Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/French pronunciation

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Redirect to French phonology. El_C 11:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] French pronunciation

French pronunciation (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

French phonology and French orthography cover the same ground (and then some) much more thoroughly and accurately. Article is also poorly formed and completely unreferenced. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 00:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

• Redirect to French phonology. Both articles are generally about the same thing, but French pronunciation is much messier and is unsourced. —The Great Llama^moo? 01:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect per Llama man ("merge" only applies if there is non-duplicated content, of course). Newyorkbrad 01:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect per above. The last two sections (stress and misc) are quite useful and should be kept. Ultra-Loser ^{[ T ] [ C ]} 02:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge non-duplicate content and then redirect - Che Nuevara 06:27, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
• I agree with the merge but don't see why this is taken to AfD. The article already had an undisputed {{mergeto}} tag since 13 August 2006.  --Lambiam^Talk 07:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I guess I'm just used to nominating things for deletion. But you're right, the merge tag is undisputed (I put it there in the first place). Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 08:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.