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 talk page.
An old one that needs special action as there are over 5000 revisions, so I have not tagged articles. Revisions of Apple 12 June 2003 and earlier are revisions for the dab page at Apple (disambiguation) and should be moved and merged there. Revisions of Apple (fruit) 30 June 2003 and earlier (all apart from today's cut & paste attempt) are the early revisions for Apple and should be merged there. Keith D (talk) 11:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I tried to delete page Apple temporarily to history-split off its first 8 edits (the disambig edits) as the start of this job, and I got a fault page showing "This page has a large edit history, over 5,000 revisions. Deletion of such pages has been restricted to prevent accidental disruption of Wikipedia." in red. Leave it and merely put notes in the affected pages' talk pages to explain the cut-and-pastes? Or what happens? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
That is why I listed here as I got the same message. I was hoping that someone here would know if there was a way of fixing with the limit in place. Keith D (talk) 15:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Somebody cut-and-pasted the contents of Straight edge to Straight Edge, then redirected the former to the latter's name space (originally, it was the other way around). Since then, there have been several edits to the latter article. I'd like a history merge of both articles at Straight edge (the original space) and redirect and protect Straight Edge to prevent that from happening again. NeoChaosX (talk, edits)16:11, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Northern Areas (Pakistan) was cut-and-paste-d to Northern Areas back in May 2008, and was just recently cut-and-paste-d back. So the history between May 2008 and a couple of days ago at "Northern Areas" should be attached to the "(Pakistan)" page, the pre-May-2008 history remains at the "(Pakistan)" page. 70.55.85.40 (talk) 06:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Kevin Jones proved to have some old deleted nonsense edits, which I undeleted and moved to Kevin Jonas/facetious edits and re-deleted, and with them the corresponding edits of its talk page, to get them out from under the good edits in this complication.
While the histories do appear to be different, there have not been any overlapping histories. Here's a history of what happened. First, Jonas Brothers was created. Then, Kevin Jonas (now Kevin Jonas/version 2) was created. Several times, the content of Kevin Jonas was deleted and the article was redirected - not merged - back to Jonas Brothers, until Kevin Jonas (now Kevin Jonas/version 2) was fully protected. Then, an article on the subject was re-created again, but this time at Kevin Jonas (singer) (now Kevin Jonas), because the other article was protected. This "new" article contained content from both the old protected/deleted article and Jonas Brothers - it was not just a split from Jonas Brothers, nor was it a true fresh start. Because there has never been overlap between the current Kevin Jonas and Kevin Jonas/version 2, the histories of these articles should be able to be safely merged. I figure it is better to have all of the histories regarding one subject in the same article, rather than split between two articles - especially in this case where there are no overlapping content edits. --Scott Alter16:30, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
Baw game of Scone, originally an article on the village of Scone was rewritten in November 2006, with a new Scone being created, and the old Scone being split. The history of the old village article is contained in "Baw game of Scone". So the history of "Baw game of Scone" up to November 2006 should merge into the current village article, with the current article "Baw..." having history start in November 2006. The entirety of the Baw talk page only concerns the village, not the current contents, so it should somehow merge into the current village talk page...70.51.11.219 (talk) 05:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Done merging histories of the two articles. The talk page histories can't be merged though, because there wasn't a cut&page move in the past, and there have been new changes to Talk:Indo-Canadians. I moved the old talk to an archive of the new talk page, so it's currently at Talk:Indo-Canadians/Archive 1. --PeaceNT (talk) 13:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
German plot was cut-and-paste moved by myself to Christmas Day Plot, which appears to be a more appropriate name per literature available. The histories need merging. (Apologies to the hard working admins, my second request in a week, was not aware of this name.) rueben_lys (talk·contribs) 14:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
singeing from singe. This isn't a cut&paste move repair, it's an article merge that should have a history merge done as well. The content of singe and an earlier version of singeing are related, and "singeing" is a better title than "singe" for all of the content. Singeing is presently a redirect to heatsetting; I'll overwrite that to the current revision of singe after the merge is performed, as "singeing" and "heatsetting" are not synonymous.--Father Goose (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
BRP Artemio Ricarte (PS37), I didnt know that cut and paste is bad, I created a new article BRP Artemio Ricarte (PS-37) and made the old article redirected into the new one.(the difference is only the dash) since most of Philippine navy ship articles have a dash in between the letter and numbers. Please correct my mistake, thanks! phichanad 0119H 1 July 2008 (UTC)
HD 17156b and HD 17156 b: article created at HD 17156 b was merged into HD 17156, then made into a separate article again as HD 17156b; as a result the history is split between two pages. It has now been moved back to HD 17156 b in a cut and paste move. All the history needs to be kept, so {{db-move}} cannot be used; the edit history all needs to be merged (probably at HD 17156 b as this seems to be the usual way of naming these articles). --Snigbrook(talk)18:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
These two pages have separate histories: one is not a copy-and-paste move of the other.
Comic Sylph existed from 03:19, 13 April 2007 to 10:19, 17 October 2007, when it was merged into something, and since then has been redirected twice more.
It's not so unlike what it was. Comic Sylphbefore it was merged may have had a smaller number of serialized titles, a smaller lead, and no infobox, but since Sylph is just Comic Sylph with a new title, I thought that the histories should be merged since the only thing that changed about the magazine was it's title (and the fact that it went from a quarterly publication to bimonthly).--十八11:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Clean up after user:Benkenobi1 and user:Malleus Haereticorum moving wars:
And that might not be all of it. Please do not trust the links given completely -
I compiled the list in a hurry and some articles were moved quite a lot. Do not forget various talk pages, and good luck. Renata (talk) 03:46, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Done, I moved all of the mentioned articles (no other pages mentioned in the edit summaries had any history related to the content) on top of each other at the most recent title and cleared up all the redirects from the history. - Bobet17:28, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Max Shreck (Batman Returns) -> Max Shreck -- Both pages deal with the same subject. The current article was created on Feb 3 2008 after the original was turned into a redirect on Dec 23 2007 w/o consensus. The pre Feb 3 edits of Max Shreck are only redirect junk and can be deleted to avoid conflicting edits. -- 69.183.15.230 (talk) 00:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Not really a cut-and-paste move, but there's no overlap and future editors might want to consult the old history and talk page. So DoneCool HandLuke01:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Restore edit history to Universal health care after botched cut and paste move? I attempted to restore this article yesterday after a move (to Socialised health care) that was done without warning or consensus. However I did the move incorrectly. Now its history displays only the two actions -- the original move and my attempted revert. I'm hoping my error can be undone? Thanks in advance. --Sfmammamia (talk) 15:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for taking care of my mess (!) I'm not sure I understand your question, but it's my belief that "socialised health care" should redirect to "Socialized medicine" and not to "universal health care." --Sfmammamia (talk) 16:59, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm not too sure I'm in the right place but here goes anyway. Someone has moved, with no real explanation, Horace Smith-Dorrien to Sir Horace Smith-Dorrien. Wikipedia policy is that titles such as 'Sir' should not appear in the page name: therefore, this move is contrary to policy. I would swap them back but I'm not 100% certain that I could do it without creating new problems. Could an admin or some gifted person restore the status quo ante? Nunquam Dormio (talk) 15:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
They've co-existed for a bit now, so not entirely sure if they can be usefully hist-merged, but most of the history of much of the content is at the wrong title, so I'm hoping someone that enjoys the challenge of the more complicated cases can figure out how to get as much as possible fixed. St. Joseph College Cavite City (the correct title, at least as far as not having the 's) has a few stand-alone edits, mostly in Feb-March 2008, then a big import fairly recently from St. Joseph's College Cavite City (in existence since Sept 2006) here. Shawisland (talk) 04:03, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Argh. My bad--such a big chunk of text I assumed (should have checked) it came from the other article. Apparently that same chunk of copyvio from http://www.eskwelahan.net/news/?p=1004 was added to both articles within about a day of each other. Sigh. Looks like the actual content move happened Feb 5 from this to this, which it's basically back to after removing all the copyvio added earlier this month. Shawisland (talk) 05:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Uhh. It seems that on 5 Feb 2008 User:Pilipinaskabite cut-and-paste moved X to Y, leaving X blank. Then in the same minute the bot User:ClueBot reverted the blanking as suspected vandalism, converting the cut-and-paste into a copy-and-paste, producing parallel versions. After that X was edited 24 times (not counting a redirect to Y).
Could someone restore the page histories that were deleted at Braun Racing when the page was moved over a redirect. These look like they were backwards merged like the Yates Racing/Newman Haas debacle that was fixed earlier this month and the deleted histories will be needed to fix. Just restore them each to a temp pages for now. Thanks -- Cmjc80 (talk) 02:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Deleted redirect edits are often found under articles which have been moved by an admin over a redirect. Is this requested undeletion necessary? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Braun Racing was also merged incorrectly. The edits prior to Feb 9 2006 need to be moved to Akins Motorsports and the first edit mentioned above to the original Braun Racing article should be merged into the current one. -- Cmjc80 (talk) 01:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
What happened was that Braun Racing purchased Akins Motorsport. Unfortunately when the pages were merged, Akins Motorsports was turned into main article when it should have been the redirect. The original Akins edits need to be split off into their own article so that page can be expanded about its pre-merge history. The intital few edits made to Braun Racing should be restored as the start of that article. Right now, the wikipedia article for Braun Racing is actually older than the team itself. -- Cmjc80 (talk) 22:25, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I'm not sure if I'm in the right place, but recently User:The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick cut and pasted the content from Italian Empire to Italian Colonial Empire. There was no consensus to this, unlike his rejig article - see talk may suggest. I assume he tried to move it but was blocked to do so. However, by moving the content, most of the history of the article is now virtually lost, or at least hard to find. I'd revert those The real problem is that he has also heavily changed the content of the article (tho the size has limitedly increased) with over 50 edits, so I honestly do not know what to do. Hope you can help me. --Do you know me?...then SHUT UP!!!Sarcasm is beauty01:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Apologies for the move c**k up, but lest my intentions be misunderstood from the above comment, I am an active editor in the European empire article space, and have spent a great deal of time cleaning up and improving them. Having recently spent a great deal of time with others on the Dutch Empire article, I turned my attention to the Italian Colonial Empire one. I hope that anyone considering the "revert" proposed above takes the time to read the old [5] and new [6] versions. At least the article is in a half decent state now, instead of a jumbled hodge podge of unsourced, duplicated or irrelevant information. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrickt02:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
In Harold Nicolson page, I wanted to enter a References in Popular Culture item, but did not see that heading, so I opened the References item, added my reference, renamed the item in the item title window below to "References in Popular Culture", checked it and saved. Returning to the page, I noticed that the original References item has totally disappeared, so I tried to add it back in by simply appending it to the References in Popular Culture item, but it does not seem to relink the two items which were there before. Can this be recovered? 17:15, 18 May 2008 User:72.69.134.132
from 15:49, 24 September 2005 on filament (astronomy), to June 2006, the galaxy filament section received no changes, until the article was rebuilt by user:smack as a dab. The contents from start to 24 sept 2005 needs to be attached to filament (cosmology), where it was rewritten, and then cut-and-pasted to the galaxy filament article, so the history ultimately needs to end up at galaxy filament. However, since nothing was merged anywhere from the dablinks to the dabbed articles when user:smack rebuilt the article, the entire history up to June 2006 user:smack's edits can be merged, since they did not affect the other articles being dabbed, only galaxy filament. 70.55.88.176 (talk) 04:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Could someone restore the page histories that were deleted at Wood Brothers Racing and Braun Racing when the pages were moved over redirects. These look like they were backwards merges like the Yates Racing/Newman Haas debacle that was fixed earlier this month and the deleted histories will be needed to fix. Just restore them each to a temp pages for now. Thanks -- Cmjc80 (talk) 02:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Deleted redirect edits are often found under articles which have been moved by an admin over a redirect. Is this requested undeletion necessary? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I found some of edits I was looking for at Wood Brothers and these were definately merged and later unmerged incorrectly. The edits made to Wood Brothers Racing prior to August 14 2006 need to be moved to JTG Racing. After that the edits to Wood Brothers prior to August 14 2006 need to be moved to Wood Brothers Racing.
Braun Racing was also merged incorrectly. The edits prior to Feb 9 2006 need to be moved to Akins Motorsports and the first edit mentioned above to the original Braun Racing article should be merged into the current one.
This compare seems to show that over the day of the supposed cut-and-pastes (14 August 2006) no bulky text was removed from page Wood Brothers Racing; this may to be a case of copy-and-paste, not cut-and-paste. This compare seems to show that the edit moving text from Wood Brothers to Wood Brothers Racing was a partial cut-and-paste, not a complete cut-and-paste leaving only a redirect. Best merely put a note in one or more of these pages' talk pages explaining who had done what? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
The histories need to be reconstructed into complete histories. What I've proposed above will do so with very litte to no overlap. Similar reconstruction was previously applied to Newman/Haas/Lanigan Racing and Yates Racing. A major problem here is that as it stands now, the Wood Brothers Racing page started as a completly different article. The edits made to Wood Brothers Racing prior to August 14 2006 need to be moved to JTG Racing so both have accurate histories. Once that is done, the edits to Wood Brothers prior to August 14 2006 need to be moved to Wood Brothers Racing and two seamless histories will be created. -- Cmjc80 (talk) 01:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
14:46, 13 January 2008 (team has split from the Wood Brothers): User:D-Day changed JTG Racing from redirect to paragraphs cut-and-pasted from Wood Brothers/JTG Racing, with a leading paragraph got from somewhere else (from 16:00, 14 August 2006 edit of what is now Wood Brothers Racing??).
The histories of John Cabot and Giovanni Caboto need merging. Someone moved John Cabot to Giovanni Caboto (using the move function) on October 19, 2007. It was reverted back four days later using copy and paste, with the result being that John Cabot's history only goes back October 2007, and the rest is still at Giovanni Caboto. This only affects the article history; the talk history looks fine. It's possible that I could perform this myself, but it's equally possible that I could screw it up, so I'm passing the buck. Thanks. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Done c&p copyvio deleted, left article at the original title for now, so that it is conform with the titles of all other seasons. --Oxymoron8308:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Please can someome delete the ARCADIS AYH plc page I created and move the original contents from AYH plc to the ARCADIS AYH plc that will then become avaliable, as the company name has changed. I messed this up by doing a C&P move. ANy references to "AYH" will need to be amended to "ARCADIS AYH". Thanks Random Jack (talk) 14:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
The Italian Job and The Italian Job (1969 film) - Today User:Australiaaz performed a cut and paste move (something that they have already been warned about before) of this film and turned the original page into an incomplete disambiguation page. Now the thought behind this isn't necessarily a bad, but, I think as it stand it needs some fixing as edit histories and talk pages are all messed up. I took a look at it but I am afraid that I might make things worse. Please note the naming conventions for films at the Wikipedia filmproject would, in this case, name the film page as The Italian Job, or at most The Italian Job (film). We don't start putting in years until you get to a remake as in The Italian Job (2002 film). When you have chosen a solution to the current situation then someone can create a proper disambiguation page for this set of films and games. Also this editor may need a firmer warning so that they don't keep making the same mistake. Thank you, in advance, for your time and attention in this matter. MarnetteD | Talk05:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
03:25, 28 January 2008: User:210.233.211.96 changed Morph (Marvel Comics) (likely by copy-and-paste from some old version of one of the above pages) from a redirect to a text file, which people after that edited, so creating a content fork.
Morph (Marvel Comics) as it exists now is a recent content fork created by copy-and-paste from some old version of one of the above pages, over a redirect.
Please take a closer look at the edits. The page that existed at Morph (comics) until Sept 14 2007 was pasted onto the Morph (Marvel Comics) redirect on Jan 28 2008. Its a continuation of the exact same article. The only overlapping edits are junk redirect/double redirect corrections mostly made by bots. These should absolutely be merged.
Noughts & Crosses series → Noughts & Crosses Trilogy ; Talk:Noughts & Crosses series → Talk:Noughts & Crosses Trilogy ... Back in January, a user cut-and-pasted the text of the "series" page to a new "Trilogy" page. I reverted it at the time but it seems this user undid that without me noticing, and so other users have been contributing edits to the cut-and-pasted Trilogy page since then. The original talk page was not cut-and-pasted but was left at its old location, and new discussion has taken placed at the Trilogy talk page, so these need to be merged as well. Also, because the series already consists of three novels and a novella with a fourth novel to be published later this year, the merged article should to be moved to its original location of Noughts & Crosses series or to Noughts & Crosses (series). Thanks! -- KittyRainbow (talk) 15:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Sos - This is no a cut-and-paste move, but a popular redirect overwritten by an article. Please move the three most recent edits by Markussep, Alaibot and The Anomebot2 to Sos, Lot-et-Garonne. Thanks, Korg (talk) 01:32, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Done OK, I moved the new history to that location and kept the old history at the redirect. (History split). Thanks. Cool HandLuke02:20, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Benny and the Jets and Bennie and the Jets. A bit of a mess -- "Bennie" was created in May 2006, "Benny" in October 2006 as a redirect. Copy/paste move made in March 2007 by User:Mrstonky Benny/Bennie. This was undone on 29 March by User:Piper108 Benny/Bennie. Then copy/paste moved again by IP 75.3.114.5 on 8 January 2008 Benny/Bennie. I hope all these links help make it easier. (I can see why the shortcut to this page is WP:SPLICE.) Cross porpoises (talk) 16:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
I should mention, it was subject of a recent page move request. The record cover pictured in the article says "Benny" but the song has been sold as both. On Elton John's official website it is "Bennie".[7] I think the way I have followed procedure to get merge, the article will be at "Bennie"? If I have done this the wrong way it is OK to put page at either article and I can go to WP:RM again. Cross porpoises (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Univisión to Univision: I only know how to handle simple cut and paste moves. The problem with this one is that someone nominated the old page for an RFD, creating history after the cut and paste move that occurred on 3 November 2005. Jesse Viviano (talk) 18:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Fredua Adu was cut and pasted to Freddy Adu (diff 1, diff 2). The article should be moved back to its original title of Freddy Adu, before the initial contentious and undiscussed move (diff). --22:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Heavens no - the BEV article only has a few edits, starting with,[8] the electric car article goes back to July 2005, and needs to have the discussion and history moved. This is the first edit for the to do page and refers to the BEV article.[9] I have been pretty much avoiding both articles until the mess gets cleaned up. 199.125.109.105 (talk) 20:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Done but for the talk pages I just linked to the old discussions since the cut/pasting has already made a bit of a mess and I don't want to make it any worse. Tra(Talk)23:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
There are two 200 mile NASCAR races at Dover each year. The problem is, the "Dover 200" name was moved from one race to the other in 2007. After the c/p move the Dover 200 page was rewritten into a page that already existed. -- Cmjc80 (talk) 20:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
In both pages the last race listed is 2007. What belongs with what belongs with what? Were the names of the two races swopped? Whatever happened, describe it on those pages. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:34, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this qualifies as a pure cut&paste, but I've merged the contents of Unicode normalization into Unicode equivalence, because the former was a meaningless table without the latter. This was not a simple cut&paste though. I'm not sure what, if anything can be done about the page histories. 19:01 & 19:06, 28 August 2008 User:VasileGaburici
Not for the faint of heart: older revisions of Dragon Warrior (disambiguation) (20:17, October 24, 2004 and earlier) pertain to the video game series currently at Dragon Warrior. The article started at Dragon Warrior and was moved elsewhere by cut and paste. Then part 1 of the article history was over-written by a disambig page. Then the disambig page was moved to Dragon Warrior (disambiguation) and part 2 of the history was moved back to Dragon Warrior. — CharlotteWebb20:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Partly Done: I have history-split Dragon Warrior (disambiguation), moving the edits 20:17, October 24, 2004 and earlier to Dragon Warrior (version 2). There are systematic running differences between the simultaneous parts of these 2 versions, which are for part of year 2004:
Dragon Warrior mentions a country called Alefgard, and does not have sections ==North American Games List== and ==Fan Translation Games List==.
Dragon Warrior (version 2) does not mention Alefgard, and has sections ==North American Games List== and ==Fan Translation Games List==.
History merge is inappropriate in this case. The two articles have parallel histories, so history merging them would hopelessly shuffle the edits together. In these cases, we just not the origin of the content in the history and perhaps on the talk page. The history of Kinsey scale should stay at that redirect. Cool HandLuke01:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
They've both existed separately for more than two years, and even though both might link to some of the same articles, there's no indication that the list was even used as a basis for the template. And even if it was, it's rarely a good idea to merge articles into templates. History merge should usually only be used when the same content is clearly cut-and-pasted from one place to another, it's not the case here. - Bobet10:12, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Von Rothbart into Swan Lake - collateral from cut and paste merger, now there is no link to the history of the first in the edit summary of the latter, therefore I tagged {{histmerge}}. Cool Hand Luke, however, then removed it, dismissing the claim because: "History merge inappropriate. These articles existed in parallel, so merging would hopelessly shuffle their histories together." - now surely there is now an issue with GFDL compliance given the von Rothbart section of Swan Lake (where the old article now redirects) is completely attributed to the cut-and-pasted the section, and not the actual contributors to the old Von Rothbart article. It seems to me that we can't leave the two pages as they are, if I've gone wrong somewhere, please feel free to put me in my place and explain the reasoning! - Toon0519:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok, fair enough, now would we need to include a link to the original article at the bottom of Swan Lake, for GFDL-attribution purposes? - Toon0500:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
In all other entries, the first-named page in each pair seems to have no history except redirects and either that request has already been obeyed, or that request is a plain move request which should have been put in Wikipedia:Requested moves. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I apologise for this, since it's my "work", and because as an admin i should know what to do in these circumstances - but I've never merged page histories before. I've just cut & pasted everything that was at Dunedin branch into the National Association for Science Fiction article. The Dunedin branch article was a speedy A7 candidate and I've since speedied it. Trouble is, of course, the page history. All the edits relevant to the text were done by one ediutor, but in several edits (they're shown at Special:Undelete/Dunedin_branch). My editing of them into the N.A.S.F. article is shown in this edit, and I have subsequently copyedited the addition to the N.A.S.F. page. If anyone could (a) perform the history merge and (b) instruct me how to do history merges myself in order to avoid this happening ain future, I'd be very grateful! Grutness...wha?11:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Not done, as they are parallel versions. If page A has been text-merged into page B, and pages A and B were edited independently before that, do not then histmerge A into B, else the history of B will come to contain the history of page A jumbled in with the history of page B. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
WFLB and WAZZ: {Discuss}: WFLB appears to have been created for the purpose of describing an FM station located in Fayetteville, North Carolina. I intended to edit the article about the station but didn't get around to it because my source had information related to other stations. One of those stations was WAZZ, and I made the majority of contributions to that article. When I looked at the WFLB article intending to add to it, I realized nearly all the content (the rest was links and templates) referred to WAZZ (once called WFLB) or to a defunct TV station, and the WAZZ-related content should be moved to the WAZZ article. But copying and pasting the content would be improper because the original contributors to the WFLB article would no longer be in the history that goes with that content.Vchimpanzee· talk·contributions·18:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC).
Histmerge impossible, as these two pages have been edited in parallel. I made the text merge. The text in page WAZZ "On August 1, 1996, ... bought WFLB along with WAZZ and WEWO. ...... Soon after that in 1997, the station swapped letters with WAZZ." seems to imply that there are two radio stations involved, WFLB and WAZZ; someone who knows more than me about the history of USA radio stations please clarify. (I live in England.) Did radio stations WFLB and WAZZ genuinely take each other's letter codes in 1997? Or what happened? The existing text seems to be all about the radio station that was WFLB and is now WAZZ; some information would be useful about the radio station that was WAZZ and is now WFLB. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
WKAP (former Allentown radio station) and WYHM → WSAN - The station changed their call sign to WYHM and changed formats in 2006 but the article was never moved and a new page was created for WYHM. When the format and call sign was changed again in 2007 to the current WSAN aother new article was created. According to the guidelines on Wikipedia:WikiProject Radio Stations, the station article should have just been moved to the new call letters both times with a new section added for each format. Since most of the info on the pages are redundant, and it should have remained one article all along, the page histories should just be merged. Thanks, RobDe68 (talk) 22:40, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
This is an example of copy-and-paste, not cut-and-paste. These articles have overlapping history. In fact, they all currently exist. History merging them is inappropriate because it would shuffle all the edits together chronologically, which would destroy their context. It could be that two or more of these pages should be merged, but a history merge is not needed; just redirect the extras. If you need to combine some of the content, just note the location for the original content, then paste it into the final destination. Turn the merged article into a redirect, and the history should be left there for future reference. Cool HandLuke23:15, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I made both pages redirects to their section in the main article. I still think the lion's share of the station's history (keep in mind all 3 articles are essentially about the same station) is on the redirect "WKAP (former..." and should be with the main article page, but I guess that's just not possible. RobDe68 (talk) 17:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
I moved some pages around so that the original article is now the main page and the 2 newer articles are now redirects. I made a note on the talk page that some edit history for that station can be found on the redirect pages. I think that's the best that can be done in this case. Thanks, RobDe68 (talk) 21:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
It's probably too late to do anything about this but a cut-n-paste occurred here when the content of Ordos people was moved to Ordos culture. Ordos people was made a redirect to Ordos culture a few days later. Both pages have prior and subsequent histories. The current location (Ordos culture) is a better location for the subject (the prehistoric people) but I want to make a stub for the modern Ordos people (a Mongol subgroup) and wonder if the history could all be consolidated before I do it. — AjaxSmack 20:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
This one should not be done. The Sprint Nextel article was based upon Sprint Corporation, but also an older version of Sprint Nextel that existed before August 2005. These versions were inadvertently deleted in a previous merge and never restored. I have restored them, so now one can see that the two articles existed simultaneously and were edited apart from each other before 14 Aug, 2005. Therefore, these separate threads should not be merged together. Very good catch. I've been impressed with your finds. Cool HandLuke07:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Emergency tourniquet & Tourniquet. I realize that this isn't really a copy and paste situation, but hear me out. The page currently known at "Emergency tourniquet" used to be named "Tourniquet." On 2 April 2007, "Tourniquet" was moved to "Emergency tourniquet," and a new stub was started at "Tourniquet." A few weeks later (and after 2 very minor edits), on 29 April 2007, the "Emergency tourniquet" article was abandoned a sentence or two used to create another article (Emergency bleeding control). Now, I want to revive the old "Emergency tourniquet" article (a decent article) and move it back to "Tourniquet" (still a stub after almost 1 year). Rather than renaming the current "Tourniquet" article to a new page that will never again be accessed just to preserve the history, why not history merge the articles? There are only 2 overlapping edits that are very minor. Otherwise, these articles developed sequentially with no parallel edits. If these articles are merged, I would then revert to this version and continue editing from there, merging back some content from the current stub page. I think this is the best way to handle the situation, as there would be no copying and pasting between articles. --Scott Alter19:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
I believe the reason surgical tourniquet got its own article is because it is pneumatic. However, the general use of the term tourniquet is non-pneumatic, but not necessarily for emergency use. Non-pneumatic usage is much more common for venipuncture than it is to stop emergency bleeding. I don't think "tourniquets for venipuncture" needs a separate article than tourniquets for bleeding control. I requested the history merge because there were no parallel histories (until your recent changes), besides two minor edits immediately after one article was turned into a redirect. --Scott Alter00:24, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
The current situation seems to be satisfactory. Page Emergency tourniquet has the history of the long article about emergency tourniquets. Page Tourniquet has the history of the short article which is a short summary and a disambig between Emergency tourniquet and Surgical tourniquet. The move from Tourniquet to Emergency tourniquet is listed in Tourniquet's log as "23:17, 2 April 2007 Gnoble (Talk | contribs | block) moved Tourniquet to Emergency tourniquet (This article deals principally with emergency tourniquets, and not other types like surgical tourniquets. This move is being made as part of several other changes and additions to the Wiki tourniquet-related content.)", i,e, it was a proper move, not a cut-and-paste. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Court TV -> Tru TV Channel changed names on Jan 1 2008, please histmerge. If possible, please do no include the Jan 1 edits to Court TV as the page should have been a straight move. -- Cmjc80 (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
History merge looks inappropriate to me. They are the same network and should be merged, but the Tru TV article was re-written from scratch and has a different history. Cool HandLuke04:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
The page was supposed to be moved and rewritten on the new page. Why do you want to loose 4 years of edit history to a redirect page? Even the editor that made the new page(Mr. Senseless) agrees it was the incorrect thing to do Talk:TruTV -- Cmjc80 (talk) 04:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
When topics are merged, the history of one of them always stays at the redirect. There are tons of redirects with years worth of history. Cool HandLuke07:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
They did indeed develop simultaneously. For that reason, a history merge would be inappropriate. The edits would be hopelessly shuffled together. Cool HandLuke02:08, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Done Le Quan Ninh to Lê Quan Ninh {{db-move}}, found needed histmerge, delayed by trouble from SQL errors from server trouble. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Not done. Parallel histories. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Comment: The attributions that were in Dragon Warrior (version 2) have been moved to Dragon Warrior (NES game). Steel1943 (talk) 17:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)