Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flying Turns (Hersheypark)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Philadelphia Toboggan Coasters. (non-admin closure) Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 11:06, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flying Turns (Hersheypark)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article contains information about a roller coaster that never existed. It was a design concept, in which very little information exists. I have imported the information into the main Philadelphia Toboggan Coasters article, so this one can be safely deleted. GoneIn60 (talk) 19:38, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

confirm Merge then Delete. --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 21:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I support a speedy merge and delete, though some of this information will be incorporated into the Hersheypark article, as well as the PTC article. Does my contribution to this discussion speed up the process since I was the primary contributor to the article? (I believe all other edits were of a grammatical or technical nature.)--hmich176 04:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect with keep - The contents have been merged and as such requries that author attribution be maintained which is acchieved by keeping the soruce article for its history and redirecting. See WP:COPYWITHIN. -- Whpq (talk) 17:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments. I was careless about the way I merged the contents, not realizing that proper attribution should have been used in the edit summary. I will be mindful of this in the future. I agree that using a redirect instead of outright deletion is a better solution to preserve the source's history. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.