Talk:Mike Shane
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page and Todd Shane are substantially identical. They should be merged to a unified page, Shane Twins. This would allow for unified development. A demerger could be done in the future if the develop significantly distinct biographies. Zeimusu | Talk page 12:29, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
- Object. There are multiple differences between the two articles, as both men have different alter-egos and title histories. Todd Shane had a significant solo run in 2004 while his brother was injured which could be expanded upon. The convention in professional wrestling articles thus far has been to create a new article for each individual wrestler in addition to a page dedicated to their tag team career if this is necessary. McPhail 20:13, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
- The differences as I see are the paragraph concerning Mike's legal action, Todd's NWA Florida Championship and Mike's IWP television championship. The rest of the articles hardly mention the wrestlers by name, only as "The Shane Twins". Todd's article is slightly strangely written as it mentions "Todd also enjoyed some singles success" without mentioning Mike's earlier IWP championship. Individually the articles lack context and would benefit from merging. A merged article is easier to maintain and less likely to contain inconsistencies. The careers as solo wrestlers would not greatly overbalance a merged article. Currently we have a redirect at Shane Twins to Mike Shane. This should be fixed even if consensus is to keep separate articles. Also I notice that both Todd and Mike are claimed to be "1-time IPW Television Champion (2001 January 13 - June 16, 2001)" in the title history. The career section suggests this only applies to Mike. (This is what I mean by inconsistencies) Zeimusu | Talk page 15:00, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
- Keep I diagree, while the articles may be similar, they are two different individual people. they should keep thier own articles. — Moe ε 19:12, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Since there was no decision regarding the merging, the consensus is to keep. — Moe ε 20:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC)