Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venera 13 and 14


 * 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 Venera. John254 00:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Venera 13 and 14

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article was a failed attempt to combine the Venera 13 and Venera 14 articles into a single page. The article was then redirected to Venera 13 alone, and is now a disambiguation page. I nominate this former article for deletion because I assert that as the merge failed, no one would likely ever search for the two missions combined or otherwise land here accidentally, and thus this can be safely deleted. SchuminWeb (Talk) 21:59, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The nom says it all... Beeblebrox (talk) 22:01, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Unnecessary merger of two good articles; it might have seemed like a good idea at the time.Mandsford (talk) 22:18, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article was actually created before the other two articles were created, so the revision history of this article contains much of the content that has wound up being moved to the other two articles. Article histories are how Wikipedia preserves the attribution of contributions, which the GFDL requires, so deleting this article will make the other two articles into GFDL violations. I see no reason why this shouldn't be left as a disambiguation, it's harmless. However, if a decision is reached to delete it anyway, the deleting admin must first merge the history into one of the two articles before doing so. Bryan Derksen (talk) 22:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That is a good point, but I believe they can do just as you suggest and merge the histories, which would preserve GFDL compliance. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:36, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep per Bryan. It's not by much, but he is correct. This article was the original and should be retained for attribution purposes as he states. If having the page in mainspace is a real problem, we could move it to the talkspace of Venera or one of the spin offs instead. - Mgm|(talk) 00:03, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As Beeblebrox pointed out, if history preservation is desired for GFDL compliance, that can be accomplished after deletion by merging page histories. Considering that this page redirected to Venera 13 prior to the conversion to a dab page, I would nominate that page to receive this page's history up to dab-ification.  It's not a hard process, and any admin can carry it out.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:22, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You can't merge page histories when the history is deleted, because it wouldn't be present. Also, the histories seem to be overlapping, which would make the history of both target and origonal entry unreadable if merged. Besides, if we are supposed to split the article, it's impossible to merge histories properly with both resulting entries. History merging just doesn't work with this entry. - Mgm|(talk) 15:07, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep and rebuild. It should be a real article like the Mariner 6 and 7 article, on the joint aspects of the mission. 76.66.195.159 (talk) 08:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 02:29, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge to preserve history As per discussion. If that's the appropriate thing to do why hasn't anyone voted fot it? What am I missing? ChildofMidnight (talk) 08:27, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've already indicated my support for a history merge, even nominating Venera 13 to receive the history. SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:06, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * So what's the appropriate !vote to achieve that outcome? Delete and then merge?  Isn't that just a merge? I guess I'm a little confused. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:07, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Basically, a history merge is a procedure performed by admins that involves deleting pages, moving pages, and then undeleting deleted revisions. If you're going to sum up your comment with a phrase, "history merge" would probably be most appropriate, because people closing AFDs will know what you mean.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:44, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Venera so that anyone looking for this title will find the more general article about the Venera missions, anyone not looking for this title can ignore it, and we don't have to merge the edit histories. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:31, 25 December 2008 (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.