Talk:Alice Cleaver

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Merge target[edit]

There doesn't seem to be a consensus on where to put a biography of this person. We have:

Paging @CactusWriter:, @Seaveral:. I haven't made a firm decision yet on which way is correct, so let's discuss matters. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:43, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the page, Ritchie333. I see that this article was first deleted way back when at a 2004 AFD deletion due to some confusing and inaccurate information in that original article. It was later restored as a redirect by User:EVula in 2007 (to a user page request). Then after recreation in November 2013 it was again redirected at that time by both User:Banak and User:DerBorg to the Passengers of Titanic list. As a redirect, I think a better target would be the Allison family page which explains more about Alice Cleaver. As the article stands now, it is the same image and the same couple of sentences from the Allison family article. Nothing more. I consider that a WP:REDUNDANTFORK. And, IMO, a person searching this name will be better served by the contextual content in the target article. If a full biography of Alice Cleaver, with RS sources, can be built then I would reconsider the redirect. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 16:16, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to work on that this week, with hopefully having a more comprehensive version completed by Monday. I'll keep at it and then it can be decided if the page stands alone or not. Seaveral (talk) 23:36, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find the relevant edit, but was probably just trying to fix a broken link rather than redirect to a particular page. Banak (talk) 00:07, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]