Talk:N-po generation

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 30 June 2019. Further details are available here.

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To merge, given the overlap in content; to merge to N-po generation as the broader topic. Klbrain (talk) 15:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Think the scope of this page overlaps too heavily with Sampo generation. Propose the pages be merged, although I'm not sure if it should be under "Sampo generation" or "N-po generation".

Here are various pro arguments for each title.

Pro-"N-po":

"N-po" is the broader category that "Sampo" fits under

Pro-"Sampo generation":

"Sampo generation" is probably the more WP:COMMONNAME for the concept, although it is a subcategory of "N-po"
"N-po" emerged after "Sampo"
"Sampo" is easier to remember than "N-po"

I'm leaning towards "N-po". Please discuss toobigtokale (talk) 00:09, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Sampo generation#Merge for a previous relevant discussion thread.

My thoughts:

While Sampo is a subcategory of "N-po", I don't think it is sufficiently independently notable enough to merit a separate page.
- Case in point, the content of the two articles currently overlap to a significant degree. The stuff that's relatively exclusive on either page I think is informative to understanding both Sampo and N-po.
- N-po is kind of a jokey riff based on Sampo (i.e. "Oh, you've given up on x? Well I've given up on even more!"). I see it as a "scale from one to ten" kind of thing; I'd say the concepts are trying to express degrees of an identical feeling, and not a precise distinction between exactly how many things are hard for people
While the kowiki has separate articles for Sampo and N-po, Namuwiki only has one for N-po, with a redir on Sampo to N-po.
- Although of course, precedent isn't everything; the kowiki and namuwiki are very much not perfect.
Subjective, but if I ask myself "is my understanding of the topic richer by having these as seperate articles?", I'd say it isn't, and especially not at present because of the strong overlap.

toobigtokale (talk) 00:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I commented there with oppose. I don't have time to re-review the sources I mention there, feel free to criticize my analysis from that time, but for now I'll default to weak oppose until such a time that I can re-review the sources again. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:49, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have the 9,964 bytes article Sam-po generation, created 2013 and the 8,225 bytes article N-po generation, created 30 June 2019, in the frame of a so-called "educational assignment". Both of them could be merged into The Sorrows of Young Werther, but who will do the job ? The same question applies to a simple merging of the "3" versus "N" articles. Is there really someone who intents to take the time for such a merging ? Pldx1 (talk) 19:16, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can do the merge; bit confused what you mean with the Sorrows of Young Werther page though toobigtokale (talk) 21:02, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it was a reference to the sorrows of youth in general? I am still not sure merge is a godo idea, per my old comments that I did not have time revise since, but note I opposed merger before and I see no reason to change my view (by there I mean Talk:Sampo_generation#Merge). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:56, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see, I don't have strong feelings about it so if there's no momentum I think can keep. That said if others read and want to contribute to the conversation please do toobigtokale (talk) 16:29, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with either; merging them soon is more important than picking the perfect page name. ErrorDestroyer (talk) 06:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Merge N-po is really a variation for the term "Sampo" rather than a totally different term. I don't see why the two would be better as separate articles. 00101984hjw (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 15:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]