Talk:Purdue University Fort Wayne
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Jax 0677 in topic Merger Proposal
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Purdue University Fort Wayne article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Merger Proposal
editClosing per request at WP:ANRFC. There is no consensus for a merge.
- The following discussion 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.
This article was a WP:REDUNDANTFORK. It's content added over the past few months should be merged back into Indiana University – Purdue University Fort Wayne and then the resulting article renamed Purdue University Fort Wayne with redirects from the former name. The article fork was wrong, IPFW was just rebranded PFW and a few departments went to a new IUFW campus (which consists solely of the Neff building leased from PFW). As evidence the "new" PFW website: https://www.pfw.edu/ ( and note that http://www.ipfw.edu redirects there) claims they've been around since 1964 and have 60,000+ alumni. KelleyCook (talk) 17:53, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
- Merge into PFW page instead of IPFW page. IPFW was formally dissolved after the 2017–18 school year—it no longer exists as a corporate entity. That said, if there's a merge, I believe it would be more appropriate to merge the IPFW content into the PFW page (and maybe create a separate IPFW history page if enough content can be found down the line). Since it appears that PFW is maintaining most if not all of IPFW's institutional history, and the IPFW athletic program was completely transferred to PFW (including a rebrand as "Purdue Fort Wayne"), a merge into PFW makes more sense. — Dale Arnett (talk) 00:09, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - There is sufficient content in each of the 3 articles, and merging would be quite choppy. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:45, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- 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.