Wikipedia:Proposed article mergers

  (Redirected from Wikipedia:Proposed mergers)

Closing instructions

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.

NoteEdit

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 mergerEdit

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 mergerEdit

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.

Requests for merge assistance and feedbackEdit

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 requestsEdit

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

1) Preceed 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 REQUESTSEdit

  • Merge: I propose merging Tuskegee Syphilis Study, Guatemala syphilis experiments, and Terre Haute prison experiments as United States Public Health Service Syphilis Studies. The primary reason is to more appropriately name the articles for the funding, initiating, controlling party. Separating into three articles, each with location as the first word inappropriately obscures the driving party in all three cases, and connections between the three cases. In the seminal informed consent cases of Auschwitz and Buchenwald, the reference names identify compounds erected or seized explicitly for inhumane purposes -- so using those names besmirches no good deeds. Moreover, Auschwitz and Buchenwald are now closed memorials. Though local governance failed to protect their charges from PHS abuse, PHS was the controlling actor, and earned the title role. Wikipedia should not continue with titles that invite misinterpretation. COVID-19 makes 2021 an especially bad time to highlight PHS errors. Still, we Wikipedians face a recurring challenge: Where the most common phrasing distorts the known history by misreporting agency, highlighting minor parties instead of major/controlling parties -- should we continue to reinforce that distortion because it's common/popular? While merging would make a long article, it would be far from our longest. Bringing the articles together could better convey the connected nature of the events and improve overall reader understanding. The articles should be merged and renamed -- even if we postpone publishing the revision for some agreed interval. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User:LoneStarNot (talkcontribs)
______

AWAITING CONSENSUSEdit

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.

______


  • Merge: I propose merging British National (Overseas) passport into British National (Overseas) and British passport. The BN(O) passport article has significant overlap with the other two. Background information for the status itself is covered in great detail in the main BN(O) article. Information like endorsements, physical appearance, and issuance are all dealt with in the British passport article. Given that almost the entire BN(O) passport article duplicates information already detailed in the other two articles, I feel that it should be considered for merging. Additionally, the article contains entire sections that are uncited or very poorly cited and contains non-free images (all UK passport images continue to be covered under Crown copyright). Horserice (talk) 06:52, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge I propose merging Giant peccary with Collared peccary. The giant peccary has not been accepted as a valid species by any major zoological authority. It has instead been listed as a synonym for the collared peccary. I believe the proposed description/historic information of the giant peccary should merely take up a section in the Collared peccary article. Porqaz (talk) 22:26, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
______

ANSWERED REQUESTSEdit

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 occured), {{Not done}}, or {{Working}} when consensus has been reached.

______
  • Merge: Third Oli cabinet to Second Oli cabinet: Second oli cabinet and Third oli cabinet are not different and the only difference is they come under second premiership and third premiership respectively as mentioned above. So a section for third premiership in same article, Second Oli cabinet can address both. Even the national medias term this as cabinet reshuffle. Can you deny this? It can be termed as second term of same cabinet as all the ministers remained same and same ministers took oath. Even their article suggest no Third Oli cabinet! Can you deny this? Fifth Deuba Cabinet, 2021 mentions it's preceded by Second Oli cabinet. Second Oli cabinet says it's succeeded by Fifth Deuba Cabinet, 2021. Isn't it? Except this article, you may not find this awkward topic, Third Oli cabinet any where. 43.245.86.16 (talk) 07:43, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion. Merger discussion is taking place >>>HERE<<< GenQuest "scribble" 19:38, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
    Please find the concensus required and reference in the talk page of both articles. Visit and comment at Talk:Second Oli cabinet. 110.44.127.181 (talk) 20:01, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
      Not done: Not enough participation in discussion to change anything as they now stand. Proposer, 43.245.86.16 may consider taking the subject article to AFD. GenQuest "scribble" 13:27, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
______

ArchivesEdit

Current Year Archives
Requests answered in July 2021
Requests answered in June 2021
Requests answered in May 2021
  Done GenQuest "scribble" 06:52, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Requests answered in April 2021
  • Merge My first merger proposal - I propose merging The Dirt Radicals into Pug Jelly. These bands are made up of exactly the same members, and they did not release much material or perform much notable activity under The Dirt Radicals name, so I would say these articles shouldn't be separate. pinktoebeans (talk) 11:27, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge Infiniti EX into Infiniti QX50. In 2014, Infiniti changed their entire product line nomenclature to "create a sense of unity among [their] product line" All Infiniti articles were either moved or deleted to reflect this. This includes articles like Infniti JX or Infiniti FX. It makes no sense for the Infniti EX article to exist on its own. Quattro (talk) 15:57, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion, which is taking place >>>HERE<<<. GenQuest "scribble" 12:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
      •   Done No opinions have been expressed, so proposer, Quattro, should consider doing a BOLD MERGE through the normal editting process. GenQuest "scribble" 16:38, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
  • I propose merging Herve cheese into Limburger. It looks like it's the same product, just listed under different names. 77.251.127.105 (talk) 14:47, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion, which is taking place >>>HERE<<<. GenQuest "scribble"
      • Discussion has been open seven days with no objections. Proposer, User:77.251.127.105, should consider a BOLD merge. GenQuest "scribble" 12:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
        •   Done No input or consensus to merge on stale proposer; proposer or other interested party may try a BOLD action through normal editting practices. Good luck. GenQuest "scribble" 22:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Merging Púca and Puck (mythology) now Puck (folklore)
    • I was going to work on the Púca page (well, the french version, but not the point). Problem, starting my work by looking at what exist in english, I noticed that there is already a Puck (mythology) page that refers to the same creature! Yes, there are pages in English for BOTH terms, pages translated in both cases in many languages ​​... BUT the Puck (mythology) page uses Puck or Púca indifferently for these creatures, ditto for the Púca page, the two terms are entirely synonymous and describe the same creature, there are just variations in the writing according to the regions, indicated on both pages (Pooka, Phouka, Pwca, etc.) and a common Celtic origin, both pages giving more or less the same information, just formulated differently, as well as most of the same examples in popular culture (a true tomayto-tomahto case). If some other creatures (I mean those with a common ancestry) have evolved into different creatures or at least with enough specificities to be considered as such (Poulpiquet, Pixie, Bucca), a bit like different "species" or "subspecies", this is not the case between Puck and Púca, treated as identical. The two should be merged and a redirect link put on Púca. Oh, Shakespeare's Puck, inspired (as said on BOTH pages) by the creature, has its own page (justified, as he is a specific Puck / Púca, I just wanted to clarify that none of the pages are about him -or when they are, they are equally so). --Zeynel (talk) 23:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion. Ongoing discussion is >>>HERE<<<. GenQuest "scribble" 12:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
      • Comment: There is resistance to this being expressed at the talk-page discussion, possibly due to the original, ill-formed request. Discussion area has been re-factored and we are now awaiting any further imput. GenQuest "scribble" 15:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
        Not done closed: No Merge. GenQuest "scribble" 21:44, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Requests answered in March 2021
  • Merge Cumbric#Counting systems to Yan tan tethera. It is duplicative of the material at the latter and inappropriate in huge chart form in the former. All that's needed there is a general summary.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  08:44, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion, which is taking place here. — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  08:44, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  Done Closed as: "Proceed" with partial merge and redirect. GenQuest "scribble" 15:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
    Y Merger complete. GenQuest "scribble" 15:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge Viton to FKM. The former is simply a brand name of the latter, the material that is encyclopedic is mostly duplicative, and we've already had at least two other brand-names-of-FKM articles speedily deleted as promotional.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  15:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion. Discussion is here.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  15:01, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
  Done: Closed as "Merge." No interest shown in opposing this merge. Proposer, SMcCandlish, or other interested editor, can proceed with a standard merge. GenQuest "scribble" 12:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge Chicxulub impactor (36K) into Chicxulub crater (65k Featured Article) There's very little to say about the impactor itself other than speculation. There's no reason to have it separate from the crater article. Discussion at TALK PAGE. Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:21, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
    • Note: Will need very strong consensus to merge due to FA status of the target article and existing article sizes. GenQuest "scribble" 04:56, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
  Done Closed as "Merge." Proposer, Hemiauchenia or other interested editor should do the work. GenQuest "scribble" 12:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
  Done This has been worked out locally and can be closed as "Merge"; proposar, Historyday01 should follow his proposed plan and proceed with the merge(s) as described in the discussion. Good luck, GenQuest "scribble" 12:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Oh, GenQuest, I wasn't aware the discussion was closed yet... I didn't think there was a consensus for merge yet, but that was just my thoughts. Historyday01 (talk) 15:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
    Y Merger complete. by interested editor. GenQuest "scribble" 12:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge: I propose merging Web television with Streaming television, following the guidance outlined on WP:MERGEINIT. In 2009, there was a similar merge, also posted on the Steaming Television page but there was no consensus for a merger. However, a 2010 comment said that term "peaked in 2008." In 2016, there was another discussion calling for a merger, but the discussion ended in 2018, with a merger never implemented. Recently, I began a discussion about this on WikiProject Television, but that discussion ended without any resolution and only a few users contributed. Due to the importance of this subject and the fact that the terms web television and streaming television are used here and there on pages, I would say this issue is definitely an important one that merits discussion. Discussion of the merger is Here. Historyday01 (talk) 14:12, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Cmnt: Discussion strongly favors merging. Historyday01 should consider moving BOLDLY forward with the merge. GenQuest "scribble" 19:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
      • GenQuest, thanks for the reminder. I was planning to keep it open as long as possible, but I could definitely move forward with this. It has a lot more consensus than one of my other mergers listed on this page, which is currently about evenly divided between those in favor and those in opposition. Historyday01 (talk) 20:19, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
        •   Done, Closed as merge. Proposer or other interested editor should proceed with the merge. GenQuest "scribble" 01:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
I'll try to do the merge as soon as I can... Sorry for dragging my feet for this long. --Historyday01 (talk) 13:19, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge Draft:Matthew Hurley into H2 Motorsports - I had created the bio after reading about controversy/investigation on H2's page (I watch some motorsports) but it failed review. I thought a 14 year old who started a business that employed a number of people and Hurley's subsequent coverage and creation of a NASCAR team would qualify for notability but may be wrong. Therefore I am asking for assistance on merging the two as I have never proposed a merger nor am I familiar enough with what content should be included on the target page. Thank you. DrGvago (talk) 16:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Requests answered in February 2021
  • Merge: I propose that the Sandnes (city) page should be merged into the Sandnes page. Anything related to the city should instead be a part of the article about the municipality. This is how the article about Stavanger is structured, and I don't know why these neighboring municipalities are structured in a different way. In addition, the wiki page about Oslo is also structured similar to the page about Stavanger. Most people will only read the page about the municipality, and because of that — the city article will become outdated. The article about the municipality is what appears when searching for Sandnes on Google and Google Maps. A similar thing should also be done on the Norwegian Wikipedia, and the page about the munincipality should be written to resemble the Stavanger page. Additionally, two pages for one historical place might be confusing for readers. Makkkkus
    • Articles are tagged and awaiting a merger discussion. This was a broken merge request. Discussion is >>>Here<<<. GenQuest "scribble" 11:47, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
      •   Not done No interest expressed in merging these two. No interest expressed in not merging these two. Proposer Makkkkus may consider doing a BOLD merge provided unique information is actually transferred to the target article. Good luck. GenQuest "scribble" 07:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge PARCO into Parco, and then move that to Parco (disambiguation) for consistency. Also, the Japanese retailer on that list is always stylized as PARCO, can that article name be fixed as well? I had attempted a move to a disambiguation page myself, but had not been able to find the article Parco (retailer) and didn't have the chance to make one myself yet at the time, so it was reverted as I only knew of the retailer (which didn't seem to have an article) to add in addition to the group that PARCO currently links to. Londonbeat41692 (talk) 03:25, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Target Article is tagged for unusual request involving existing redirect and a couple of disambiguation pages and move request as well. Awaiting a merger discussion. Discussion is >>>HERE<<< GenQuest "scribble" 05:48, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
      Procedural close, nothing to merge, merely a move request which is dealt with separately. -- P 1 9 9   14:27, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
        Not done (see above). GenQuest "scribble" 20:53, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge Trump v. Deutsche Bank AG into Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP. The lower court cases were consolidated into one Supreme Court case with a single opinion, and that is what will be remembered for posterity. We can simply combine the backgrounds of each case into one Background section (since each bank had a different background with their case). The source page is empty, outdated, and lacking in info, and users have noted that on both articles and talk pages and said they should be joined together. One example of this is Colorado Department of State v. Baca which is merged into Chiafalo v. Washington since they are both consolidated for one opinion, and thus have the same article. I added the merge banners for the Trump articles and opened a merge discussion, but it doesn't make an official merge notice on the talk page. Phillip Samuel (talk) 04:03, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge Kinetic Sand with Magic sand - it's (as far as I can tell) the same thing, sand with a hydrophobic coating, just a stickier one, in the case of kinetic sand, allowing it to be moulded where magic sand would fall apart. Both articles are pretty short, but Kinetic Sand is shorter. --Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) 22:17, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge North Briton to North Britain. The weird stub at North Briton serves no purpose and is not an encyclopedic topic but an unhelpful WP:CONTENTFORK. The people who live in North Britain are just residents of an area, and are not a distinct ethnic, linguistic, cultural, or other population. Cf. South Briton redirects to South Britain, and this is typical for "South/North/East/West[ern] [whatever]" names when they simply refer to indistinct populations of regions.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  20:13, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion >>>HERE<<<. First proposed September 2020, but was not tagged at both articles and no discussion thread was opened until today.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  20:13, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge Meryre_II with Tomb_of_Meryra_II - The first article is about the man. The second is about his tomb. The article about the man describes the art depicted in his tomb and what it indicates about his role in the Egyptian court of his time. The second just says he has a a tomb. This article would be more effective if combined with a sub-section of Meryre II entitled "Amarna Tomb 2."-- ForWhomTheSunShines (talk) 13:53, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Requests answered in January 2021
  • Merge List of largest cities throughout history (source article) into Historical urban community sizes (destination/target article). I have opened a discussion to merge on the target article's talkpage. Since I am an IP, I can not subscribe to this noticeboard or the discussion on the article talkpage. I will know the outcome only if and as and when i specifically check these. I am an experienced but a recreational editor and edit once in a while. I am glad there is this noticeboard to watch over the things. Please keep and eye and I leave it your hands to take care of it. Thanks in advance for volunteering your time for these kind of things. 58.182.176.169 (talk)
  • Merge The Mother Court and Supremely Partisan into James D. Zirin. It's been several years now and this trio of WP:COI-infused micro-stubs has not improved even slightly (all narrowly survived WP:AFD, one as "no consensus" so likely to be AfDed again if not merged). With all their content combined (and more easily watchlistable by proper editors for any further attempts to misuse Wikipedia as a promotional platform), we might end up with an at least marginally encyclopedic article. What we've got right now is Zirin WP:GAMING our system to give himself three promotional articles at once.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  05:57, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion. Merger discussion is taking place >>>HERE<<<.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  05:57, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Comment There are no comments or objections stated after 2 1/2 weeks to the proposal. GenQuest "scribble" 08:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
        Not done Stale proposal getting no participation or traction in discussion. Proposer, SMcCandlish could try a BOLD merger. GenQuest "scribble" 23:26, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
      Probably better done as an RfC, since there was previous AfD action.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  20:21, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge Meteorological history of Hurricane Michael into Hurricane Michael. This merge discussion has been running for two weeks and this merge discussion was started by none other than the creator of the article Hurricane Noah. I have closed the discussion before shortly after merge moratorium exception was applied, but my close was considered to be improper (Cyclonebiskit said that this discussion was not unanimous and the consensus should be achieved through strength of arguments. I was also involved in the discussion). Because of this reason, I decided to put this discussion here to get more attention from willing editors to participate in the discussion. SMB99thx my edits! 07:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion. Merger discussion is taking place >>>HERE<<<. SMB99thx my edits! 07:56, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
    •   Done Discussion closed with CONSENSUS to merge. Proposer, SMB99thx or other interested party should proceed with the merge. GenQuest "scribble" 21:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge The Incorruptibles into John Hornor Jacobs. The micro-stub at The Incorruptibles has already been deleted at AfD once, and was simply recreated in essentially the same form, without any better sourcing. This is actually a speedy deletion candidate. I think it would be more productive to merge the tiny amount of material there into the author's article, which is itself a tiny stub, and start fleshing that article out a bit more concerning the author's other works.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  21:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
    • Articles are tagged and are awaiting a merger discussion. Merger discussion is taking place >>>HERE<<<.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  21:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
    •   Done No objection stated to merging the stubs. Proposer SMcCandlish should consider proceeding with a BOLD merge. GenQuest "scribble" 08:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
          Y Merger complete. .  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  02:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Older archives

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

All articles tagged for mergingEdit

Additional articles to be merged listsEdit

See alsoEdit