Proposed Mergers vs Deletions on Wikipedia: How to Decide

Every week, hundreds of Wikipedia articles face a simple but high-stakes question: should they be merged into another page, or deleted entirely? It’s not about popularity. It’s not about how much someone likes the topic. It’s about whether the article meets Wikipedia’s core standards: notability, verifiability, and neutrality. If you’ve ever wondered why some obscure blog posts vanish while others get folded into larger topics, here’s how the real decisions get made.

What Triggers a Merge or Deletion Proposal?

Not every article gets flagged. Most stay untouched. But when an article gets flagged, it’s usually because someone noticed one or more red flags. Common triggers include:

The article covers a topic that’s too narrow or personal - like a local high school club with no outside coverage.
It duplicates content already covered in another article - for example, a biography of a minor politician who’s already mentioned in a larger article about their party.
The content is mostly original research, opinion, or unverified claims - no reliable sources to back it up.
The article is a stub with less than 100 words and no clear path to expansion.
It’s been flagged repeatedly for bias, promotional language, or copyright issues.

These flags don’t automatically mean deletion. They mean: time to check the rules.

Merges: When Two Articles Become One

Merging isn’t a punishment. It’s a cleanup. Wikipedia isn’t a personal blog - it’s a reference work. If two articles cover the same subject from slightly different angles, they should be combined.

Take the case of “List of 2010s indie rock bands from Portland, Oregon.” It had only six entries, all with no external sources. Meanwhile, the article “Music of Portland, Oregon” already had a section on indie rock. Instead of deleting the list, editors proposed a merge. The six bands were moved into the larger article, properly cited with sources from local newspapers and music magazines. The original page became a redirect. Result? Cleaner structure. Better sourcing. No loss of information.

Good merges follow a simple rule: keep the most comprehensive, best-sourced article. The other becomes a redirect. You don’t delete content - you move it to where it belongs.

Deletions: When an Article Has No Place Here

Deletion is the last resort. But it happens - and it should. Wikipedia isn’t a hosting platform. It’s an encyclopedia. That means it only includes topics that meet specific, documented criteria.

One of the most common deletion reasons? Lack of notability. In 2024, over 21,000 articles were proposed for deletion on the English Wikipedia. Of those, about 7,800 were deleted. Why? Most were about people, businesses, or events with no independent coverage in reliable media. Think: a self-published author with no reviews, a local bakery with no mention outside its own website, a minor sports team that never made the news.

Here’s a real example: an article on “Dr. Elena Ruiz, pediatrician at Maplewood Clinic.” The article listed her education, her job, and her hobbies. No interviews. No published research. No mention in any local newspaper or medical journal. It was written by a family member. After a week of discussion, the article was deleted. Why? Because Wikipedia requires independent, published sources to prove someone or something matters enough to document.

The Key Difference: Merge vs Delete

The line between merging and deleting is thin - but critical.

Merge happens when the content is valid but redundant. The information is useful, but it’s already covered elsewhere. You move it. You don’t throw it out.

Delete happens when the content is invalid or unsupported. There’s no reliable source. No verifiable facts. No broader relevance. It doesn’t belong here - anywhere.

Here’s a quick decision tree:

Is the topic covered in another article? → Yes → Can the content be moved and properly cited? → Yes → Merge.
Is the topic covered in another article? → Yes → Can the content be moved and properly cited? → No → Delete.
Is the topic NOT covered elsewhere? → Yes → Are there at least two independent, reliable sources that discuss the topic in depth? → Yes → Keep.
Is the topic NOT covered elsewhere? → Yes → Are there fewer than two reliable sources? → Yes → Delete.

This isn’t opinion. It’s policy. Wikipedia’s notability guidelines and verifiability policy are the law here. Editors don’t vote based on feelings. They vote based on evidence.

A library table with printed Wikipedia articles, sources, and a decision being made between deleting and merging content.

What Happens During a Deletion Discussion?

When an article is proposed for deletion, it goes to a public discussion page - usually Articles for Deletion (AfD). Anyone can participate. But not all opinions matter equally.

Here’s what counts:

References to reliable sources (books, newspapers, academic journals, major media outlets)
Direct quotes from Wikipedia’s policies
Specific reasons why the article fails to meet standards

What doesn’t count:

“I think this is boring.”
“I don’t like this person.”
“This should be on a different wiki.”

Final decisions are made by experienced editors - called administrators - who close the discussion. They don’t tally votes. They weigh arguments based on policy. A single well-reasoned comment citing policy can outweigh ten emotional ones.

What to Do If Your Article Is Proposed for Deletion

If you created an article and it’s flagged, don’t panic. You still have options.

First: read the discussion. Don’t argue. Don’t edit-war. Listen. Ask yourself: Can I find two independent, reliable sources that mention this topic in detail? If yes, add them. If no, consider whether the content belongs elsewhere.

Second: improve it. Add citations. Expand it. Fix tone. If the article is too narrow, propose a merge. Redirect readers to a better article.

Third: if you’re sure it belongs, defend it - with evidence. Not with passion. With sources.

Most articles saved from deletion were saved because someone added a credible source - not because they yelled louder.

Why This System Works

Wikipedia has over 6.6 million articles in English. It can’t be everything. It can’t be everyone’s favorite blog, hobby site, or personal memory. It has to be trustworthy.

The merge/deletion system keeps it that way. It’s not perfect. Sometimes good articles get deleted by mistake. Sometimes bad ones stick around too long. But the system is designed to be slow, deliberate, and evidence-based.

Compare that to social media, where anything goes. Wikipedia’s strength isn’t its size - it’s its restraint.

A glowing stone decision tree showing merge and delete paths with citations and sources.

Common Myths About Merges and Deletions

Myth: “Deletion means the topic doesn’t matter.” → Truth: It means it doesn’t meet Wikipedia’s standards for encyclopedic coverage.
Myth: “Merges are a way to erase small communities.” → Truth: Merges preserve information by putting it where it can be found and cited properly.
Myth: “Only admins can delete articles.” → Truth: Anyone can propose deletion. Only admins close discussions, but they follow community consensus.
Myth: “If it’s on Wikipedia, it must be true.” → Truth: Wikipedia doesn’t guarantee truth - it guarantees that claims are backed by sources.

How to Help Improve the Process

You don’t need to be an admin to help. Here’s how:

When you see a poorly sourced article, add a citation - even if it’s just one.
If you find a duplicate, propose a merge with a clear reason.
Participate in AfD discussions - but only if you can cite policy or sources.
Don’t revert deletions without evidence. If you care, improve the article first.

Wikipedia survives because people care enough to fix it - not because they want to protect every little thing they’ve ever written.

What’s the difference between a merge and a deletion on Wikipedia?

A merge moves content from one article to another when the topics overlap and the information is valid but redundant. A deletion removes an article entirely when the content lacks reliable sources, doesn’t meet notability standards, or can’t be improved. Merges preserve useful information; deletions remove content that doesn’t belong.

Can I get a deleted Wikipedia article restored?

Yes, if you can show new, reliable sources that prove the topic meets Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. You can request restoration through the Articles for Creation or Deletion review process. But simply disagreeing with the deletion won’t work - you need evidence, not opinion.

Why do some small topics stay on Wikipedia while others get deleted?

It’s not about size - it’s about sourcing. A small-town mayor might stay if major newspapers covered their election, policies, or controversies. A self-published author might be deleted even if they have 10,000 followers online, because Wikipedia requires independent, third-party coverage - not social media popularity.

Do I need to be an expert to participate in deletion discussions?

No. But you need to follow the rules. You don’t need to be an admin or have years of experience. You just need to cite Wikipedia’s policies - like notability or verifiability - and point to reliable sources. A well-reasoned comment from a new editor can change the outcome.

What happens to the history of a deleted article?

The full edit history is preserved and can be viewed by administrators. It’s not lost. If the article is restored later, the history comes back with it. This protects against vandalism and allows editors to learn from past mistakes.

How long does a deletion or merge discussion usually take?

Most discussions last seven days. Some extend longer if there’s strong disagreement or if new sources are added. The key is not speed - it’s thoroughness. Administrators wait until enough input has been given before closing the discussion.

Final Thought: It’s Not About Control - It’s About Clarity

Wikipedia’s deletion and merger system isn’t about silencing voices. It’s about making sure that when someone looks up a fact, they get something accurate, reliable, and useful. It’s a system built by volunteers who care more about truth than ego.

If you’ve ever written something you hoped would live on Wikipedia - and it didn’t - that’s not a failure. It’s a signal. Maybe it needs a better home. Maybe it needs better sources. Maybe it’s not ready yet. But it’s not gone forever. And if you’re willing to meet the standards, you can always try again.