Template talk:Merge

Reason Parameter

Consistency is all very well, but sometimes it's inappropriate. With templates like {{Verification needed}}, the parameter was introduced to avoid the all-too-numerous situations where one editor would add an unlikely but plausible note and another would add a VN tag that, given the nature of the tag at the time, would point to a non-existent entry on the talk page. In most cases, a brief note is all that is required to state the nature of the verification that is required.

In this case, however, I don't think it works. The removal of one article (well... transition to a redirect) is cause for proper discussion. A "reason" parameter is only ever going to give a brief summary, but when talking about the removal of an article, a proper debate should be held.

The fact that I agree with the first merge suggestion to "benefit" from the new template is immaterial: the proposer should have to make his or her case on a talk page no matter how good the idea. rpeh •T•C•E• 04:08, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I considered that after I added the parameter, but wasn't sure if it made sense to have a discussion in cases where nobody feels strongly enough to create a talk page discussion and disagree. Still, it's a fair enough point and I can't say I disagree with your reasoning. – Robin Hood↝talk 05:09, 14 August 2010 (UTC)