Talk:Allegheny River Lock and Dam No. 3

Request for comment
There are eight articles titled like this one, except for digit (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9). All are a modest paragraph long, and are such that what is said is likely all that will ever be said. (You're asking, or looking for dam #1? No, I didn't forget it.  And none of these articles mentions what happened to it.  Ha! Ha! If all of the dams were listed in one article, I'd add a paragraph on what happened to it; right now, there's no place). I propose merging them into one article. The title could be "Allegheny River locks and dams" or "List of locks and dams of the Allegheny River" (similar to List of locks and dams of the Ohio River). My experience has been that editors readily or heedlessly split articles, but get contentious about merging them. . These aren't the only dams on the Allegheny, and the proposed merged article could also enumerate those. It'd make a decent length article.

This merge won't lose any information from the encyclopedia. It may make information more accessible, since someone looking for one of these will likely have to page back and forth between articles to locate the relevant one. Especially on a mobile device that only displays one page at a time, that can be very tedious, and load/reload time expensive in elapsed time and data usage. Sbalfour (talk) 20:17, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Support Best start right away. Not a lot you can say about it.  scope_creep Talk  22:43, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * This is not a WP:RFC matter, please follow WP:MERGE. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 12:24, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. what I don't want, considering I'm merging at least (8) articles, is to spend the considerable effort to do that only to have some other editor promptly undo me. Waiting for talkpage local consensus on an unnotable article like this is fruitless. I'd just be BOLD and do it. Sbalfour (talk) 15:35, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Unsure Each lock is a different part of the lock and dam system on the Allegheny River with a different location and there are different individual reference numbers for their entries on the National Register of Historic Places. If a merged page is created for these, then I think that each particular NRHP reference number, coordinate data and image of each location should be included on that page since these pages were most likely created due to their inclusion on the National Register. Leepaxton (talk) 23:30, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Rename article
This dam was renamed C.W. Bill Young Lock and Dam by Congress on December 1, 2003 (see Public Law No. 108-137). Can the article be renamed? It has been YEARS since I actively edited Wikipedia, so I don't know the process. DangApricot (talk) 15:32, 23 July 2020 (UTC)