At the top of this section Funkynusayri said "this article should rather be called Nordic race with Nordic supremacy theory as a sub-section of it". That's not an objection to merging, it's an argument in favour of merging, with one aspect contained within another in the same article. We all know that there was historical concept of a 'Nordic race'. No-one disputes that. The question is whether there is any point having a separate article about it, distinct from the cultural and ideological uses to which it has been put. If both can managably be contained in the same article, then they should be. The Mediterranean race article contains both aspects, and so should this one. The title is rather a separate question. Nordic theory is a name that was created by user:fastfission to merge the term Nordic race with the idea that the concept became historically significant because there were specific theories about it. After all, that's what makes this page different from the others. This topic has a long, sometimes acrimonious, Talk page. If you look up Mediterranean race there is far less discussion, and there is almost none on Alpine race or Dinaric race. I don't mind what the title is, but the difference in title does reflect the reality that theories about this issue have been historically and ideologically significant, while theories about other European "sub-races" have been purely academic.