| Revision as of 22:07, 5 June 2006 editFormeruser-82 (talk | contribs)15,744 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:16, 5 June 2006 edit undoJayjg (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators134,922 edits →[]Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| Page duplicates (word for word for the most part) material in ]. This is because it was merged with that article in February and then redirected to ]. It was orphaned (ie nothing linked to it). I deleted it because of that a few weeks ago. It has just been recreated today and a merge tag put on it calling for it to be merged with ] in an attempt to bury that article. ] 21:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC) | Page duplicates (word for word for the most part) material in ]. This is because it was merged with that article in February and then redirected to ]. It was orphaned (ie nothing linked to it). I deleted it because of that a few weeks ago. It has just been recreated today and a merge tag put on it calling for it to be merged with ] in an attempt to bury that article. ] 21:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep'''. Racial segregation and Apartheid are not identical concepts; Homey has no problem with creating (and defending) articles on ], ], ], and even ], and strongly objects to any of them being merged anywhere, but suddenly when it comes to this article he suddenly (and rather inconsistently) needs to have it deleted. He has actually deleted this article once already, using the rather bizarre claim that "orphaned re-directs should be deleted", when, in fact, the opposite is true - ideally all re-directs ''should'' be "orphaned", to avoid straining the servers. Now he is simply trying to avoid having ] merged into this article. ]<sup><small><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></small></sup> 22:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 22:16, 5 June 2006
Apartheid outside of South Africa
Page duplicates (word for word for the most part) material in racial segregation. This is because it was merged with that article in February and then redirected to segregation. It was orphaned (ie nothing linked to it). I deleted it because of that a few weeks ago. It has just been recreated today and a merge tag put on it calling for it to be merged with Israeli apartheid in an attempt to bury that article. Homey 21:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Racial segregation and Apartheid are not identical concepts; Homey has no problem with creating (and defending) articles on Israeli apartheid, Sexual Apartheid, Gender Apartheid, and even Apartheid (disambiguation), and strongly objects to any of them being merged anywhere, but suddenly when it comes to this article he suddenly (and rather inconsistently) needs to have it deleted. He has actually deleted this article once already, using the rather bizarre claim that "orphaned re-directs should be deleted", when, in fact, the opposite is true - ideally all re-directs should be "orphaned", to avoid straining the servers. Now he is simply trying to avoid having Israeli apartheid merged into this article. Jayjg 22:16, 5 June 2006 (UTC)