[WikiEN-l] Merge vs. Keep/Delete

Sat Oct 8 09:09:47 UTC 2005

On 10/8/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Michael Snow wrote:
> > Tony Sidaway wrote:
> >
> >> I wonder if we could agree to change policy to permit an administrator to
> >> "speedy redirect" a merge candidate and close an AfD where notability
> >> is the
> >> sole or principal reason given for deletion, or no reason is given. This
> >> would be a good way of ensuring that the possibility of merging
> >> articles was
> >> not unreasonably neglected. An article could always be renominated if
> >> good
> >> faith attempts to merge had failed.
> >>
> >>
> > I endorse that, although I don't see why the authority to
> > merge-and-redirect should be limited to administrators. I've always
> > found the resistance to merges puzzling. It's almost as bad as the
> > polarizing notion that deletion debates orbit the twin suns of Keep and
> > Delete, which are the only possible outcomes, and a "vote" to merge is
> > in reality to be reinterpreted as a vote for one of these binary stars
> > (which one depends on who's arguing). An argument for a merge is just
> > that, and in these cases it's often by far the best solution.
> >
>
> Merge-and-redirect often *does* require admin attention, because the
> "proper procedure" is to perform a history merge, isn't it?
>
> - --
> Alphax                      |   /"\
> Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
> http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iQEVAwUBQ0dAL7MAAH8MeUlWAQhQPQf+JUqu3Qc3jfeggXPZRpgwEeqL2DNy4KcJ
> y02ec0wcwwWE641GWdIzv4uBVZHufJAj3pqyTZyaccYxbUp9VinKzttZL9Y8ssno
> jDUrPUZtTIRpN9i9y4Yv+z/CPV4C3TQ9tuZb9CAQs4k7njIgWylKN+VSDtMTfybW
> wlu+0OItFOPRScOBX5IqRHtaE6zZAegwYYagzYj9G+tGhsgF+UQRTm9+7yi+uhvQ
> wihn9Cv81ExPF8LvX85a10htDF3OZKYQiBaR3IW3hwmx9fnyHBPIWBB0ybyTrTfF
> p7SJ+Lk6krR9VFqNREyqpFleZqPkwhX5RnFFRxKNa7Z74NzUzT9jog==
> =Zn+p
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
Wouldn't that kill the usefulness of diffs over a period when both
articles were edited? If article A was edited on December 1 and
December 3 and you merge in an article edited on December 2. You get
two diffs with massive changes without any explanation how that
happened. You could mention the merge in an edit summary, but you'd
have to list which edits have been merged in. Redirecting keeps the
histories clean.

--Mgm