304:
guideline, or essay that says that if articles aren't continuously edited they should be merged or deleted. I don't care if nobody edits the article for another 100 years. What's the relevance? Maybe the article isn't edited because its a perfect article :-) ? In any case, I admit I'm not giving policy based reasons for the non-merge, but at the same time you aren't giving any policy based reasons for its merge. My opinion is that geographic locations with its own political entity are notable enough for its own wikipedia article. This opinion is the opinion of the majority of wikipedia editors. Cruise the afd log and you'll see far less notable geographic entities resulting in Keeps. You've got hills, canals, and uninhabited towns that are kept under the inherently notable argument. --
449:"doesn't make too much sense" is addressed by your very own argument that "I don't care if nobody edits the article for another 100 years". If it's ok that Salangbato never gets expanded, why is it a problem that the Famy article itself doesn't get expanded "at this time" to include all the other barangays? I think that by including the info at Famy, Laguna, there's actually an incentive for new editors to expand
32:
362:- If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. For instance, parents or children of a celebrity who are otherwise unremarkable are generally covered in a section of the article on the celebrity, and can be merged there.
273:
mind you) place articles into larger ones. WP:INHERENT is not even a guideline. I'm not saying the information from
Salangbato should be removed from Knowledge; I'm saying there's nothing that says that the info on Salangbato can't be merged into larger articles. So what then is your argument for retaining a separate article? --
417:
That's a pretty colorful box that you placed on the page but I'm unsure how much it helps your argument. #2 and #4 could theoretically apply but they happen not to in this case. Nor does #3 apply; this article is not "very short". A stub maybe, but not very short. As for reasons not to merge - the
272:
Well, let's go back a bit. WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:NPOV only say what kind of material can be included into
Knowledge (nothing about whether the material deserves individual articles or not). WP:OUTCOMES say what are usually kept or deleted in AfDs and has no prohibition against merging (not deleting,
216:
say: "Do take precedents into account, but articles should still be evaluated on their merits and their conformance to standard content policies such as WP:RS, WP:V and WP:NPOV." Taking into account previous precedents (of barangays in particular and not just some "geographic place"), there's no
303:
Well, you did not even give an essay-based reason for a merge. You mention the fact that a Keep result at an afd does not mean that the article cannot be merged. But it surely does not mean that it should be merged! Your second basis for a merge is also not policy based. There is no policy,
356:- There are two or more pages on related subjects that have a large overlap. Knowledge is not a dictionary; there does not need to be a separate entry for every concept in the universe. For example, "Flammable" and "Non-flammable" can both be explained in an article on Flammability.
85:
this time, 10 months after the AfD (which by the way does not say "don't merge into the parent article") and merge the most of the info (all of it still unreferenced, by the way) into the parent article. (I've also updated one info there and added a ref.)
422:
will create an awkward disconnect. The Famy article does not have any information on any of the other barangays. A merge at this time will result in half of the Famy article taken up by the
Salangbato article. That doesn't make too much sense.
368:- If a short article requires the background material or context from a broader article in order for readers to understand it. For instance, minor characters from works of fiction are generally covered in a "List of characters in <work: -->
76:
The AfD said to keep the article: i.e., don't delete information. It's been 10 months now since the AfD and I don't think there's a procedural hindrance to reorganizing the article. Take note that the article has had not
385:
I've mentioned it in my nomination above. Reason #3 fits the bill. Reason #2 and #4 might also be applicable. So there's a case for merging. You're only saying there's a case for not deleting which is
134:
It's been 10 months since that AfD and there has been no expansion, or adding of additional references to this stub article. At this point, a merge with the parent article is a good option (see the
128:
46:
444:
Well, there's no use talking about the difference between what's a very short article and a stub article. Also, saying there's a disconnect between having the
Salangbato info in the
181:
565:
561:
547:
251:
is also irrelevant. This article does comply with WP:RS, WP:V and WP:NPOV. Government sources are accepted as RS for geographic information. --
113:. A second motion was to do a bold merge (including cleaning up and placing the appropriate notices (such as the section above), which was
430:
311:
258:
191:
453:
itself to add info on other barangays. Then we can revise, reorganize, improve the raw info into a great article about Famy. --
525:
476:
merge for the mean time until we could obtain enough data to warrant a decent start article (perhaps in the next census?).--
244:
177:
38:
564:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
217:
consensus that barangays are inherently notable and that common outcomes becomes the sole reason for keeping a
95:
603:
583:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
571:
435:
316:
263:
196:
31:
184:. An article does not need to be continuously expanded for it to be considered article worthy. --
497:
248:
213:
209:
568:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
42:
584:
507:
212:
says "Whether some topics are or are not inherently notable is, on
Knowledge, irrelevant" and
599:
17:
591:
526:
https://web.archive.org/20060220144911/http://www.laguna.gov.ph:80/Articles/05_08_Famy.htm
515:
425:
325:
306:
253:
186:
143:
118:
110:
550:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
458:
394:
278:
226:
164:
131:
was closed as keep. This does not mean "you can't merge", but just "don't delete info".
91:
82:
590:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
477:
350:- There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject and having the same scope.
529:
450:
445:
106:
70:
557:
81:
non-bot expansion since that AfD, so I don't think there's a problem with being
556:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
60:
611:
482:
462:
454:
439:
398:
390:
320:
282:
274:
267:
230:
222:
200:
168:
160:
87:
63:
512:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
59:
What is the source for the data provided? Is it clear of copyright?
520:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
419:
243:
Conveniently, you quote from the "arguments against" section of
124:
Here are the reasons, slightly rehashed from the section above:
176:
Geographic locations, especially distinct political units, are
26:
109:. This redirection was opposed (and reverted) so far only by
535:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
182:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Common outcomes#Geography
496:
I have just added archive links to one external link on
501:
560:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
117:reverted without explanation on this talk page by
530:http://www.laguna.gov.ph/Articles/05_08_Famy.htm
343:There are several good reasons to merge a page:
121:. So this is making a formal proposal to merge.
546:This message was posted before February 2018.
68:
369:", and can be merged there; see also WP:FICT.
8:
105:The article was first just redirected into
7:
25:
500:. Please take a moment to review
448:and merging "at this time" -: -->
328:is a help page and it says there:
418:full merge of this article into
30:
37:This article was nominated for
64:18:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
1:
612:02:54, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
483:12:16, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
463:06:30, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
440:06:15, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
399:05:59, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
321:05:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
283:05:16, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
268:04:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
231:04:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
201:04:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
169:03:58, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
96:21:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
18:Talk:Salangbato, Philippines
389:the same as not merging. --
627:
577:(last update: 5 June 2024)
518:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
493:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
489:External links modified
247:essay. Your quote from
245:WP:Inherent Notability
69:I've merged this into
558:regular verification
543:to let others know.
504:. If necessary, add
548:After February 2018
539:parameter below to
553:InternetArchiveBot
498:Salangbato, Laguna
178:inherently notable
610:
578:
57:
56:
16:(Redirected from
618:
606:
605:Talk to my owner
601:
576:
575:
554:
519:
511:
480:
433:
428:
314:
309:
261:
256:
194:
189:
45:. The result of
34:
27:
21:
626:
625:
621:
620:
619:
617:
616:
615:
609:
604:
569:
562:have permission
552:
513:
505:
491:
478:
431:
426:
372:
312:
307:
259:
254:
192:
187:
159:As nominator --
153:
103:
101:Merger proposal
74:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
624:
622:
602:
596:
595:
588:
533:
532:
524:Added archive
490:
487:
486:
485:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
371:
370:
363:
357:
351:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
287:
286:
285:
236:
235:
234:
233:
204:
203:
171:
152:
149:
148:
147:
132:
102:
99:
73:
67:
55:
54:
47:the discussion
35:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
623:
614:
613:
607:
600:
593:
589:
586:
582:
581:
580:
573:
567:
563:
559:
555:
549:
544:
542:
538:
531:
527:
523:
522:
521:
517:
509:
503:
499:
494:
488:
484:
481:
475:
472:
471:
464:
460:
456:
452:
447:
443:
442:
441:
438:
437:
434:
429:
421:
416:
415:
414:
413:
400:
396:
392:
388:
384:
383:
382:
381:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
374:
373:
367:
364:
361:
358:
355:
352:
349:
346:
345:
344:
327:
324:
323:
322:
319:
318:
315:
310:
302:
301:
300:
299:
298:
297:
296:
295:
294:
293:
284:
280:
276:
271:
270:
269:
266:
265:
262:
257:
250:
246:
242:
241:
240:
239:
238:
237:
232:
228:
224:
220:
215:
211:
208:
207:
206:
205:
202:
199:
198:
195:
190:
183:
179:
175:
172:
170:
166:
162:
158:
155:
154:
150:
145:
141:
137:
133:
130:
127:
126:
125:
122:
120:
116:
112:
108:
100:
98:
97:
93:
89:
84:
80:
72:
66:
65:
62:
52:
48:
44:
40:
36:
33:
29:
28:
19:
597:
572:source check
551:
545:
540:
536:
534:
495:
492:
473:
451:Famy, Laguna
446:Famy, Laguna
436:(yada, yada)
424:
386:
365:
359:
353:
347:
342:
317:(yada, yada)
305:
264:(yada, yada)
252:
218:
197:(yada, yada)
185:
173:
156:
139:
135:
129:Previous AfD
123:
114:
107:Famy, Laguna
104:
78:
75:
71:Famy, Laguna
58:
50:
249:WP:OUTCOMES
221:article. --
214:WP:OUTCOMES
210:WP:INHERENT
180:. See also
142:reasons at
151:Discussion
119:Brewcrewer
111:Brewcrewer
43:2008-02-08
592:this tool
585:this tool
348:Duplicate
598:Cheers.—
508:cbignore
479:Lenticel
326:WP:MERGE
219:separate
157:Support.
144:WP:MERGE
39:deletion
608::Online
537:checked
502:my edit
474:Support
366:Context
354:Overlap
140:Context
516:nobots
432:crewer
313:crewer
260:crewer
193:crewer
174:Oppose
115:still
61:RJFJR
541:true
459:talk
455:seav
427:brew
420:Famy
395:talk
391:seav
360:Text
308:brew
279:talk
275:seav
255:brew
227:talk
223:seav
188:brew
165:talk
161:seav
138:and
136:Text
92:talk
88:seav
83:bold
51:keep
49:was
566:RfC
528:to
387:not
79:any
41:on
579:.
574:}}
570:{{
514:{{
510:}}
506:{{
461:)
423:--
397:)
281:)
229:)
167:)
146:).
94:)
86:--
594:.
587:.
457:(
393:(
277:(
225:(
163:(
90:(
53:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
