Talk:Regional Force Surveillance Group

Proposed Merger
I propose the contents of the Regional Force Surveillance Units page should be merged into the page Regional Force Surveillance Group. The content is clearly the same. I can't see a use for two separate articles. --TinTin (talk) 01:39, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think the articles should be merged. The Regional Force Surveillance Group is a specific military unit which was recently established. The Regional Force Surveillance Units article covers the units in general, especially their unique composition and histories. Nick-D (talk) 07:27, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand they are slightly different concepts, one is a TYPE of unit and one is a GROUPING / FORMATION of units, however currently ALL RFSUs are contained within the RFSG and the RFSG contains ONLY RFSUs (the RFSG contains no other unit type except the Indigenous Development Wing which is not of unit status). Therefore the overlap is huge and there is very little which is unique between each article.  The lack of depth in the new RFSG article I think highlights the fact there is only really enough information for one article.


 * Just to be clear I recommend keeping all content from both articles. I recommend moving the existing RFSU content into the RFSG article, including noting that RFSUs pre-date the creation of the Grouping / Formation  and converting the RFSU article to a re-direct. --TinTin (talk) 23:25, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * As the RFSG isn't even two months old, it isn't surprising there isn't much to say about it. It's not good practice to have articles on notable military units redirect to generic articles. Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, and there's no problem with having specialised articles. Nick-D (talk) 07:37, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * How about we leave this open until next week (ie. 5th December) and then if no one else feels strongly about this we will keep things as they are and remove the proposed merge tags? --TinTin (talk) 23:23, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That sounds sensible Nick-D (talk) 09:31, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * As there has been no other feedback, and Nick-D feels they should be retained, I will remove my proposed merger. --TinTin (talk) 22:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. Nick-D (talk) 10:12, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No problems. --TinTin (talk) 06:06, 7 December 2018 (UTC)