Talk:Scotch mist (disambiguation)#Requested move 19 May 2025

{{WikiProject banner shell|

{{WikiProject Disambiguation}}

}}

Scotch mist (phrase)

The link Scotch mist (phrase) seems to have been hi-jacked. I don't know what to do about it, but someone may. Ampwright (talk) 05:17, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 19 May 2025

{{requested move/dated|Scotch mist}}

:Scotch mist (disambiguation) → {{no redirect|Scotch mist}} – WP:MALPLACED malplaced disambiguation page, primary is not a wp link but goes to wiktionary Ivey (talk - contribs) 13:51, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

:Comment The usage as a phrase for a type of mist is the first entry on wikitionary, but I agree it has no usages on wikipedia. I think for now just solving the Wikipedia:MALPLACED issue is good, and seeing if Scotch mist (phrase) gets turned into an article. Then we can have a primary topic conversation. Ivey (talk - contribs) 13:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

  • Comment {{la|Scotch mist}} used to point to the flower Galium sylvaticum until May 17, 2025 -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 05:11, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
  • :That is, it did between January 2017 and that date. I changed the entry on 17 May this year to remove the redirection to an obscure plant. I don´t know why the redirection was put there in Jan 2017: no explanation given. SRamzy (talk) 07:55, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
  • ::The user who did that in 2017, also blanked the disambiguation page at {{la|Scotch Mist}} to point that to the plant as well. The disambig page created in the 2000s should be histmerged onto the current disambiguation page -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 16:16, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
  • :::The history splice has been completed. The entire history of the disambiguation page is now attached to this page. -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 22:39, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
  • ::::Thx. SRamzy (talk) 00:29, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
  • Support - Though the history of this page is not clear cut, this proposal is still good for moving forward. Azuredivay (talk) 16:34, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
  • :I concur. SRamzy (talk) 23:17, 25 May 2025 (UTC)

Reverted cleanup

Hi @SRamzy reverting is usually for vandalism or disruptive edits - [WP:RV]. My cleanup was in good faith, and I stand by it. Disambiguation pages aren't articles, they're to disambiguate content on Wikipedia. The current "primary topic" isn't one, it's a dictionary link. External links should not be used on disambiguation pages. In the future, a conversation before reverting a good-faith edit would be appreciated.

If you think the usage as a phrase is worthy of being a full article, I suggest putting it at Scotch mist (phrase) for now.

I am going to re-do my cleanup work, but will use that redirect as the primary topic for now. Ivey (talk - contribs) 13:07, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi @Ivey, thanks for the link to the article on reverting. I accept that your edit was in good faith. The more appropriate action I could have taken would have been to restore the information that the primary sense of the phrase is the meteorological phenomenon, from which other senses have been derived.

:My edits on 20 May were aimed at repairing a situation where users typing in Scotch mist were being redirected to a page concerning the plant Galium sylvaticum, a plant I´ve frankly never heard of. That situation came into existence in 2017, and was complained about at Talk:Galium sylvaticum.

:I have been examining similar pages and think maybe Sleet would be a good model to follow, The topic doesn´t deserve its own full page like Snow. SRamzy (talk) 09:02, 22 May 2025 (UTC)