Talk:2007 Estonian unrest

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 30 April 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete.


Contents

[edit] Reason? Delete?

Just wondering about the reason for the creation of this page. From what I can see right now, it has created a situation where both pages have most of the same info but aren't updated at the same rate. If you trully want to make this page the centrepiece, you should move most of the Bronze Soldier of Tallinn article here, including all of the sections about the reason for this unrest. Esn 07:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Delete: I think this article should be deleted as soon as possible, and all updates take place at the main article: Bronze Soldier of Tallinn. --Camptown 08:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Nope. The unrest should be covered here, and the article is categorized riot - why should an article about a monument be categorized as riot? --213.155.224.232 19:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Who and why?

Something this article does not state: who is doing the protesting, and why? Gary van der Merwe (Talk) 08:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article for merger & deletion

[edit] Do not delete this, be serious

Do not delete this. I think it is quite important. Think about it in another way - what if something like this would happen in USA. For Estonians and Russians is this very important cause, so we should have it here too. --Aktron (t|c) 16:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge discussion

Unfortunately some comments about the merger took place at the AfD, which confuses the issue. The AfD established that the "main" article is Bronze Soldier of Tallinn, but that doesn't mean a merge is necessary. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2007 Estonian unrest for many opinions. Note that "merge & delete" is not an option because of the GFDL licensing requirements. My own opinion: perhaps this page might need renaming but the information here is extensive and sourced, and the other article is already very long. Whether or not this is the right way to do it, all the information on that page does need to be broken up per WP:SUMMARY, BUT, when that happens the {{main}} template should be used to make sure readers and editors know about the other article.

There does appear to be significant impetus to merge, but it's not unanimous. Whatever restructuring is done should be done boldly at this point, and if there are objections or issues to work out with the solution, it can be done afterwards. Mangojuicetalk 15:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)