Viruses Low‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses 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.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Agriculture Low‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture 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.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.
	It is requested that an image or images be included in this article to improve its quality.

Split proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pea enation mosaic virus 1 is an Enamovirus, Pea enation mosaic virus 2 is an Umbravirus. The two species aren’t even in the same phylum. Lumping them together just makes this a poor disambiguation page. The current page should be a redirect from Pea enation mosaic virus (disambiguation). --awkwafaba (📥) 19:26, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support split. Velayinosu (talk) 21:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This article consists of 6 sentences. Pea enation mosaic virus 1 already exists as a redirect to Enamovirus. I've created Pea enation mosaic virus 2 as a redirect to Umbravirus. No further action is required. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shhhnotsoloud Then should this article be rewritten as a disambiguation page? Velayinosu (talk) 01:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Velayinosu: to be honest as long as it is factually accurate I think it's fine as it is. Reformatting it as a disambiguation page would lose everything except the article links. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will close this discussion, according to what i see, its been declined, as its been over 3 months Webclouddat (talk) 01:58, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.