldid=1191409873 Thewikizoomer (talk) 10:59, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Merging articles after AFDs

Hello, WikiProject,

I just came across Guardian Life Magazine which was part of an AFD in October 2023 that closed with a decision to Merge but nothing has happened. I went to the target article talk page which is where editors were directed to discuss a merger but there have been no comments there for years. I close AFDs often with decisions to Merge articles and I guess I never considered how or when they were carried out or by whom. Is this a task that members of this WikiProject are concerned with? If not, how do these merges come about? Thanks for any answers folks can provide. Don't worry, you can address my questions without volunteering to merge this article! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

We keep a running list of those articles that need to be merged after an AFD, but there's no one officially responsible for completing the merges. I always hope that one of the people who recommended a merge during the AFD will then come in and complete it, but that very rarely happens. I've tried initiating discussion on talk pages, pinging those who voted "merge," and the result was almost always radio-silence. You close a ton of AFDs, so you know how often people champion merging as "an alternative to deletion," (I've come to hate that phrase) but then they never seem to want to do the work to combine the articles, which sometimes results in nothing happening.

There are some that I can handle, but other topics...I just don't have the proper knowledge to do what I would consider to be a quality job. I should probably go back to haunting AFDs with my annoying little copy/paste comments like merge which part(s)??? or The target article is already really long; are we sure that's the best choice? Joyous! Noise! 04:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I enact a lot of merges from old AfD-merge proposals, but there's a much smaller active set of us working on these that the set working on AfDs. I echo Joyous's comments that the AfD-merge discussion outcomes don't summarize the discussion as they should. We hence have to spend quite some time dissecting the discussion to work out how a merge can effectively be done. So, it would be great if:

1. Those looking at AfDs would close with more specific outcomes, including what content should be merged (full or partial; and if partial, which parts)
2. Might help out with the list Joyous mentions, or even the broader Category:Articles to be merged.

The backlog there is current out to May last year, so an October case is not extraordinary. Klbrain (talk) 13:24, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

The other issue with the Guardian Life Magazine AfD-merge is that in December, a bot edit changed the sorting date from October to December, pushing it down the priority list for many of us; I've reported the bot issue to the owner. Klbrain (talk) 15:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Going about two articles on the same topic.

I was going through the 2022 deaths category. Discovered that Dan Robinson (American football) and Dan Robinson (politician) are of the same person, just focused on two different aspects of his career. Wasn't sure where to go about this, figured I'd bring it up here as ultimately one will need to be merged with the other. Rusted AutoParts 02:56, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

"Merge review"

Is there any kind of formal way to query a closure of a merge discussion, similar to Wikipedia:Move review or Wikipedia:Deletion review? Taking it to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard seems a tad extreme! But I certainly feel the closure of Talk:Australian Grand Prix#Merge proposal is not in line with concensus (at best there would be no concensus), with the closer even telling me the reason for the close was the 3-2 majority, therefore completely ignoring that the issues the two opposers (me being one) had not been adressed. A7V2 (talk) 00:30, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

At present, there is no dedicated avenue for reviewing merge discussion closures. WP:Closing discussions recommends:

For other procedures, whether formal RfCs or less formal ones such as merging or splitting, contact the editor who performed the closure and try to resolve the issue through discussion. If you are unable to resolve the issue through discussion with the closer, you may request review at the Administrators' Noticeboard. Before requesting review, understand that review should not be used as an opportunity to re-argue the underlying dispute, and is only intended for use when there is a problem with the close itself.

I would say that discussing with the closer is always good practice, and afterwards, I would not consider WP:AN to be an extreme route to take at all. It is simply the catch-all procedure for issues that do not have dedicated channels. Felix QW (talk) 08:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice. I will keep it in mind should something like this happen again. In this instance, further discussion with the closer would most likely not have been fruitful, but an uninvolved editor reverted the closure so for the moment this particular issue seems to be resolved. A7V2 (talk) 06:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)