Talk:Papaverhof

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 21 March 2014 by reviewer Dodger67 (talk · contribs).

Architecture

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Netherlands

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands articles

Proposed merge with Papaverhof

Both articles are about the same subject Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:36, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds logical to me. I only created the other one because this one got rejected at AfC. Nice to see them reverse the rejection! Jane (talk) 18:33, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jane, for future reference, please don't ever do that again. A Decline (Not Rejection) at AfC is almost never a permanent refusal, a decline is actually the way AfC points out a problem and helps the article writer fix it. Reviews are repeated until the article is acceptable. In this case it was actually an error by the reviewer, which I corrected, but the principle still stands. Your creation of the stub has made the process more complicated, but don't worry, it's completely fixable. We just need an admin to perform a history merge of the two articles. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:06, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just responded to a cry for help on the Wikiproject Netherlands page and was surprised (and saddened) to see the notice on the contributor's page. Glad to see I don't need to worry about this ever again! Jane (talk) 22:55, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{admin help}} Please do a WP:History merge of Papaverhof and Papaverhof complex, the merged page title should be "Papaverhof", thanks. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:41, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a go... Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:35, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All done Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:39, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you inadvertently deleted my stub along with everything in it when you merged - hope you can fix this. Jane (talk) 09:10, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]