This is the
talk page of a
redirect that has been
merged and now targets the page: • De Queen Formation Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:De Queen Formation Merged page edit history is maintained in order to preserve attributions. |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
This article was nominated for merging with De Queen Formation on 28 April 2019. The result of the discussion ( permanent link) was consensus to merge. |
Procedural close. This should have been a merge discussion in the first place, so since this page was created first, in 2009, and the suggested target page was created in 2014, it is unclear which way the merge should go. In accord with WP:MERGE, involved editors will be notified of the ensuing merger discussion. Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! ( nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 14:01, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
It was proposed in this section that
DeQueen Formation be
renamed and moved to
De Queen Formation.
The discussion has been closed. Links:
current log •
target log |
DeQueen Formation → De Queen Formation – USGS's National Geologic Map Database describes this lithostratigraphic unit at Geologic Unit: De Queen naming it "De Queen Formation." Trilotat ( talk) 21:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. Iffy★ Chat -- 09:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
It has been proposed that this article be merged into De Queen Formation. Arguments may follow: ( Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 15:25, 28 April 2019 (UTC))