 | This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page: • Preobrazhensky Regiment March Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:Preobrazhensky Regiment March |
 | The contents of the Donajowsky page were merged into Preobrazhensky Regiment March on December 22, 2019 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article merge
editThe article speaks 99% about the march and nothing referenced about "Donajowsky". The fact that it is an error is not discussed in sources. We cannot make a separate article of nonnotable stupidity. If somebody opposes merging, please provide arguments; I agree I may be mistaken. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:02, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Look, seriously, do we have a policy which says "I can redirect whatever I do not like and will be edit-warring of somebody else objects"? Why do not you contact the author of the article, @Shakko:, she is active (though not necessary at the English Wikipedia) and see what she has to say?--Ymblanter (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- I asked you to provide arguments, and got nothing but wikilawyering. Look, seriously, there is no policy which says "I cannot merge without asking permission from Ymblanter". Why do not you read the freaking article before jumping the revert gun? If you want to waste time of more wikipedians, so be it; I added merge tags. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:27, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- If you check the editing history you will clearly see that you are just casting aspersions which are not very well grounded.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Wikilawyering again without arguments on the subject. I did check edit history and I did see you edited it. And I do know that some people edit articles without actually reading and evaluating them (wikignomes in particular, who amass millions of edits and get their 15 minutes of fame without actually adding content).Chukcha no reader, chukcha writer. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:01, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- If you want to make the case that I amass my edits without actually adding content, please do it explicitly. I will then take you to ANI and see whether the community would evaluate this as a personal attacks, Before that, please abstain from making negative statements about me, especially if they are false. And please respect Wikipedia policies. They are crystal clear on what you should do if you made an edit and it was reverted in good faith.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:47, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- In other words, you are inviting me to insult you so that you can complain?????????? And you are also asking me to "stop beating my wife"???? WOW!!! <plonk> Staszek Lem (talk) 18:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Good, I think here we can stop this exciting discussion and see what other users, including the main author of the article, have to say.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- In other words, you are inviting me to insult you so that you can complain?????????? And you are also asking me to "stop beating my wife"???? WOW!!! <plonk> Staszek Lem (talk) 18:54, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- If you want to make the case that I amass my edits without actually adding content, please do it explicitly. I will then take you to ANI and see whether the community would evaluate this as a personal attacks, Before that, please abstain from making negative statements about me, especially if they are false. And please respect Wikipedia policies. They are crystal clear on what you should do if you made an edit and it was reverted in good faith.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:47, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Wikilawyering again without arguments on the subject. I did check edit history and I did see you edited it. And I do know that some people edit articles without actually reading and evaluating them (wikignomes in particular, who amass millions of edits and get their 15 minutes of fame without actually adding content).Chukcha no reader, chukcha writer. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:01, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- If you check the editing history you will clearly see that you are just casting aspersions which are not very well grounded.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- I asked you to provide arguments, and got nothing but wikilawyering. Look, seriously, there is no policy which says "I cannot merge without asking permission from Ymblanter". Why do not you read the freaking article before jumping the revert gun? If you want to waste time of more wikipedians, so be it; I added merge tags. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:27, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- Let us try a second round, after ANI was closed with a recommendation for a closure by an uninvolved user. The march itself is clearly notable, and I do not see why the article should redirect to the regiment article. It goes well beyond the regiment, even if the article can be sourced better and expanded. Having said this, I would not oppose a move to Preobrazhensky Regiment March or a similar name, since having two articles, about the march and about the (clearly erroneous) composer of the march seems too much for me.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:59, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Obviously you didn't bother to look around. In fact, the redirect was to Preobrazhensky Regiment#March Since the fuss started I expanded this section greatly. So I am moving its content into Preobrazhensky Regiment March and there is nothing remains to merge. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:17, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.