Talk:Isotactic

Merged with tacticity. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. All content was unreferenced and 100% redundant with contenct already contained in tacticity article. Irene Ringworm 00:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently merge was too bold. I didn't expect any controversy. Please discuss below.Irene Ringworm 19:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In favor of merge[edit]

Policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary. This page is nearly 100% redundant (including the picture) with the page labeled tacticity. Unless there are plans in the works to expand this article with, for example, multiple notable examples of isotactic polymers, I suggest we merge. Will merge in 7 days if there are no responses. Irene Ringworm 19:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed to merge: article could well expand into larger technical article devoted entirely to isotactic polymers.Will take some time though and we do not wish to discourage expects in the field of isotactic polymers to have their specialist contribution added to the very general and entry-level tacticity article. I also carefully read the dictionary guidelines but really was not able to find any justification there for this merge. PS this merge discussion should take place on the tacticity talk page not here according to the merge tag V8rik 21:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Against merge[edit]