 | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 July 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from P. Sathasivam appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 August 2013. The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Merge
edit- Support, for the reverse merge order !
- P Sathasivam (created on 1 July 2013) should be merged with P. Sathasivam (created on 29 June 2013). As per nameing conventions, correct name should be P. Sathasivam as in P. Chidambaram -- --Mrutyunjaya Kar (talk) 10:08, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Proposed merge with P. Sathasivam
editduplication of information Uncletomwood (talk) 08:46, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- Support, for the reverse merge order !
- P Sathasivam (created on 1 July 2013) should be merged with P. Sathasivam (created on 29 June 2013). As per nameing conventions, correct name should be P. Sathasivam as in P. Chidambaram--Mrutyunjaya Kar (talk) 09:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- The page name should be P. Sathasivam (not P .Sathasivam, a pretty obvious typo). This doesn't even warrant a merge discussion. And re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/P. Sathasivam, editing is not a competition. Merge the articles together and bring it to DYK (once it meets the criteria, which it currently doesn't)—you can (and should) list credit for all major contributors in the DYK nom process. czar · · 17:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- * There is absolutely no reason why this should be merged with or redirected to the new article created by uncletomwood today. It seems some bits in both articles are copied from 'Outlook India' but that can be put right - the older, original article should have been expanded. Also, the Chief Justice assumes office later this month, but uncletomwood's article gives the impression he has already done so.That is wrong.--Zananiri (talk) 21:23, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- If the subjects of the article are the same, it follows that the content should be merged. Where to? The title that best fits the subject, which is the one with the proper spelling. czar · · 00:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
- * There is absolutely no reason why this should be merged with or redirected to the new article created by uncletomwood today. It seems some bits in both articles are copied from 'Outlook India' but that can be put right - the older, original article should have been expanded. Also, the Chief Justice assumes office later this month, but uncletomwood's article gives the impression he has already done so.That is wrong.--Zananiri (talk) 21:23, 1 July 2013 (UTC)