Deletion of Epicaricacy

Comment: I'm going to |assume good faith on Betsy's nom, but I call keep in the first place on the sole grounds that AFD is not the forum for discussing redirect.  No real reason to delete, and it's not purely a dicdef at this point.  Improvements noted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF)

Comment: to schadenfreude as {{tlx|R from merge}}, which I believe is required under GDFL since some new content has been merged there. Its meaning overlaps so closely with schadenfreude that they are synonyms, and it would be a violation of policy Wikipedia:Content forking to retain a separate article. Article content about the emotion should be merged there. Article content that is merely about etymology may find a good home on Wiktionary, but does |not belong here
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC)

Comment: to Schadenfreude. My arguments, based on , are on the article talk page and quoted by betsythedevine above. The question is not whether the article does now or might in the future contain some encyclopaedic content. It is whether "epicaricacy" has any significantly different meaning from "Schadenfreude", and I have as yet seen no claim or evidence that it does
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NAD)

Comment: per 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NAD)