 | This article was nominated for deletion on 4 March 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
Merge
editAFD above was closed by a non-admin with the result "keep". There was one vote for deletion or merge, one for a keep and maybe merge, and one clearly for a merge keeping this title as a redirect instead of deleting the page history. Consensus was thus clear for a merge. I have gone through this article looking for any information present here that is not already on the article it would be merged with, and the other article already has everything. I have therefore finished the merge by doing a redirect. Unfortunately we have someone who is leaving very misleading and contradictory editing comments and reverting the redirect. I have tried patiently to explain to him that if he thinks there is information here worth saving not present in the other article that ll he has to do is copy it over. Instead he keeps insisting on reverting this back to a full article. I'm no sure how he thinks merges work around here, but I have done everything I can think of that could possibly be done, and if he disagrees he is free to edit the merged page to add whatever he feels is appropriate, but reverting back to a full article is nothing but a violation of WP:POINT, similar to other edits he has made lately on other articles. This nonsense needs to stop. DreamGuy (talk) 17:18, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- → from Wikipedia:Third opinion: Firstly, right here is the correct place to discuss whether this article should be merged. Discussion via edit summary is rarely productive, and may lead to the article being protected. Reading the AfD discussion linked above, either merging or maintaining as a stand-alone article would be perfectly appropriate. If we three cannot come to an amicable solution in a few days, I recommend placing {{mergefrom}} and {{mergeto}} tags to attract more attention; given that the AfD was only sparsely attended, however, I expect that this course is unlikely to attract many new editors. Both articles are fairly small, so WP:SIZE does not require two articles. There is some information on Rikki Sylvan that is currently not treated at Rikki And The Last Days Of Earth, but most of the article deals with the band. This includes no information which is properly cited using inline citations, though it might be sourcable to the external links provided. Moog is, I believe, a big deal for music geeks, and might reasonably be sourced and added to the band article. Reading the brief double-linked biography, RATLDOE is far and away the most significant project with which Sylvan has been involved; none of the other former members have Wikipedia articles, leading me to suspect that this is the case for them as well. It would not be unreasonable to include a section there noting what happened to the members after the band split. There are two short paragraphs of this nature already in the History section of the band article, which could easily be split into a new section and expanded.
- This leaves me with two arguments: I like having two short articles, and I like having one long article. Absent strong sourcing indicating the notability of Sylvan outside RATLDOE, treating his entire biography there seems the more appropriate course. However, significant coverage in reliable sources of his later work would indicate that a separate article would be warranted. Have I summarized the dispute accurately? Please bring sources and points of policy here, and leave the article as it stands until discussion concludes. - Eldereft (cont.) 18:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see any reason to leave the article as it stands. Esasus does not appear to be making any good faith attempt whatsoever to discuss it, instead leaving misleading comments about the AFD (merge was and still is the consensus, not keep as a separate article) and harassing and false accusations on my talk page and elsewhere that my edits here should be considered vandalism. He refuses to make edits to the other article to fix the supposed lack of a merge that he claims he wants, which would certainly solve any perceived problem if that's what he's really after. I appears instead that he simply disagrees with the decision of others to merge and refuses to accept it. DreamGuy (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- The consensus of the AfD discussion was Keep. User:DreamGuy is repeatedly blanking the article and redirecting Rikki Sylvan to Rikki And The Last Days Of Earth, which is an article about one of Rikki Sylvan's musical projects. User:DreamGuy has not merged any of the information contained in this article - he is just blanking the article. The result is that the information contained in the article is hidden (i.e. removed). Even if the two articles were to be merged (which I do not support), it would be logical to merge Rikki And The Last Days Of Earth into Rikki Sylvan and not the other way around. By continuing to edit war against this article that he took the position to delete, User:DreamGuy is ignoring the consensus of the AfD discussion, and is deliberately trying to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. User:DreamGuy's repeated blanking and redirect of the article Rikki Sylvan constitutes vandalism pursuant to Wikipedia:Vandalism, and he has been warned to stop. Esasus (talk) 23:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
- Please calm down - nobody is here to destroy anything, only to improve presentation of all relevant information. Please also refrain from accusations of bad faith, as they add nothing to this discussion. Your merger proposal makes sense from the standpoint of logical hierarchical organization, but the band is significantly more notable so I agree that it would not be the optimal solution. As I stated above, performing an article merge after such an AfD is perfectly reasonable, though not required.
- Advice for resolving disagreements over edits is given at BOLD. Please everyone note that nowhere does this essay recommend a series of reverts with increasingly terse edit summaries.
- Now, what relevant and reliably sourced information was lost in the merge? Please be specific. What reliable sources give extensive coverage to Sylvan as a notable entity outside of the band? Please link or describe them here or, better yet, add them to the article. Really, just one decent source (suggestions may be found at WP:MUSIC) with significant coverage of that nature would make this article obviously not a merger candidate; a little attention to clean-up would still be nice, though. - Eldereft (cont.) 15:07, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
- You have already been pointed to the vandalism policy to educate yourself about what it really says, so there's really no excuse for continuing to make such false accusations. DreamGuy (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Merge performed. Please add sourced information to RATLDOE; when there is sufficient sourced detail to warrant a spinout article for Sylvan, feel free to edit this article appropriately. At present, however, on balance one article serves the encyclopedia better. Thank you for discussing. - Eldereft (cont.) 14:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you. DreamGuy (talk) 15:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)