Category talk:Articles to be merged/archive
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Contents |
TOC
Perhaps rather than moving 200 at a time, links to beginning letters (and numbers) would work better? Moogle 05:00, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
It might be a good idea to add which articles are being merged with which ones, thus possibly clarifying the reasoning and whatnot. Clarkefreak 18:00, 15 Feb 2005 (CST)
- Someone has since added the TOC template. -- Beland 18:35, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
New template format
How can we mark which ones have been done? FreplySpang (talk) 00:50, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Here, I guess. We might have to waive that "no editing comments" thing, though.Brendan62442 03:09, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Finished?
Just wondering: How will we know when we are done updating the new template on all of the pages? --Dmcdevit 04:10, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- All articles have been converted now, I think. -- Beland 22:13, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Footer: TOC/Next 200
I notice the TOC table has a link to go back to the "top" but it's not very helpful as it already IS at the top. Another TOC table and possibly another page turner (next 200, etc) at the bottom of that long list of articles would be really helpful. Unfortunately, I don't have the privs to edit it in. I assume one of the administrators might--could one of you guys please add that in? Or where can I go to request it?
17:56, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
- I agree, would be very useful. Orange Goblin 18:35, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
merge instructions
The "how to merge" instructions are pretty confusing. What is the purpose of moving the merged article to /history1? Do we really want to then change that page to be a redirect? It seems to me that simply changing the merged article into a redirect and remarking on the talk page of the destination article would allow access to the history, and not involve creating double redirects, etc. Is there a problem with that I'm not seeing? Simplifying these instructions would probably help get participation. — brighterorange (talk) 20:52, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- User:Gyrofrog just improved the instructions greatly (thanks!), but I still don't understand the purpose of the move to /history1. Any ideas? — brighterorange (talk) 22:12, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- I agree with you, Brighterorange. Our merge instructions have been merged and consolidated, and the whole /history1 business has been squeezed out. I actually make merge remarks in the edit comments of both articles, so if you look at the history of either, you will know to cross-reference the other. -- Beland 02:59, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- That's what I do, too. Great, I'm glad to see this process streamlined, and I withdraw my complaints. — brighterorange (talk) 03:30, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Disputed merges
It would be handy if disputed merges were removed from this page. 138.88.179.138 02:42, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- I moved Template:MergeDisputed to Category:Articles with disputed merge proposals. Articles in this category will move to the new subcategory the next time they are edited. (Yes, this is a bug.) If you want to force them to move, doing an edit that makes no changes (a "null edit") will work, and will not show up in the edit history. -- Beland 03:07, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
- They should all have been null edited by now; I had Pearle poke them. Enjoy, Beland 04:09, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Merging categories
The instructions are to use {{cfr}} for merging categories, but the template's text is specifically for renaming categories, which is not at all the same thing. A template for moving categories needs to be created. —Michael Z. 2006-01-18 08:41 Z
- I've fixed this by referencing the correct template. Kcordina 09:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
