This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current main page.
@
Zxcvbnm: Page
Universe of The Legend of Zelda seems to have undergone steady development from a stub at 00:58, 28 September 2001. I have not found in its history any complete cut-and-paste event that would warrant splitting its history. It starts as a short article about the land of Hyrule, and at the end it still contains much matter about the land of Hyrule.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
12:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
@
Anthony Appleyard: The article started out solely about Hyrule, and underwent a post-move subject change in 2008 to the entire Zelda universe, including other realms that aren't Hyrule, like Termina for example. That should really have been created as a new article, and Hyrule merged into it, rather than being totally moved. That is because Hyrule does not encompass the entire Zelda universe and while many games are set in Hyrule, others are not, or partially take place somewhere else.ZXCVBNM (
TALK)15:50, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
@
Zxcvbnm: "That should really have been created as a new article" :: but "should have" is not "actually happened", and we cannot change the past. Topic sometimes changes in a gradually-developing gradually-lengthening article. The change of topic was gradual, and I see no place to cut the history.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
16:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Re:
Thomas Edward Wilkinson. Until a few days ago, this was a stub article named "Thomas Wilkinson (Bishop of Zululand)." "Thomas Edward Wilkinson" existed as a redirect page. I had created an expansion of the page in userspace, and had discovered that he was always referred to formally as Thomas Edward (not Thomas). So Thomas Edward Wilkinson was the better page name. I attempted to do a page move to Thomas Edward Wilkinson, but the system would not work as Thomas Edward Wilkinson already existed as a redirect. Not realising the implications for page history, I cut and pasted the stub article into Thomas Edward Wilkinson, made Thomas Wilkinson (Bishop of Zululand) a redirect, and corrected all the What Links Here links on the linked pages. I then replaced the stub with my expansion cut and pasted from userspace. I should add that Thomas Edward Wilkinson remains the better article title because (1) he was only six years bishop of Zululand, but was 25 years coadjutor bishop of London for North and Central Europe; and (2) he was known informally as Edward, not Thomas (I have yet to add that bit to the page, with ref). So please could someone kindly merge the history? My apologies for not realising that there was a history problem until I received a notice about it. I did not realise, because the article history still shows on the article history page as from 2011.
Storye book (
talk)
08:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
Article author here. Suggest you perform history splitting such that history begins at version dated 22:15 23 August 2020. At this point, all information from the template article on Swearengin had been replaced by information on Siegel. And thanks for all your help.
Gnaanamurthy (
talk)
02:14, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
@
Anthony Appleyard: Further information: I made several updates to the Swearengin article on August 15. I then copied the source as a template for the Siegel article.
Hi there! I copied the material from
Draft:Black Is King and pasted it into
Black Is King, as I was not aware of the issue with attribution. I did so because another user wanted to create an article for Black Is King, but at the time Black Is King was a redirect and they did not know how to convert a redirect to an article, and so they created
Draft:Black Is King through AfC. I then converted the redirect into an article and copied what was in the draft. There has since been edits made by others to the article. It was then raised to my attention that the histories need to be merged. I hope you can help with this! Thank you :)
Bgkc4444 (
talk)
00:19, 19 July 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
Undone, article was hijacked and a copyvio - offending hijack split off from original and deleted, article moved back to its original location at
Kurt Lightner.
Primefac (
talk)
12:35, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
Minimum Evolution was newly created, while a "redirect with possibilities" already existed at
Minimum evolution. The downcased version should be the article title. I would round-robin that out of the way and CSD the former redirect, but it has a non-trivial history. So I suspect that a move + histmerge is needed here? --Elmidae (
talk ·
contribs)
16:27, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
City of Lions page seems to have started life as completely different subject - a drowned city off Cornwall (see Talk discussion) but was changed on 6 January 2013 by an anonymous IP to start a new article about a band (?) This was then added to over the years. I started off by trying to find links to this page as an Orphan but so far without success. Also no references and any links given are dead, so all needs verification: may fail WP:notability? May even be a disruptive edit that has taken on a life of its own...? Needs more experienced eyes!. Thanks.
Crep171166 (
talk)
01:32, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Lady Wood, Lady Wood was about the
area of Leeds which was merged. In
August 2016 an article on the album was written. The edit history before 2016 should be moved to
Lady Wood, Leeds (along with the talk page prior to
2016) and either the album can stay at the base name or a DAB could be created. Crouch, Swale (
talk)
21:49, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
The history of
UFC Fight Night: Smith vs. Teixeira currently contains a confusing mixture of edits about different subjects. To fix this, please do the following steps in order:
Not done, page was blanked before it was copied over, so only one contributor (no attribution issues) and parallel/convoluted histories following the copy/paste. I have redirected the second draft to the first as they are identical (barring differences in decline rationale).
Primefac (
talk)
21:14, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
@
Anthony Appleyard: the "Harleston, Norfolk" title was an article about the town from
2005 until it was merged in
2010. I created the "Harleston, South Norfolk" in
2020 and then moved back content from the
Redenhall with Harleston article
[2][3]. The history of "Harleston, Norfolk" and "Harleston, South Norfolk" do not appear to be parallel since they existed at different times. The only thing that is parallel is the content that was in the "Redenhall with Harleston" article which I'm not requesting for merging. Also in any case "Harleston, Norfolk" not "Harleston, South Norfolk" is the correct title per
WP:UKPLACE since there is only 1 in Norfolk. I just used the other title for AFC. Crouch, Swale (
talk)
20:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
@
Anthony Appleyard: due to the fact that some content from
2010 (such as the Georgian residences) is now in the current article. Both articles are on the same topic and have content from the other and aren't parallel. Crouch, Swale (
talk)
19:42, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
@
Primefac: Excuse me? I didn’t ask you to do that. I want my edit history back, please. I don’t understand why you’re giving me such a hard time over this... I’d like to ask @
Anthony Appleyard: for some assistance here, and a proper explanation as to why the history merge can’t happen. I just wanted some help, not this... – PhilipTerryGraham (
talk·articles·reviews)17:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
History merges are done to preserve attribution. For example, let's say there is an article
Example. Editor A copies
Example to
Draft:Example.
In scenario 1, editor A asks editors B and C to help improve the Draft, which after a few dozen edits is copied back to
Example by editor A. In this case, the edits made by B and C need to receive proper attribution, so
Draft:Example is merged into
Example.
In scenario 2, editor A works on the Draft for a while, and then copies that finished product back to
Example. They have done all of the work themselves, so there is no concern about attribution because (from the perspective of the Article) only one editor has actually changed the content.
@
Primefac: I understand this, I'm moreso asking why it's this way. What are the ill effects of simply merging the original edit history into the mainspace article that prompts a denial of this kind of histmerge request? Hopefully my wording is much clearer now. At the very least, thankfully, I got the edit history back through an
undeletion request, so I no longer need assistance in that regard. – PhilipTerryGraham (
talk·articles·reviews)18:47, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
@
Primefac and
PhilipTerryGraham: Let this happen: Page X is copied to page Y. User P edits X, and at the same time user Q edits Y. Then, these edited forms of X and Y are text-merged to make a new page Z. This text-merging cannot be followed up by a history-merging, for reasons explained at
WP:Parallel histories.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
21:47, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
@
Primefac and
PhilipTerryGraham: The English Wikipedia has one information note about each edit that users have made. If page X is text-split into pages Y and Z, by cut-and-paste, and someone calls for history-merge of X to Y and of X to Z, the information note about each edit of X can be moved to Y's edit history, or to Z's edit history, but not to both. Moving it to both would need the information note to be duplicated. That is called "cloning". Cloning can be done in the German Wikipedia, but not in the English Wikipedia. All that can be done is to put edit history information sections in the end of Talk:X and in the starts of Talk:Y and Talk:Z . See
WP:Parallel histories.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
04:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current main page.
@
Zxcvbnm: Page
Universe of The Legend of Zelda seems to have undergone steady development from a stub at 00:58, 28 September 2001. I have not found in its history any complete cut-and-paste event that would warrant splitting its history. It starts as a short article about the land of Hyrule, and at the end it still contains much matter about the land of Hyrule.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
12:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
@
Anthony Appleyard: The article started out solely about Hyrule, and underwent a post-move subject change in 2008 to the entire Zelda universe, including other realms that aren't Hyrule, like Termina for example. That should really have been created as a new article, and Hyrule merged into it, rather than being totally moved. That is because Hyrule does not encompass the entire Zelda universe and while many games are set in Hyrule, others are not, or partially take place somewhere else.ZXCVBNM (
TALK)15:50, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
@
Zxcvbnm: "That should really have been created as a new article" :: but "should have" is not "actually happened", and we cannot change the past. Topic sometimes changes in a gradually-developing gradually-lengthening article. The change of topic was gradual, and I see no place to cut the history.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
16:53, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Re:
Thomas Edward Wilkinson. Until a few days ago, this was a stub article named "Thomas Wilkinson (Bishop of Zululand)." "Thomas Edward Wilkinson" existed as a redirect page. I had created an expansion of the page in userspace, and had discovered that he was always referred to formally as Thomas Edward (not Thomas). So Thomas Edward Wilkinson was the better page name. I attempted to do a page move to Thomas Edward Wilkinson, but the system would not work as Thomas Edward Wilkinson already existed as a redirect. Not realising the implications for page history, I cut and pasted the stub article into Thomas Edward Wilkinson, made Thomas Wilkinson (Bishop of Zululand) a redirect, and corrected all the What Links Here links on the linked pages. I then replaced the stub with my expansion cut and pasted from userspace. I should add that Thomas Edward Wilkinson remains the better article title because (1) he was only six years bishop of Zululand, but was 25 years coadjutor bishop of London for North and Central Europe; and (2) he was known informally as Edward, not Thomas (I have yet to add that bit to the page, with ref). So please could someone kindly merge the history? My apologies for not realising that there was a history problem until I received a notice about it. I did not realise, because the article history still shows on the article history page as from 2011.
Storye book (
talk)
08:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
Article author here. Suggest you perform history splitting such that history begins at version dated 22:15 23 August 2020. At this point, all information from the template article on Swearengin had been replaced by information on Siegel. And thanks for all your help.
Gnaanamurthy (
talk)
02:14, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
@
Anthony Appleyard: Further information: I made several updates to the Swearengin article on August 15. I then copied the source as a template for the Siegel article.
Hi there! I copied the material from
Draft:Black Is King and pasted it into
Black Is King, as I was not aware of the issue with attribution. I did so because another user wanted to create an article for Black Is King, but at the time Black Is King was a redirect and they did not know how to convert a redirect to an article, and so they created
Draft:Black Is King through AfC. I then converted the redirect into an article and copied what was in the draft. There has since been edits made by others to the article. It was then raised to my attention that the histories need to be merged. I hope you can help with this! Thank you :)
Bgkc4444 (
talk)
00:19, 19 July 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
Undone, article was hijacked and a copyvio - offending hijack split off from original and deleted, article moved back to its original location at
Kurt Lightner.
Primefac (
talk)
12:35, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
Minimum Evolution was newly created, while a "redirect with possibilities" already existed at
Minimum evolution. The downcased version should be the article title. I would round-robin that out of the way and CSD the former redirect, but it has a non-trivial history. So I suspect that a move + histmerge is needed here? --Elmidae (
talk ·
contribs)
16:27, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
City of Lions page seems to have started life as completely different subject - a drowned city off Cornwall (see Talk discussion) but was changed on 6 January 2013 by an anonymous IP to start a new article about a band (?) This was then added to over the years. I started off by trying to find links to this page as an Orphan but so far without success. Also no references and any links given are dead, so all needs verification: may fail WP:notability? May even be a disruptive edit that has taken on a life of its own...? Needs more experienced eyes!. Thanks.
Crep171166 (
talk)
01:32, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Lady Wood, Lady Wood was about the
area of Leeds which was merged. In
August 2016 an article on the album was written. The edit history before 2016 should be moved to
Lady Wood, Leeds (along with the talk page prior to
2016) and either the album can stay at the base name or a DAB could be created. Crouch, Swale (
talk)
21:49, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
The history of
UFC Fight Night: Smith vs. Teixeira currently contains a confusing mixture of edits about different subjects. To fix this, please do the following steps in order:
Not done, page was blanked before it was copied over, so only one contributor (no attribution issues) and parallel/convoluted histories following the copy/paste. I have redirected the second draft to the first as they are identical (barring differences in decline rationale).
Primefac (
talk)
21:14, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
@
Anthony Appleyard: the "Harleston, Norfolk" title was an article about the town from
2005 until it was merged in
2010. I created the "Harleston, South Norfolk" in
2020 and then moved back content from the
Redenhall with Harleston article
[2][3]. The history of "Harleston, Norfolk" and "Harleston, South Norfolk" do not appear to be parallel since they existed at different times. The only thing that is parallel is the content that was in the "Redenhall with Harleston" article which I'm not requesting for merging. Also in any case "Harleston, Norfolk" not "Harleston, South Norfolk" is the correct title per
WP:UKPLACE since there is only 1 in Norfolk. I just used the other title for AFC. Crouch, Swale (
talk)
20:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
@
Anthony Appleyard: due to the fact that some content from
2010 (such as the Georgian residences) is now in the current article. Both articles are on the same topic and have content from the other and aren't parallel. Crouch, Swale (
talk)
19:42, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
@
Primefac: Excuse me? I didn’t ask you to do that. I want my edit history back, please. I don’t understand why you’re giving me such a hard time over this... I’d like to ask @
Anthony Appleyard: for some assistance here, and a proper explanation as to why the history merge can’t happen. I just wanted some help, not this... – PhilipTerryGraham (
talk·articles·reviews)17:11, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
History merges are done to preserve attribution. For example, let's say there is an article
Example. Editor A copies
Example to
Draft:Example.
In scenario 1, editor A asks editors B and C to help improve the Draft, which after a few dozen edits is copied back to
Example by editor A. In this case, the edits made by B and C need to receive proper attribution, so
Draft:Example is merged into
Example.
In scenario 2, editor A works on the Draft for a while, and then copies that finished product back to
Example. They have done all of the work themselves, so there is no concern about attribution because (from the perspective of the Article) only one editor has actually changed the content.
@
Primefac: I understand this, I'm moreso asking why it's this way. What are the ill effects of simply merging the original edit history into the mainspace article that prompts a denial of this kind of histmerge request? Hopefully my wording is much clearer now. At the very least, thankfully, I got the edit history back through an
undeletion request, so I no longer need assistance in that regard. – PhilipTerryGraham (
talk·articles·reviews)18:47, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
@
Primefac and
PhilipTerryGraham: Let this happen: Page X is copied to page Y. User P edits X, and at the same time user Q edits Y. Then, these edited forms of X and Y are text-merged to make a new page Z. This text-merging cannot be followed up by a history-merging, for reasons explained at
WP:Parallel histories.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
21:47, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
@
Primefac and
PhilipTerryGraham: The English Wikipedia has one information note about each edit that users have made. If page X is text-split into pages Y and Z, by cut-and-paste, and someone calls for history-merge of X to Y and of X to Z, the information note about each edit of X can be moved to Y's edit history, or to Z's edit history, but not to both. Moving it to both would need the information note to be duplicated. That is called "cloning". Cloning can be done in the German Wikipedia, but not in the English Wikipedia. All that can be done is to put edit history information sections in the end of Talk:X and in the starts of Talk:Y and Talk:Z . See
WP:Parallel histories.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
04:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)