Talk:New World Liberation Front
Latest comment: 5 months ago by JBW in topic Administrator help requested: merger
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Further sources
edit- "The Bombings Across America That We've 'Forgotten'". Time. 2016-09-20. Retrieved 2023-04-28.
- The book "Day of Rage"[1] specifically claims it was an offshoot/subgroup of Symbionese Liberation Army
References
- ^ Burrough, Bryan (2015-04-07). Days of Rage: America's Radical Underground, the FBI, and the Forgotten Age of Revolutionary Violence. Penguin. ISBN 978-0-698-17007-0.
Administrator help requested: merger
edit | This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. |
The previously created article acknowledged in the {{Copied}} template above, which had been speedy deleted, undeleted, and moved to Draft:New World Liberation Front (history) should IMO be histmerged with this subsequently created version, and not just attributed on the talk page. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:51, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Yngvadottir: Despite the fact that someone has posted a message on this page saying that content has been copied from that draft to this article, I can't see any copied material. If I have somehow missed some then please tell me and I'll reconsider, but if I am right then history merging a page with no history relevant to this one would serve no useful purpose, and would add irrelevant material to the article history. JBW (talk) 13:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- @JBW: I don't see any copying, either. What the history for the draft and the log entries for this page show is that the original page (created on 29 December 2022) was wrongly tagged as a hoax, was speedy deleted, then undeleted and draftified (all on 7 January 2023). Another editor subsequently created an article at the same title (26 April 2023) and the editor who had tagged it as a hoax then redirected the draft to the new version and placed the template for attribution (28 April 2023). The hoax tag was in error, as was the deletion. There is no overlap between the article histories except for the redirection. For full attribution, the original creator (who complained in vain at the deleting admin's user talk and then successfully at Requests for undeletion) should have their contributions to the page show in the history. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Unless I'm missing something, the original creator does have their contributions to the page show in the history. There's no need for their contributions to another page, albeit on the same subject, to also show in the history of that page. JBW (talk) 22:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- You're the admin, not me. But my reasoning is that it's the same page (same title, same topic) and the deletion was wrong, as recognized by its rapid reversal. So where's the harm in uniting the two histories and thereby fully undoing the error? (And it would not be "also", as I understand it; the history of Draft:New World Liberation Front would be moved to form the first part of the history of this page.) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Yngvadottir: I have just finished dealing with an article which had been nominated for speedy deletion as re-creation of a page deleted at AfD. It took me a considerable amount of time and effort to check its history to determine whether it qualified for the speedy deletion, because the earlier page had been restored and history merged with the new one, so that it wasn't obvious which revisions were from the original version and which from the new one. Maybe that would be unlikely to happen with the current article, but it indicates how history merging can create problems in the future. Sometimes history merging is necessary because of the need to provide attribution for content of the page, but history merging when it is not necessary for that purpose is unhelpful. The purpose of history merging is very specific: to provide a record of who created what part of the text of the current page, which is necessary in order to record who holds the relevant copyright. It is not for just making a record of other facts with some connection to the page in question, such as the fact that another page on the same topic and with the same title, but with different content, had previously been created. If you really strongly feel that a record of that fact should be available to anyone looking at the editing history, then you may like to put a note about it in an edit summary. JBW (talk) 13:12, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- You're the admin, not me. But my reasoning is that it's the same page (same title, same topic) and the deletion was wrong, as recognized by its rapid reversal. So where's the harm in uniting the two histories and thereby fully undoing the error? (And it would not be "also", as I understand it; the history of Draft:New World Liberation Front would be moved to form the first part of the history of this page.) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Unless I'm missing something, the original creator does have their contributions to the page show in the history. There's no need for their contributions to another page, albeit on the same subject, to also show in the history of that page. JBW (talk) 22:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- @JBW: I don't see any copying, either. What the history for the draft and the log entries for this page show is that the original page (created on 29 December 2022) was wrongly tagged as a hoax, was speedy deleted, then undeleted and draftified (all on 7 January 2023). Another editor subsequently created an article at the same title (26 April 2023) and the editor who had tagged it as a hoax then redirected the draft to the new version and placed the template for attribution (28 April 2023). The hoax tag was in error, as was the deletion. There is no overlap between the article histories except for the redirection. For full attribution, the original creator (who complained in vain at the deleting admin's user talk and then successfully at Requests for undeletion) should have their contributions to the page show in the history. Yngvadottir (talk) 22:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)