Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minor basilica


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Basilicas in the Catholic Church. For now, and pending agreement among editors about how to organize this material. But there is consensus that there are currently too many articles about the same topic.  Sandstein  16:59, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Minor basilica
I am also nominating the following related pages because all the material in it is contained in Basilicas in the Catholic Church. It is therefore redundant.:


 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Replicates material in the article Basilicas in the Catholic Church Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator per agreement below with that he also would withdraw his RFC. We can then begin another discussion on structure, scope, and number of articles needed to treat all these topics. Better than doing it piecemeal. Unless it's too late to withdraw now? Laurel Lodged (talk) 06:50, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 *  Keep Interesting to see that the information about minor basilicas is added to the article Basilicas in the Catholic Church by the filer himself. This is not the place to request a merge. The Banner  talk 17:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Reply as nominator, I did not create the page Basilicas in the Catholic Church. I found it in the RFC on Talk:Basilica. It already had a section on Minor basilicas. I expanded the material by taking the best bits out of the nominated article. Nothing sinister to report here. Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:16, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Was it not a better idea to change Basilicas in the Catholic Church into a disambiguation page instead of copying the information from Minor basilica and Major basilica? In fact Basilicas in the Catholic Church is the article replicating information. The Banner  talk 17:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And yes, you copied the text fromMinor basilica and Major basilica without comforming to the licenses by failing proper attribution: Attribution—You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work.) And that is usually called copyright violation. The Banner  talk 18:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge to Basilica according to active RFC on Talk:Basilica. Elizium23 (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment There is still no reason to shoehorn these two quite different concepts into the same article! GPinkerton (talk) 00:58, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * redirect to Basilicas in the Catholic Church by section for both. It seems to me that merging the architecture and ecclesiastical articles is a bad idea, but in any case resolving that shouldn't be part of this discussion. Mangoe (talk) 17:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Query I genuinely don't know what this suggestion means. Does it involve the deletion of articles? If so, which ones? Does it involve the merger of articles? If so, which ones? Does it involve blanking with re-directs? If so, which ones? By the way, nothing in the proposal involves the main Basilica article: that of course should stay and refer to the 3 forms of basilica. Laurel Lodged (talk) 07:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * There is a problem with that, though. In the current state of Basilica it does not refer to the 3 forms, because it was split apart. That's why there is a current, active RFC suggesting that we reunite the 3 senses in the main article again, but until that happens, I am kind of opposed to tinkering with the ancillary articles like this.
 * I think perhaps that what needs to happen is if Laurel withdraws this AFD, I withdraw my RFC, and we begin another discussion on structure, scope, and number of articles needed to treat all these topics. If we do it piecemeal then it will only be done poorly. Elizium23 (talk) 07:57, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree to this proposal. Laurel Lodged (talk) 09:31, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And do not forget to revert your copyvio at Basilicas in the Catholic Church. The Banner  talk 10:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Basilicas in the Catholic Church per Mangoe. Logical place for the info, and keeps the redirects which are useful. oknazevad (talk) 18:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 18:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Basilicas in the Catholic Church for both Major basilica and Minor basilica as Mangoe and Lightburst suggest. There is enough for just one article on this subject. GPinkerton (talk) 01:00, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * comment I'm having some trouble following what is going on here, but if the proposal is to merge everything back into a single article, I object to that. The ecclesiastical sense and the architectural sense are so different that they should have separate articles. Mangoe (talk) 02:30, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm also having a hard time following what's going on here, but I support merging Minor basilica and Major basilica into a single article that covers Catholic basilicas, but is separate from the general Basilica article and from the List of Catholic basilicas.  Ergo Sum  14:05, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment we certainly do not need bother the major and minor articles and Basilicas in the Catholic Church, unless one can provide an overview and the other detail. My preference would be to merge Major basilica into Basilicas in the Catholic Church and summarise Minor basilica there, making it a main article to that section.  There are so many churches with the minor title, that it is worth also keeping the list article.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge No need for this to be split into three articles. Reywas92Talk 16:40, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.