Talk:Mitt Romney dog incident/Separate merger discussion

Separate merge discussion
I already added a notification above, but per request at another page, here is a second. There is currently a separate discussion at Articles for deletion/Obama Eats Dogs in which several editors would like to merge this article and Obama Eats Dogs into the article Dogs in the 2012 United States presidential election. Please centralize discussion of this idea at that page, thanks. Kelly hi! 21:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that AFD should focus on that article. There is also too much going on right now; you have a move request above, and now in a different venue you want to talk about merging.  Let the move discussion run its course and then we'll deal with any possible merging that should take place.  S Æ don talk  21:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually the idea of merging the two articles into a third was made by another admin editor,, not me, and supported by other editors who haven't been involved with this article, to my knowledge. Kelly  hi! 21:47, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I didn't mean to insinuate that you started the discussion, I was only commenting on your suggestion that a discussion take place there. S Æ don talk  21:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I did place another merge notice on the top of this article, though I admit it does look a little awkward having two up there. I wish I had thought of the neutral title Dogs in the 2012 United States presidential election before proposing the first move. Kelly  hi! 21:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * For the record, I'm not an administrator.--kelapstick(bainuu) 21:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Corrected, thanks for the heads-up. Kelly  hi! 21:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Consideration should be given to the possibility that User:Kelly has done this sort of shuffling around on purpose. It's clear from her initial involvement that she is only here to slowly break down the article. Earlier AfD discussion, image deletion discussion, addition of coatrack info (obama) and now a separate article. A war on several fronts. El duderino (abides) 03:48, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * And then what happened? Also, WP:AGF. Kelly  hi! 03:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * "Unless there is clear evidence to the contrary." El duderino (abides) 04:17, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge into Dogs in the 2012 United States presidential election
There is currently a discussion taking place at the Obama eats dogs AFD when it should be taking place over here.

Is there any interest in merging this page into Dogs in the 2012 United States presidential election? I am opposed to the idea personally, as there is much much more sourcing and information in this article than there will be wrt Obama's social faux pas from when he was 6 in Indonesia, and I think Dogs in the 2012 United States presidential election will end up being 90% Seamus and 10% Obama, and that someone will eventually point out the same issues with the Obama sections that have been pointed out here, and will propose that the article be moved again to something specific to Seamus. This strikes me as an attempt to draw a parellel between Obama's actions as a child and Romney's actions as an adult, and I don't think that Obama aspect has the notability that the Romney aspect holds.

Lastly, I don't think that an AFD of another article is the appropriate venue for this discussion, since this is the article talk page. Kelly, now that I have started a discussion here will you please correct the link on the page? Thanks. S Æ don talk 22:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The move discussion is already getting messy, why fork it into yet another thread? Kelly  hi! 22:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm going to ask for help from an uninvolved admin on WP:ANI to straighten out the move/delete/rename discussions - not because anyone did anything bad, but because we have a mess. Kelly  hi! 22:28, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, starting a merge discussion while there is an ongoing RM is what makes it so messy and as you may recall I suggested we wait till that played its course first, but since the discussion is going on anyway (not that consensus there will override a consensus here), I'll just quote myself "I don't think that an AFD of another article is the appropriate venue for this discussion, since this is the article talk page."  S Æ don talk  22:28, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No objections to you asking on ANI and I imagine we'll all respect any consensus that arises there. I'm not sure if it will simply be dismissed as a content dispute but worth a shot.  May I suggest (just in case) that you don't add it to the ongoing discussion there but create a new section?  S Æ don talk  22:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:ANI. Kelly  hi! 22:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose Such a new article and the merge of this article into it would be unencyclopedic. Not everything that anyone blogs about in a US presidential campaign needs its own standalone article. Edison (talk) 23:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)