Talk:Innovation of Industrial Internet of Things

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed merge with Industrial Internet of Things

Innovation of Industrial Internet of Things covers what the IIoT is, and how industries interact with it. I don't really see any reason for that to be a separate article from this one. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 03:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC) _signed,Rosguill ^talk 03:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I support merging the content of these two articles, but I’d propose merging Innovation of Industrial Internet of Things into Industrial Internet of Things because the average user will naturally search for the term Industrial Internet of Things. My biggest concern about the Innovation article is that lack of cohesion in tone throughout the article. I also think it borders on going too in-depth on the subject, as sometimes happens in articles on new subjects, but I tend to be an inclusionist anyway. At this point I’d defer to a subject matter expert to trim down anything extraneous. I’m happy to help out in any way I can, especially when it comes down to copyediting.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 23:22, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, do we normally merge into the older article or the larger article? Keeping in mind that larger is not necessarily better, I'd say that the Innovation article could be merged into IIoT, and while doing so, the content could be copyedited to address the tone and cohesion issues. If we need to merge the other way (IIoT into IIIoT), we would then want to move IIIoT over IIoT to use the more common name (and what the article is really about) as the canonical one. @Rosguill and FacultiesIntact: Thoughts on this? — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 20:33, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the content in the Innovation article is essayish, which makes me think we should proceed with a selective merge into IIoT. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:15, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in agreement with Rosguill. I'll start working on this in a sandbox, unless there are any objections. I'll leave a link here once I create it.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 00:24, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my attempt at merging the content. The deeper I got into the Innovation article, the more it seemed like there was a lack of substance to its content. @Rosguill and AfroThundr3007730: do either of you have a minute to take a look? here's a link to the diff so you can better track the changes.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 23:19, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me _signed,Rosguill ^talk 23:30, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this is good stuff, and looks ready for merging. Perhaps the best method would be to do a WP:HISTMERGE of your sandbox into IIoT then redirect IIIoT once that's done. The history merge would preserve your cleanup edits and make this more transparent for other editors. — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 00:06, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback! @AfroThundr3007730: I'm afraid I don't know the first thing about doing a WP:HISTMERGE. Do you think you could help with that?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 01:01, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@FacultiesIntact: That will require an admin to accomplish. @Oshwah: Would you be able to assist with this endeavor? — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 04:22, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure! ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:24, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 04:27, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Um, @Oshwah: I kinda meant merging into the article, not the (confusing I know). We intended to redirect IIIoT to IIoT afterwards... O.o — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 04:30, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah: Or better yet, do you have a better idea for how to deal with these two articles? at this point IIIoT is currently a merged version of both, and the other is now redundant and should be redirected. The ideal final title for the surviving article would be "Industrial Internet of Things". — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 04:39, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AfroThundr3007730 - My apologies for performing the HISTMERGE into the wrong destination page. If these two pages can be merged, I suggest that a manual one be done from here, since a HISTMERGE won't be necessary (it's only used to fix instances where two exact pages are created such as an improper cut-and-paste move). After this is done, we can re-evaluate if a HISTMERGE is needed. Keep me updated and let me know if I can be of assistance with anything, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:21, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah: The contents of the former sandbox would be the final merged article. ~~Since that now resides on IIIoT, should we do a round robin page move to move it to IIoT? Or would copying the contents to IIoT and just redirecting IIIoT be best?~~ Nevermind that last bit. I just did a manual merge (option 2), and the page histories can be left as-is. — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 03:43, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also @FacultiesIntact and Rosguill: the articles have now been merged per this discussion. Feel free to continue to tweak the result to taste. — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 03:55, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]