Talk:Lacerte

Sorry, the discussion tab was empty, so I didn't know this had been through VfD. My reasoning for a redirect was that it's a duplicate copy of what's in the Intuit article, and if Quicken doesn't warrant its own article, Lacerte certainly doesn't. -- Norvy (talk) 05:50, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly a good point -- I'm not sure if (or for how much longer) Lacerte is notable. Especially since it's a division of Intuit now. The only counterexample I could think of is Intuit Canada, formerly WinTax, which was acquired in 1993. Apparently it draws enough support to have a separate article, although it was largely written by an Intuit Canada employee. Wonder what the outcome of a VfD would be there ;-)

Meanwhile, what do you think is the best course of action for the Lacerte article? W/o violating the prior VfD? Jbetak 06:56, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think a keep VfD vote precludes later merging. Merges should take place without a VfD, and the content is already in the Intuit article. A redirect would be appropriate here. -- Norvy (talk) 16:12, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Norvy. Sorry for the delay -- I'm not opposed to a merge of both articles, which effectively means a redirect, since as you have pointed out, the Intuit article already contains all the pertinent info. I was wondering though, if the VfD didn't included "merge" as an option -- I believe I saw two votes for a "merge" there. There were six clear "keeps". What do you think? Should I perhaps contact the voters to see how the feel about it now? Jbetak 02:59, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like to contact them, that's fine. VfD (AfD now) explicitly says If a page can serve as a useful redirect or be merged somewhere, do not list it here. Doing so only clutters AfD. The keep votes won, and the content is preserved, just not in its own article. -- Norvy (talk) 03:29, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the question at WP:WQA, no, a prior keep vote does not preclude any future action (not even later deletion). So you should be WP:BOLD and do what you think is best, taking the opinions expressed above into account. It's worth reading the VfD, of course, but you are not bound by it. There's not a lot of need to contact those involved in the debate to check with them since, if they have an interest in the article, they will (or at least should) have it watchlisted. A redirect is usually a good idea if the information is largely duplicated. If someone disagrees with your action, they can discuss it with you (or revert you). -Splash 01:46, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cool -- Splash, thank you for taking the time to set this straight! Thanks for your cooperation Norvy. Jbetak 05:14, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]