This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
I think it would be indie to inckude all of the content in the film company that took it over. That company acquired several film companies. Are you gping to inckude the background and history of all of them in this detail? One of them is already a separate article. This film company played a significamt role in early film history and through.the company that succeeded it. That is why it's discussed substantially in reliable independent sources. The article on its successor company does not inckude details about its talent or the films it released and shouldn't. Even if it were merged it should be created and then merged for attrobution. There is no reason for this article to languish in draftspace. FloridaArmy (talk) 13:03, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
amerge can be discussed better in mainspace, so I accepted it. , I think the first step would be to see just what films it produced, so we can tell how much content there will be. DGG ( talk ) 06:41, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]