Greater Armenia (state): It's not a broad-concept article , and may not stand for a separate topic from Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity) .  Although most of its material lacks reliable sources, A455bcd9 replaced it with a section similar to Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity)#Provinces (see here ) and eventually turned it to a dab (see here ) again one month after they proposed the merge.  Given that the consensus in the merge discussion is not clear, I restored the dab at the base name and moved the article here to obtain further consensus if it should be deleted or blanked and redirected .  NmWTfs85lXusaybq ( talk ) 10:54, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Armenia .  NmWTfs85lXusaybq ( talk ) 10:54, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There was a consensus: 4 users were ok for turning the page into a dab and provided reasons to do so.  Two users opposed the move but based on their answer, we can assume that they did not understand the question and when asked for precision they didn't reply.  Anyway, you decided to override the merge process and to create the dab, that's fine.  But then why did you reopen the merge discussion ?  I don't understand what you're doing.  a455bcd9 (Antoine) ( talk ) 14:46, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Regarding this process: as I said in the merge discussion, I could not find any RS describing "Greater Armenia" as anything else than the Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity) , or part of it, or the region that used to be part of it.  So I'm fine with all options: delete "Greater Armenia (state)", redirect it to Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity) , or rename it to "Greater Armenia (region)" to describe the region (although I'm not sure it would reach the notability threshold in that case).  I'd tend to favor Blank and redirect to Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity) .  a455bcd9 (Antoine) ( talk ) 15:18, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ P Aculeius , Caeciliusinhorto-public , KhndzorUtogh , Avrand6 ,  and Rager7 : Also ping the participants of the previous merge discussion.  NmWTfs85lXusaybq ( talk ) 15:40, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Neither: merge the content, and then restore the disambiguation page.  This isn't a deletion argument, because the title has some encyclopedic value and the content that was here should be/should have been merged into "Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity)".   It shouldn't be a redirect, because there's a secondary (or perhaps even primary) meaning in a nationalist concept of Armenia extending beyond its present borders.   The existence of two or more plausible meanings for the phrase is what justifies a disambiguation page; and we do not need to delete the article and create a new page for that purpose in order to hide what was previously written and merged into "Kingdom of Armenia (antiquity)".   The original source of merged content is usually kept, with the content available for review under article history, unless for some reason it violated copyright or was patent nonsense.  Here the reasons for merging are that it's overlapping and underdeveloped.   The lack of sources isn't even an issue in this regard.   As far as I could see, the only arguments opposing the merger seemed to be vague assertions that the topic was somehow distinct in a way that could not be clearly described; and it seemed to me that they were coming from the perspective of modern Armenian nationalism, rather than anything to do with the article as it stood.  P Aculeius ( talk ) 17:12, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Greater Armenia has already been a disambiguation page, while we might want to merge the history there.  The only issue is that the merge proposer

Discussion outcome: redirect