RationalWiki:Duplicate articles/Archive1

Evolutionism and Evolutionist (Merged)
Two stubs saying the same thing. Should be merged.  w easeLOId ~ 14:33, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I seem to run into "evolutionist" more often. Which one has more in-links?  ħ uman  18:24, 9 October 2008 (EDT)

Agnosticism and Agnostic (Merged)
Different article content but should probably be merged.  w easeLOId ~ 14:33, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I'm going to merge these into agnosticism, if I flood recent changes with don't panic, I'm just going to do it a section at a time and probably going to confuse the hell out of myself.  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 18:26, 9 October 2008 (EDT)

Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox Church (Merged)
Duplicate, should be merged.  w easeLOId ~ 14:33, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Definitely. ASAP.  ħ uman  17:58, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Done.  w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 15:16, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

Washington, D.C. and District of Columbia (Merged)
Identified by Human. District of Columbia is a stub.  w easeLOId ~ 15:04, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Yes, and there are quite a few redirects that should point to the final article. It's a hard city to pick an exact title for.  ħ uman  17:59, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Wikipedia redirects "district of columbia" to "washington, dc". I assume we could either follow suit since I think Washington DC is the more common term, or we can go the other way just for the sake of doing it differently.  A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 15:32, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Done. The stub only contained two facts so was an easy merge.  I've left "Washington, D.C." as the article & done redirects for obvious variants (with & without the dots & comma).  If you know of any more variants, please create the appropriate redirects.   w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 16:18, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

Public school and Public schools (Merged)
Pretty much cover the same ground, we also have public education, which should stay separate. I recommend merging to the singular title.  ħ uman  18:21, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Suggest: Just move the plural version over the singular - which was only put there as a space filler by me) 18:24, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Go ahead, if you really think there is nothing useful at the singular (I thought there was?).  ħ uman  19:10, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Never mind, I merged 'em. Kept most of what was at the singular.  ħ uman  19:24, 9 October 2008 (EDT)

Human and Humans (Merged)
Humanity is currently a red link & should redirect to whichever of these swallows the other.  w easeLOId ~ 16:47, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I vote for the singular title, which the style we usually use.  ħ uman  22:11, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Done. Not a great article, but at least now it's one article.  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 19:28, 9 October 2008 (EDT)

Year 2000 problem and Y2K (Merged)
Lengthy duplicates; would take some work to merge, but probably should be done. Low priority. <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId ~ 14:33, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Definitely, I think to "Y2K" as main title. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  17:59, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * They're both quite sizable though, which is the best version? I think "Year 2000" is written better, or at least arranged better. We'd also want to create a "millenium bug" redirect if that isn't already there and if it is, ensure it goes to the right one to prevent double redirects. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 15:34, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Urgh, I know you merged them to the longer title, but isn't Y2K a much more likely to be used link? No biggie, just curious. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  18:47, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Groan. There was a load of content lost here.  I should probably clarify what is meant by merging: it involves reading (or at least scanning) both articles & copying any info across from one that isn't in the other - so that the contents of both articles are merged, not just choosing one & deleting the other!  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 19:02, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I undid the redirect; yes, this one's gonna take work, there is some duplication, and yet much good content in both to be combined. Perhaps we should just step-by-step cut chunks of the plural one and move them over, carefully integrating them, until there's nothing left but commas? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  19:21, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Yeah, that's why I said 'low priority' on this one. But they should remain as duplicates until they are properly merged.  Thanks for undeleting; I was gonna do the same.  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 19:30, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I don't see why we can't do the merge slowly - we can even leave a note at one saying not to add anything, since it's being superseded. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  20:12, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Good plan. I suggest merging to the Y2K article because it's longer so the other one will be easier to pick bits out of.  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 20:21, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Merged to the Y2K article. Year 2000 problem & millennium bug both redirect there.  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 14:54, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

Reaganomics and Supply side economics (Merged)
I found these two due to their mention in a WIGO entry. They basically say the same thing, except the Reaganomics one says that they name it after Reagan who tried it and fucked it up (which is also what the larger article says). <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 06:37, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Good catch. 'Ronics should be a redirect; SSE should mention the phrase.  Is there anything at 'Ronics that isn't already at SSE? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  15:54, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I done did it. Copied what was at reaganomics and added it after the short intro at SSE, copyedited to fit better.  This had to be the longest "open edit window" I've ever run - I actually started both edits and did the cut and paste immediately after making the above comment! <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  18:17, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

Atheism and Atheist (Separate)
The atheist article is a short light-hearted one, so arguably could remain separate. Or it could be merged as a section at the end of the atheism one (e.g. "symptoms of atheism" or similar). Keeping "atheist" and "atheism" as separate articles isn't really consistent with usual wiki convention - e.g. Christian redirects to Christianity. <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId ~ 14:33, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Yeah, I keep seeing this one but "atheist" got expanded to be like a snarkier version so they're currently very different articles... Not sure, my instincts would be to merge but the smaller one has potential. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 15:28, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I like the "atheist" one, so I resurrected it when it had been deleted a while back, but I'm not sure that it should be separate from "atheism". Sooner or later I think it should be merged.  Could possibly be kicked to Funspace instead, but that tends to be where we throw the trash that won't float anywhere else.  Anyway, I've whacked the new "dup" template on both of them, so hopefully we'll see a few more people's views before taking action.  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 16:05, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I think these deserve to remain seperate, for no better reason than we might actually do justice to both, as opposed to most "ism" vs. "ist" topics. I will feel free to to be overruled by the mob on this one, of course.  It's just my thinkies, is all. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  03:14, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I'd say keep them seperate. They're pretty different in tone and style so merging them would be difficult.  But both of the "tones" are appropriate here.--Bobbing up 15:13, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
 * OK, interesting question: If we make a decision like that, how do we "memorialize" it?  If we remove the templates and archive the discussion, someone might very well restart it someday, not knowing what was said.  Should we add a permanent memo (or template?) at the top of their talk pages, with a link to the archived discussion?  Weasel, what do you think? <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  15:20, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
 * In response to this & the other point raised on talk, I've created two templates to go on the talk pages as permanent markers of completed & proposed merges (template:merged & template:unmerged). <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 16:36, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Since I'm on the merge page, I'm going to de-dup these for now. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 06:38, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

Attachment disorder, Attachment therapy, and Attachment parenting (Separate)
Found these three on the stub list. The "parenting" one in particular because it's completely blank. &mdash; Unsigned, by: Armondikov / talk / contribs
 * Not sure they are actually "duplicates". The first two might overlap a bit, and the third very empty stub is a rather different topic entirely (and might be better off deleted).  It's hard to tell for sure with such short articles, of course ;) <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  16:57, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I've deleted the blank one (& removed the that link to it in another article). <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 17:03, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I've left attachment disorder & attachment therapy separate. They seem to be separate although closely related subjects rather than complete duplicates, so arguably could still be merged, but it's inessential to do so.  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 09:37, 19 October 2008 (EDT)

Vandalism & Wandalism (Separate)
Same subject (vandalism on wikis). I reckon these should be merged. <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId ~ 09:28, 19 October 2008 (EDT)
 * True, but the term wandalism is only in use here really so it's worth keeping both, but cutting down the RW references in the vandalism one. More specifically, we can add actual vandalsim rather than wiki vandalism to that article. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 11:29, 19 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I agree they should be separate (and should "see also" each other!). And the "V" one should, yes, have more about actual physical vandalism, like sneaking into the Schlafly house and rearranging the furniture, or toilet-papering his front yard for Halloween. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  17:03, 19 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Awesome idea. Surely his address is either public domain or easily obtained... If only the air-fair to the Bible Belt was lower and to get into the country you didn't need to pass through checks that would make Berlin Wall guards hard, I'd be there in a second with a pack of cheap eggs and an Andrex puppy! (snark). <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 17:53, 19 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Schlafly's in New Jersey, which isn't exactly the Bible Belt. It is Sopranos country, though, so maybe a mafia-style drive-by egging would be more appropriate.  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 18:16, 19 October 2008 (EDT)

At present they're both entirely about wiki vandalism, so they are duplicating. If we keep them separate, we should probably make the "vandalism one largely about physical vandalism, and move most of the wiki-related content to "wandalism", putting a strong "see also link" in both. It that seems agreeable, I'll go ahead with it.  So I reckon m" (or whichever article ends up dealing largely with wiki vandalism) should include a section about wandalism at CP & Schlafly's claims that cases can legitimately be referred to law inforcement. <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId ~ 18:11, 19 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Just done :P Sorry if I've pipped you to it or edit conflicted with you but it's mostly finished. The vandalism stub could do with some work. I've mentioned wandalism on it but we need to make sure we don't just double up all the info on that paragraph. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 18:14, 19 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Cool. I've expanded them both a bit.  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 19:23, 19 October 2008 (EDT)

Stuffer and Stacker (Deleted)
While not strictly duplicates, these could be merged into a coherent single article. Although one could also pose them for deletion as they appear to just reword someone's blog rather than something a bit more real. If there's more references out there, that would be fine though. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 09:16, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
 * Yes, but "stacker and stuffer" sounds like some sort of porn film. Going to be a lot of disappointed netizens if we merge them. Wazza (Not Wazzock, Wazza)Approach the Presence 09:17, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I've never encountered these terms in this context before, & can't find them on Wikipedia, Wiktionary, etc. Does this usage exist beyond the confines of that blog?  If not, they probably shouldn't be RW articles, but could be incorporated into another article (not sure which at present).  <font color="maroon" face="Hurry Up"> w easeLOId [[Image: Weaselly.jpg|15px]]~ 09:35, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
 * I suggest deleting them both as meaningless made-up jargon that will never get linked to. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  19:41, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * I like your thinking. It has the added advantage of involving minimal effort.   19:44, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * Done. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  17:40, 11 February 2009 (EST)

Simulated reality and Simulation argument (Merged)
Simulated reality was written recently about the whole concept (although fairly Matrix-centric). Simulation Argument is an older article about one philosophy paper on the subject. I suggest we merge it into the "Simulated reality" article. 14:09, 25 January 2009 (EST)
 * Done.  09:41, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Arabism and Pan-Arabism (Merged)
Arabism was created as a copy of wp:Pan-Arabism, but we already have Pan-Arabism -- Nx  talk 07:03, 28 January 2009 (EST)
 * Ice the drive-by copy, keep ours, install a redirect over the drive-by to the one we've always had. TheoryOfPractice 08:25, 28 January 2009 (EST)
 * Both stubs (at least now). Merge from arabism to pan-srabism, if there is anything worth merging.   08:47, 28 January 2009 (EST)
 * Only the racism part, if we want to keep that. -- Nx  talk 09:28, 1 February 2009 (EST)
 * I've merged it across but ditched the cited article ("Arabism is Racism") which was from an anti-Islamic site & looked pretty dubious.  20:53, 15 February 2009 (EST)

2008 Presidential Election & 2008 U.S. Presidential Election (Merged)
Same event. 18:46, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * Smallify table in 2k8 PE and merge into 2k8 US PE -- Nx  talk 18:52, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * Yes, 2k US PE is the obvious correct title. And make that awful table smaller ^2. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  19:34, 4 February 2009 (EST)
 * Indeed. Sounds like a plan. <font color="#000099">Worm  (<font color="#000099">t  19:39, 4 February 2009 (EST)

I merged the table and made it smaller, but it feels lonely in the new section 2008 U.S. Presidential Election, and funny text in 2008 Presidential Election doesn't feel like it should be in the other one. --  Nx / talk 07:35, 7 March 2009 (EST)
 * I won't be sorry to the see the "funny" text deleted ("Yo, Gangsta! Word! Da Homey dominated! No mo' Honkytown in da house! Black Man take over White House. Paaaaaaar-taaaaay!"). The duplicate might as well be made into a redirect, as I will do now.   09:01, 7 March 2009 (EST)
 * Already merged. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 00:02, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Freethought & Freethinker (Merged)
I think it unnecessary to have separate articles for the "-ism" (the philosophy) and the "-ist" (the adherents). Especially if both articles are stubs. I think they should be merged. 16:48, 11 February 2009 (EST)
 * Yeah, thinker >>> thought (the "ism"). <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  17:31, 11 February 2009 (EST)
 * Merged this "ist" into the "ism". That's my housework done for the day. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 00:06, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Nice work. I'll archive them all as my "chore of the day". <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:07, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Mohammed and Muhammad (Merged)
Same dude, diffrent spellings. 11:05, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 * Merge the stuff from MO to MU--preferred transliteration/spelling is MU, I believe TheoryOfPractice 11:10, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 * Done.  12:30, 15 February 2009 (EST)

Argumentum ad verecundiam & argument from authority (Merged)
As far as I can tell, these are exactly the same thing. Wikipedia has both phrases as redirects to the same article, WP:appeal to authority. 15:23, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 * So basically, you're appealing to the authority of WP. Typical. TheoryOfPractice 15:28, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 * Snarky... but sort of true. They are the same thing, are they at all used in different context, i.e., when one is a valid authoritiy and one is just "well, they have authority about something"? <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 15:32, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 * I don't think so. I think "argument from authority" or "appeal to authority" is used by people who don't like using Latin phrases.  I was pointing to WP as an anology, not necessarily an authority.  I think we should merge into "argumentum ad verecundiam" as it's in keeping with our other articles on logical fallacies where we use the Latin phrase (ad populum, ad hominem, etc.)   15:48, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 * Don't forget my favorite style, the ad hoc. Unless I have a book, it which case it turns into typical RatWiki argument. --"CURtalk 15:54, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 * Yeah, definitely point them to the Latin. Particularly as it's more extensive and better written than the English-titled article. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 15:58, 15 February 2009 (EST)
 * Merged into Argumentum ad verecundiam. Well, I just really deleted the other one as there wasn't anything worth merging. It's reference brought up a missing page so I removed it entirely. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 00:01, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Cloning and Human cloning (Merged)
I didn't tag them but it came up in their talk pages that HC should be merged into C. <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  17:37, 7 March 2009 (EST)
 * As this hasn't been discussed in nearly a month, I've gone ahead and merged them both into cloning as it's the more general article. If they later get expanded so that we can have two articles, that'd be grand, but until then, merged. <font color=red face="Tahoma"> A rmondiko V  User_Talk:Armondikov 23:56, 5 April 2009 (EDT)
 * Most excellently I thank you for your substantial contribution! <font color="#DD00DD" face="comic sans ms"> ħ uman  00:00, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Song of Songs and Song of Solomon (Merged)
Seeing as how we have a song of Solomon article, shouldn't the former be deleted? It seems pretty obvious, but "shoot first, ask questions later" is not my preferred policy style. --Pear 00:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, merging SoS into the Guide would make sense. Leave a redirect behind?  Thanks...  02:22, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Directed panspermia and Aliensdidit (Merged)
They are the same concept, it's just that "aliensdidit" is the parody version of "goddidit". I think Goddidit is a valid term because some people do just resort to that as an answer to everything, I don't think anyone except rather crazy nuts go "aliensdidit" to everything. Unless the article begins to cover various "conspiracies" such as the Great Pyramids being built by aliens. Alien based abiogenesis should be directed panspermia or panspermia. 11:21, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * If we add the von Daniken style aliensdidit response to pyramid's, Aztec pictures and Mayan calendars would it widen that articles enough to have sepearte articles? 11:25, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That's what I was touching on, but until then they are fairly closely duplicated, particularly in the mention of Crick. 11:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Π has expanded aliensdidit, they're now decenlt separate articles. 12:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I must say this is a rich topic. I have plenty of material to expand the ancient astronauts article. 12:53, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It is, I remember reading up on it (and being slightly taken in) years upon years ago. Stuff like the Nazca lines and others. 12:55, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Teach the Controversy + Teach the controversy (Merged)
Obvious candidate for merging, but I'm too lazy to do it myself. Would just redirect the latter to the former, except there's unique content in both. Dreaded Walrus t c 00:51, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Amin7b5 01:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Extra-sensory perception and Extrasensory perception (Merged)
An obvious merge, but we may as well practice going through the hoops :p Which is the best title for it? It'll also require checking any ESP redirects too. 16:32, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * When there is no clear right or wrong answer, I say follow wikipedia's decision. tmtoulouse 16:35, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Extrasensory perception it is :p Although there have been cases where we've done the opposite out of a combination of spite and "lulz". 16:42, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I would opine that extrasensory has evolved to losing its vestigial hyphen. So, yeah, I agree. 19:56, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I done did it. 20:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Society of Friends and Quaker (Merged)
A BoN noticed this, please discuss. 08:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * WP redirects Quaker to Society of Friends. Both articles seem to cover slightly different aspects so we might get a decent article out of merging. 08:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * We should merge to SoF and redirect Quaker to breakfast. 23:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I merged them to SoF, there was very little at Quaker that wasn't at SoF anyway. 23:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Panspermia and Directed panspermia (Merged)
I was just wondering of there is enough material for two articles. Panspermia talks almost exclusively about direct panspermia already. 08:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we've gone through this before... but I think they're separate issues. Directed Panspermia is very much aliensdidit, Panspermia is an alternative to abiogenesis. I was planning an expansion of both articles for sometime today. 09:16, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually we went over Directed panspermia and Aliensdidit. 23:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I say merge them. Have the main article "Panspermia" and then make another section in the article called "direct panspermia" and talk about the differences between the two. 13:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Totnesmartin 09:42, 19 October 2009 (UTC)