Talk:Velim, Goa

Merge proposal

Merge stub Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando into this article with separate redirects. They are parts of this village and do not appear to need or justify separate articles. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 09:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Here's my reply User talk:Pbsouthwood#Regarding your merge tag at Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando. ✠ Rejoy2003 ✠ (contact) 11:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Rejoy2003, Please keep discussions on article content on the article talk page where the discussion was started, so that other interested parties can contribute in the proper place. I will move your response to here where it should have been posted in the first place, and will respond to it here. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 10:40, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Regarding your merge tag at Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando

Hello, I'm quite taken away by your placement of the merge tag on article Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando. Firstly, I'm against it. Why? Because there are similar articles that have already been reviewed and are "village subdivisions" of Velim village. See Tollecanto, Cutbona & Baradi, Goa. I think this article should not be merged but stay as it is as an independent article.

If the problem is mention of three subdivisions as the article name, we can have them made independent articles for each subdivision for eg. Naik-Caiero article etc, which I think might be appropriate given the current circumstances. ✠ Rejoy2003 ✠ (contact) 09:54, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Rejoy2003 The correct place to discuss a proposed merge is at the article talk page where the merge is proposed. To get my attention, you can simply ping me from your comments there. My talk page is not the proper place for this discussion. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 09:55, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Rejoy2003 If you are against the proposed merge, you are free to contest it by explaining why it would be better for Wikipedia to keep the articles separate. Please take into account the relevant Wikipedia content policies, which may be referred to when assessing the merger. At present Naik-Caiero, Silvas and Ubdando is a stub, it is about three subdivisions of a village, which it would appear is made up of quite a large number of subdivisions, there is currently no content in the main article about the subdivisions other than links, and there is no obvious reason why is should not be merged into the article on the village, which is currently quite small, and would be improved by having more content. It is not necessarily relevant that other subdivisions have been reviewed and not tagged for merging. This could happen at any time if in the considered opinion of one or more editors, the encyclopedia would be improved by merging them. As I have not looked at the other subdivision articles I cannot comment further on them at this stage. Bear in mind also that a merge is not necessarily permanent, and the article can be split again if and when it becomes too big, or some other legitimate reason to split arises. Personal preferences do not carry any weight in this decision if they conflict with policy.· · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 12:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

• Merge - zero rationale for a separate article. Makes much more sense to include in target.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:18, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
• Merge no reason for separate article with the small amount of info about a specific ward of a village, better included in main ariticle. MB 16:55, 24 November 2022 (UTC)