Talk:Pat Roberts Intelligence Scholars Program

merge to Pat Roberts
With only a single 3rd party reference, it's not clear that this article can be supported separately. Any issue with merging it to Pat Roberts?--RadioFan (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It was created three (3) minutes ago. Maybe you could (a) give it a bit more time and (b) follow WP:BEFORE, not least by finding the public debate referred to in the first Counterpunch article. Thank you. Disembrangler (talk) 20:24, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If you aren't done, adding underconstruction will help signal to other editors that you intend to continue editing it. How else are we to know?  What improvements do you see being made to this article?--RadioFan (talk) 03:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no deadline. It's already tagged Stub, and has enough content to justify initial existence. See also WP:IMPERFECT - articles don't come into the world fully-fledged. In any case, a more appropriate RC Patrol response would be to suggest that if more content isn't added after a while, a merge to Pat Roberts might be appropriate, and watchlisting the article. As to the substantive issue: a merge would risk WP:BLP issues arising, since it's a controversial program. I don't have time to expand the article now - but the whole point of Wikipedia is that I don't have to. Thanks, Disembrangler (talk) 06:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Can we get back to the original suggestion? Why do you see this as a separate article rather than a section of Pat Roberts?--RadioFan (talk) 11:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Same reason JFK Airport isn't part of JFK. Hope the present expansion of the article is enough. If not, a merge might be reasonable, but not with Roberts - it would be to some kind of overview article of these programmes (which overview may not exist yet). Disembrangler (talk) 21:39, 24 June 2009 (UTC)