Forum icon  ForumsTen Forward → Small suggestion to improve the process of merging (replywatch)

Here's a very minor annoyance of mine: When a merge is proposed, the user doing so generally explains why on the talk page. All talk page topics should have a header, so typically they come up with something like "merge" or "merge with x", something very basic. If the actual merge happens, the admin typically also moves the talk page discussion to the talk page.
This is where the issue arises: the talk page now contains a discussion on the merging of something into it, but the discussion often never mentions the exact name of the article that was merged, in the title or body. As someone who often researches the history of certain decisions, this makes things more complicated, it ads another research trip to a revision history. I've personally been experimenting with proactively namedropping the article title in either the title or the motivation when putting something up myself, but this often isn't possible in an organic matter
So, my suggestion is simple: I think it would be a good idea if the admins adopted the practice of upon merging a talk page change the discussion title to make clear what page was being discussed. Stuff like this is already done something with titles like "moved from x:", but that seems more like the exception then the rule. -- Capricorn (talk) 14:56, October 15, 2017 (UTC)