RationalWiki:Duplicate articles

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, (new)

Shortcuts:
There are 42 pages marked as duplicates:

Please use this page to highlight any examples you find of duplicate articles or other pages which you believe should be merged. Create a new section for each case, linking to the articles concerned.

Please also put the template {{dup|x}} at the top of each of the duplicate articles, replacing "x" with the name of the article which should be merged into. Doing so shows that the articles have been identified as duplicates and gives a link to here, where editors can discuss merging the articles.

If you have a comment or objection regarding any of the proposed merges below, please add your comment and sign your name with ~~~~.

If a decision is made to merge the articles, please look through both articles and ensure that you copy or incorporate any relevant content from both into the final version. The title that ends up not being used can then be replaced with a redirect to the other. The {{dup}} template should be removed from both articles.

If a decision is made not to merge the articles, the {{dup}} template should be removed from both pages.

Finished discussions should be archived periodically.

Merging Hydroplate theory and Soft-sediment deformation into Flood geology[edit]

I think that both HT and SSD should be merged into FG, as these are inherently two sub-sections of FG. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 16:21, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

I kept HT separate. It's not about interpreting current geology but rather about a potential water source for the flood, a la the firmament. Leaving this open, if you disagree. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 13:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
The question is, does HT belong in FG?
The summary of FG says:
"[FG] asserts that the Biblical Great Flood was an actual historical event and attempts to interpret geology in terms which make it consistent with the flood myth."
Allright, so we know what we're looking for.
The summary of HT says:
"Hydroplate theory is a creationist hypothesis that Earth once had huge chambers of water sandwiched between the earth's crust and its mantle. It was invented solely to explain the question "Where did the water for the great flood come from?""
Ah.
Well... I'm thinking, HT could probably fit in FG as well, as it appears HT is entirely a form of flood geology. Then we'd have something to work towards front page quality, etc. Thoughts? :3 Reverend Black Percy (talk) 13:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Methinks it's a bridge too far. Lunar bukkake theory is related to geology -- yet it surely doesn't belong in flood geology, aye? Moreover, our hydroplate page is one of the top Google results. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 15:13, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

👎—вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 00:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

👍 ClickerClock (talk) 04:24, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Cold fusion and Fusion woo[edit]

Read the articles, lots of overlap. The FW article has CF as a subsection, the CF article's hatnote specifically notes that the article deals with the woo surrounding CF. Both articles contain a "Soft woo"/"Probably woo" segment, as well as a "Non-woo" segment. They could and ought to merge. They both deal with fusion woo. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

As far as I can see, FW deals with all fusion woo that is non-cold. Cold fusion is important enough to have its own article. The fact that both have "soft/prob woo" and "non woo" bits probably means that there's such semi-woo exists both for cold and for non-cold fusion.--JorisEnter (talk) 21:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I think that it's extra important that we cover all the fusion crankery into one article, not only because it's got a great shot at front page if we do, but also because we explicitly do not cover actual fusion in any major article, only the woo surrounding fusion (in accordance with the mission statement). Splitting our articles up into "cold fusion" and "fusion woo" drives a wedge right through the middle of the exact same topic - crank claims regarding fusion - in a way that I don't think is necessary. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
You've got a point there. If we merge FW and CF into the main NF article under separate headings ("CF" and "Other woo" or something) this might become a nice page.--JorisEnter (talk) 22:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for hearing me out Joris; It's not that I don't agree with you fully that Cold Fusion is the main fusion crankery. I think that the vision for this merged article is not just "these two articles mashed together". I was essentially thinking of a rewrite wherein we use the name Fusion woo for the title, but the text itself is largely on cold fusion, but with subsections on the fusion woo... et cetera. Something frontpage-y. I mean, come on - we need a fusion woo frontpage article. :D Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
That's also an option. Fusion woo appears to be quite something (given the WP edit wars) so they could probably be merged.--JorisEnter (talk) 22:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I think so too. And it's generally the same pseudoscience nuts that provide the manpower for the entire range of fusion woo claims. Attacking them in a Unified Shit Theory (that is, fusion woo) article isn't a bad idea, if you ask me - along the lines of what I propose here. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Yeah sure. I wouldn't break it into "cold" and "other", though; the other approaches can't be lumped in together.

👍 Merge!!! 04:24, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

That said, the article is certainly not ready for gold or even silver -- its explanations are too technical and too dense for the average reader, and it covers too few approaches. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 22:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Which article do you mean?--JorisEnter (talk) 22:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
FW. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 22:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
...which is why I recommend a rewrite based on the two existing articles, not a literal mashup of the two. So, that makes three for "merging", then? Reverend Black Percy (talk) 22:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I personally support the rewrite idea. —вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 00:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge Birth control into Safe sex[edit]

For the reasons presented by Bigljbigl. The article isn't just about the preggo even now. Fuzzy. Cat. Potato! (talk/stalk) 08:46, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

No, they're not the same thing - David Gerard (talk) 10:09, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Yes, they are. Both are about preventing the consequences of unsafe sex, and I agree with FCP. —LJL (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 22:15, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
No merge. Different enough ClickerClock (talk) 04:24, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Merging Last Thursdayism into Omphalos hypothesis[edit]

The LT article clearly belongs as a refutation segment in the OH article. Together, the resulting, grand OH article is easily Silver, with a good shot at future frontpage quality. I could merge the two skillfully. Please let me. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 14:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Didn't we already have a "yep do it" for this one? In any case please do - David Gerard (talk) 14:49, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Only if done well. LT and OH are both excellent articles in their depth, ordering, and presentation. (LT is frequently linked as a counterexample to creationism, and presumably draws many visitors.) I fear a merger might make a more scatterbrained article with fewer viewers. FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 18:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

...Which is why I said "skillfully" (and which means; I agree). If I ever actually get around to attempting the merger (ADHD), I will take care to sandblast any rough edges. Thanks, old timer. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
My main objection is that LT gets a lot of visitors and it's very useful to have as a separate in-depth explanation. It might be better as a fun page, with the nonsnarky material moved to the Omphalos page. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 00:05, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
I think that a summary of last thursdayism with a link to the main page would be the best idea.Vorarchivist (talk) 18:07, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Dog whistle politics and Code word[edit]

Code word is the definition; dog whistle politics is the application. DWP has useful description and examples that would help out CW. Fuzzy "Cat" Potato, Jr. (talk/stalk) 01:50, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

I support a merger, but into which one? I actually think dog whistle is the more useful term; I think we should merge CW into DW (and drop the word "Politics"). Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:53, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Code word appears to be more common: [1][2] and trends. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 02:02, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Bird evolution with Bird and Neornithes and Neornithine 'Big Bang' and Paleornithology[edit]

The pages are mostly EvoWiki stubs. Together, they could present a very interesting synthesis of modern research on bird evolution, up to about 2000-2010 or so. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 20:43, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Just do it - David Gerard (talk) 20:42, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Smash that mf-ing merge button (and don't forget, we're not an encyclopedia Th hug.gif). Reverend Black Percy (talk) 21:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Merge Indohyus with List of transitional forms or possibly Pakicetus and Basilosaurus[edit]

The three species are transitional forms.-【DiamondDisc1】 (talk) 04:22, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, some kind of article on whale evolution would be good, especially because, as artiodactyls, they are honorary goats. BicyclewheelToxic mowse.gif 04:37, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
I wouldn't merge to the big list, but there's a good article that could be written from merging Indohyus, Pakicetus and Basilosaurus. I basically wrote a merge, for the RW blog way back when. I should try to recover that text - David Gerard (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Goodpost.gif What David said. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 13:07, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Mass immigration and Illegal immigration and Myths and facts about immigration to the United States to Immigration[edit]

The dispersed information would be better if organized into one article. FuzzyCatPotato of the Dazzling Question marks (talk/stalk) 04:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Merge!! —ClickerClock (talk) 08:49, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Merge Panspermia With Exogenesis[edit]

Both are stubs, and the two things aren't different enough to require being separate articles. —вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 11:33, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

agreed, there doesn't seem to be any difference big enough to not merge them.Vorarchivist (talk) 21:55, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge Infofascism with either Newspeak ,Fascism, or Censorship[edit]

-【DiamondDisc1】 (talk) 02:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

If anything, it should be merged into FUD -- or we should create an article on disinformation including both of the above and a section on "active measures". Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 21:21, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Arab nationalism and Pan-Arabism[edit]

Says in the articles themselves that pan-Arabism is just Arab nationalism taken to its extreme. Pan-Arabism would work better as a section of the Arab nationalism article. —ℓσωℓу ѕуѕσρ вιgℓʝвιgℓ σf gσαтιѕтαи (ωσя∂ѕ σf ωιѕ∂σм/α¢нιєνємєитѕ) 12:59, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I think no. —ClickerClock (talk) 08:49, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Not an argument with Ben Garrison[edit]

Merge not an argument with Ben Garrisonチーズバーガー • めん Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 01:34, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Disagree. First, the phrase is Stefan Molyneux's and not Garrison's. Second, the phrase has escaped Molyneux's bubble and deserves its own independent debunking. Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 21:18, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Nope. —ClickerClock (talk) 02:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Merge Neutralization to Denialism[edit]

Neutralism is among the tactics in the overall process of denial. The article on Neutralism is a stub and can be easily be a substantial subsection in "methods" in the Denialism article. Or, we can make an entire section in the Denialism article detailing common denial tactics of criminals, just a suggestion out of the top of my head. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 01:23, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Nah. —ClickerClock (talk) 06:54, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Merge Martin Smith with Unite Against Fascism[edit]

Martin Smith is a national officer of UAF.-【DiamondDisc1】 (talk) 05:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Merge!—ClickerClock (talk) 10:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
A merge would be confusing, especially a merge to UAF, as the sexual assault allegations occurred while he was with the Socialist Workers Party, and still reverberate in SWP/leftist organisational politics.[3] Someone who's been in so many organisations is awkward to handle, so keep separate is simplest, although a merge to the SWP could be considered here. --Annanoon (talk) 10:03, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Merge Scientology Volunteer Minister with Scientology[edit]

-【DiamondDisc1】 (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll second that motion. Comrade GC (talk) 04:34, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Merge Tulpa with Buddhism[edit]

Tulpa is a belief of a branch of Buddhism.-【DiamondDisc1】 (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Not sure. I parsed Category:Buddhism and noticed that other Buddhism terminologies have their own article. See Maitreya, Qigong, Karma, all of them around as short as this one. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 07:24, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Some of my books on cryptozoology - at least the ones at the weird end of it - posit Tulpas as an "explanation" for various cryptids. This could go into the article... and it also means tulpa isn't a purely Buddhist concept. WilderBicycle 19:52, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
As long as you incorporate that information, that will be enough for tulpa to have its own page. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 22:47, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Merge Cathy O'Brien with MKULTRA[edit]

チーズバーガー • めん Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 21:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Merge!—ClickerClock (talk) 10:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Merge Oy vey and Le Happy Merchant with Alt-right glossary[edit]

CowHouse (talk) 10:54, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

No. Oy Vey is a separate term. I'm not sure it deserves an article, but neither should it be in the Alt-Right glossary

Merge Hydroplate theory with Lunar bukkake theory[edit]

X4Unknown (talk) 8:37, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Merge!—ClickerClock (talk) 10:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Both are pretty long. How would you merge? (Personally I wouldn't want to lose the title Lunar bukkake theory, but that's not sufficient reason to keep). --Annanoon (talk) 10:05, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Merge CBD with Cannabis[edit]

チーズバーガー • めん Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 04:07, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

@CheeseburgerFace We actually have a subsection on it in the main Cannabis article. You think we can easily fit that CBD article into the already-large Cannabinoids subsection? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 03:08, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Merge!—ClickerClock (talk) 10:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
CBD doesn't really fit in the Cannabis article. Each entry in the Cannabinoids section is arranged into a short claims and research findings bullet list. The CBD article doesn't compress well into the bullet list format. I vote goat on this. Cosmikdebris (talk) 00:36, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Waterboarding and Torture[edit]

The section "Does it work?" of the waterboarding article is more general info that belongs under torture. —Kazitor, pending 12:16, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Merge!—ClickerClock (talk) 10:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Merge Buttered cat theory‎ with Murphy's Law[edit]

チーズバーガー • めん Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 19:35, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Merge CANZUK with White Commonwealth[edit]

These are basically the same idea for the same 4 countries. Bongolian (talk) 00:14, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Seconded. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 00:16, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
IMHO, it better to fork from it, as it is a version of the White Commonwealth, eg "see more: CANZUK". However, I wrote out a more substantive article and it is more information about it, there is quite a bit of stuff to put on. which I would put on in due course. As an academic once said, "It is old wine in new bottles". Euromec (talk) 04:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)