Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oxyacetylene

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 of the debate was Redirected to Oxy-fuel welding and cutting Adrian~enwiki (talk) 05:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oxyacetylene

The current content of this page is just an operating manual for an oxyacetylene torch. There is a more encyclopedic article at Oxy-fuel welding and cutting, however a proper merge would (in my opinion) require blanking this entire article and then redirecting Oxy-fuel welding and cutting here, and I guess I'm not bold enough to do that without consensus. Thatcher131 04:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Oxy-fuel welding and cutting per nom. dbtfz ^talk 04:39, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per dbtfz --Ruby 05:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Redirect.~~ Speedy redirect per nom. Be bold; the way Wikipedia is set up, you can't screw anything up by being bold. On the other hand, this AfD consumes a lot of community resources, including the time of a lot of skilful editors. -ikkyu2 (talk) 06:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well the problem is I'm relatively new and I got spanked once before for making too drastic a change without "respecting the work of prevous editors" (although the person who complained had a vested interest and we eventually worked it out amicably). I will do the redirect now and clear the AfD from the article. Thatcher131 06:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone replaced Oxyacetylene by a redirection, which should not have been done while it was under AfD. I reverted that blanking. Anthony Appleyard 09:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Come on folks, let's Wikipedia:use common sense here. Redirects don't purge the article history and we're getting a strong consensus here. -ikkyu2 (talk) 20:36, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oxyacetylene contained two lists of information, which needed to be merged. I merged them, and merged in matter from Oxy-fuel welding and cutting. I then merged all of Oxyacetylene's contents into Oxy-fuel welding and cutting, but I have left also a copy of it in Oxyacetylene to satisfy the AfD rules. Anthony Appleyard 10:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Redirect to Oxy-fuel welding and cutting and close the AfD since Redir seems to be the consensus here.--Isotope23 15:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect already Come on people, you're completely missing the point of WP:IAR. Everyone thinks it should point there, there's no dispute, and a redirect can easily be fixed later if it's a problem. You're doing process for the sake of process. AfD has rules to make things smoother, but it would be smoother here to just ignore the rules and close it early. Night Gyr 22:48, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, Don't merge The only content in the article is unencyclopedic instructional material. If you want to keep it, put it in wikibooks. It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. Night Gyr 23:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, don't merge Oxyacetylene (or oxyacetylene set) is a term commonly used in industry. Also agree that the existing content is more suitable for wikibooks, there is a lot of good content there but it is more a HowTo. — Graibeard^(talk) 00:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect; the information doesn't seem to be too encyclopedic. No need to merge; perhaps a paragraph or two could be excised, but then, there's no source given for all this info. IMO, the oxyfuel welding/cutting article is in worse shape now than it was before ("Setting up the equipment"? What is that doing there?). Anyone who wants to write a good oxyfuel welding article will be able to do it without this content, and this content, being unsourced and largely unuseful, isn't what the article needs. Also, question—does wikibooks require references? I would imagine so, but if it didn't, this couldn't potentially go there. --Spangineer (háblame) 01:08, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Redirected to Oxy-fuel welding and cutting. Adrian~enwiki (talk) 05:12, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.