| Revision as of 20:41, 24 February 2007 editEyrian (talk | contribs)10,448 edits Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:54, 24 February 2007 edit undoXomic (talk | contribs)1,271 edits →merge to []?Next edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| I wish to merge this article with the list of uncommon fetishes, this a stub and not be notable; any objections.--]<sub>]</sub> 20:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | I wish to merge this article with the list of uncommon fetishes, this a stub and not be notable; any objections.--]<sub>]</sub> 20:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :I am opposed to such a merge. Why would combining this into a larger list article make any more sense? Unless the various articles in such lists are deeply interdependent, they should be split into multiple articles. Also, what do you mean by not notable? Uniform fetishism is a common occurrence. --] 20:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | :I am opposed to such a merge. Why would combining this into a larger list article make any more sense? Unless the various articles in such lists are deeply interdependent, they should be split into multiple articles. Also, what do you mean by not notable? Uniform fetishism is a common occurrence. --] 20:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::It's also a stub with no sources.--]<sub>]</sub> 20:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:54, 24 February 2007
merge to List of uncommon fetishes?
I wish to merge this article with the list of uncommon fetishes, this a stub and not be notable; any objections.--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 20:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- I am opposed to such a merge. Why would combining this into a larger list article make any more sense? Unless the various articles in such lists are deeply interdependent, they should be split into multiple articles. Also, what do you mean by not notable? Uniform fetishism is a common occurrence. --Eyrian 20:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's also a stub with no sources.--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 20:54, 24 February 2007 (UTC)