Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Types of irons

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 merge to Iron (golf). \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 03:57, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Types of irons[edit]

Iron (golf) covers the subject already. It is doubtful that sufficient content exists to warrant a separate article. Indeed this article does not really expand on its parent. _wjemather ^bigissue 10:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge what little non-duplicated content there is (basically the definition of 'muscle back' and the difference between split and full cavity backs) to iron (golf) and then redirect ~~there~~ as a somewhat likely search term. Olaf Davis (talk) 10:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Iron (disambiguation) is a much better redirect target as Wjemather says. Olaf Davis (talk) 15:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Golf-related deletion discussions. —_wjemather ^bigissue 10:18, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect per above. Article in question is basically just a duplicate. Cheers, I'^mperator 12:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. To me, despite being an avid golfer, types of irons doesn't automatically lead me to think iron (golf), but also iron (appliance), fetters, etc. and as such maybe Iron_(disambiguation) would be a better redirect target. _wjemather ^bigissue 13:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Passive/KeepI am willing to work toward makeing sure this article has sufficient content and citeations over the next week. Right now muscle back and cavity back redirect there which gives it more hits than before i merged them a week ago. Pictures of them may also come in the future which will require a separate article. Username 1 (talk) 14:19, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Iron (golf) has plenty of room for pictures, doesn't it? Olaf Davis (talk) 10:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge & Redirect - Pictures do not warrant a second article. As of now, there is no need for a separate article. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 17:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect as above. This is duplicative. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:49, 2 July 2009 (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.