Talk:Ten Years' War
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cuba, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles of Cuba on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project. |
 |
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Merge
If we do merge the articles, the Ten Years' War spelling should be used as that is more correct grammatically. Also, I think such a merge should preserve all facts found in each entry. In any case, I will not support merging if the authors of the entries disagree. This wouldn't be too bad as I think both versions have their strengths. The "Ten Years' War" version is my favorite because it contains only the more interesting information about the war. --Primetime 22:47, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Merge even if the authors diagree. That's what editors are for. Use whichever main article whose title best agrees with Wiki naming (should Wiki names have apostrophes?) Thatcher131 08:36, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
- To answer your question, every encyclopedia on earth in English uses them in titles.[1][2][3][4][5] (Although not in the preceding citations, Encyclopedia Americana does it too.) --Primetime 08:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- I didn't mean to question WP naming policy, I was trying to ask what it was regarding these two titles. Thatcher131 21:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] merge
merge merge merge
Then, with a name decided upon, I can make a category of the same, agreed-upon name and collect all the material about this war into the category. Thanks Hmains 00:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hey! All right! Thanks Hmains! Looks great. Is that everything? Can I go ahead and nominate the other article for speedy deletion?--Primetime 07:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
- not delete, but re-redirect (as I have done) so that users who type in the name of the other article will get this article. Thanks --Hmains 18:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge
This article will never be merged, it looks like. Some guy named Darwinek added a template on January 29 writing "template" in the edit summary, then left without writing anything else. I think the proposal is making editors reluctant to improve the article for fear of having their contributions lost. Thus, I will remove it. If someone actually intends to try to merge the two, let me know.--Primetime 06:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] WP:MilHist Assessment
Thus far, this article is of fair length, and contains a seemingly thorough treatment of the details. It includes not only elements of the war itself, but the background and aftermath as well. But it doesn't have any pictures nor an infobox. I think the infobox, and the general overall expansion of the article would help it become B-class. LordAmeth 11:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
