. Extensive arguments by the nominator have failed to sway any of the editors for keep. signed, Rosguill talk 22:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
This delete request is to help avoid perpetuating ongoing confusion between two very similar English words with very different meanings. For background, a medal is a small coin-like object without monetary value. A medallion has two very distinct meanings: 1. a large medal, often suspended by a chain or ribbon, and 2. a very large wall ornament used on buildings and monuments. To make things confusing, most awards are presented in the form of the first meaning of medallion, but are usually called "medals" (Think gold medal in the Olympics.) The second meaning of medallion can be found at Medallion (architecture).
This request involves a redirect that is often mistaken for "medallion", but is, in fact, a separate English word with a very different meaning. The similarity in spelling causes frequent confusion. A medaillon (spelt aill versus alli) is a small round cut of meat. I attempted to create a mini stub article out of the redirect but was quickly reverted for two reasons: 1. I had forgotten to review pages linked to the redirect. My bad, I was trying to rush it through and simply forgot. I have since corrected those links to either the large medal or the wall ornament meanings, as appropriate. The remaining links are disambigs to my former stub article. 2. The reverter cited Wikipedia:NOTDIC, which I actually agree with.
This all being said, our choices can be to: A) Keep the redirect, which is pointing to the wrong meaning of the word. B)
Point the redirect to a better article. That would be preferred, but I have been unable to find such an article. That is exactly what prompted me to draft the mini-stub in the first place. C) Go back to my mini-stub, in defiance of Wikipedia:NOTDIC, or D) Delete the redirect entirely.
I feel strongly that it would be better to have no redirect at all than to have a redirect to the wrong meaning of the word. This is not an alternative spelling, it is a different word with a different meaning. It is not a misspelling, it is the correct spelling for a different word. It is not an incorrect name, it is a correct name for a subject that we find not notable. Since we don't have the usual option of B, because there is no better article to redirect to, and we don't want to do C for lack of standing, and since A is incorrect, we are left with option D, to delete the redirect.
If a butcher or chef can find a mention of a medaillon in an existing article, I'm open to turning this into a section redirect. Can anyone come up with a fifth alternative? Sincerely, PoundTales (talk) 14:05, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
- According to Wiktionary, "medaillon" is an alternative form of specifically the cooking meaning of "medallion". As such if a new article were to be created, it should probably be at a title such as Medallion (cooking). Otherwise, I think the best option is either {{tl|Wiktionary redirect}} or keep as plausible typo. eviolite (talk) 14:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep redirect as redirect from common misspelling / alternative name. We have 4 incoming links, all meaning to go to medal/medallion, showing that this is a common misspelling. There are books like [https://books.google.be/books?id=s2LUzgEACAAJ&dq=medaillon+art&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y this] showing that the use of it in art is not uncommon (mainly because it is the standard term in French, which was a major language for art literature for a long period). Things like a "medaillon painting" are uncommon but used terms[https://www.google.be/search?q=%22medaillon+painting%22&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwid_uyQ7vf1AhWqyYUKHcdlCTsQ_AUoAHoECAEQAg&biw=1536&bih=696&dpr=1.25][https://www.google.be/search?q=%22medaillon+painting%22&source=lnms&tbm=bks&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjqteWT7vf1AhVSzRoKHeqPBzkQ_AUoAXoECAEQCw&biw=1536&bih=696&dpr=1.25], and see also e.g. [https://www.digitalcommonwealth.org/search/commonwealth:ms35v350b this] or [https://www.google.be/search?q=%22a+large+medaillon%22&biw=1536&bih=696&tbm=bks&ei=h3MGYpzZIs-oa5uHlKAN&ved=0ahUKEwjcuN2C7_f1AhVP1BoKHZsDBdQ4ChDh1QMICQ&uact=5&oq=%22a+large+medaillon%22&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LWJvb2tzEANQowVYhwZg0AtoAHAAeACAAViIAfQBkgEBM5gBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-books this]. All in all, it seems to me to be a logical redirect. Fram (talk) 14:34, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Fram. The assertion that "medaillon" refers to the meat doesn't seem to be founded. Perhaps it's called that in French, but in English the evidence suggests it's simply spelled "medallions". e.g. [https://dairyfarmersofcanada.ca/en/canadian-goodness/recipes/beef-medallions-roasted-garlic-and-brandy-sauce][https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/308106479][https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/beef_fillet_medallions_90079] - that being the case, it seems best to simply keep it as a redirect from a misspelling of medallion — Amakuru (talk) 17:44, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Okay, let's take a step back here. This seems to have the potential of becoming a "hot" issue, and I'm not sure why. Rapid reverts without discussion does tend to make things hot, and I've seen a few of them, already, on this issue. Let's all take this slowly and civilly and keep to the facts. First of all, the 4 incoming links comment: This is true. But two of these four links are from this discussion, and one of them is from a User page. The only incoming link presently of concern is from Medallion (architecture), where it is used in a {{tl|distinguish}} hatnote. None of the incoming links support an argument one way or the other. Secondly, the not well founded comment: I think this reference, which I'll cite as "MWCD", can establish the usage:
:{{cite book |editor-last=Mish |editor-first=Frederick C. |author-link= |date=2003 |title=Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary |edition=11th |url=https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/medaillon |location=Springfield, MA |publisher=Merriam-Webster |isbn=0-87779-808-7}}
Also, I had submitted an uncontroversial technical move request for the page Medallion (disambiguation) to Medallion per standard naming conventions. The move was made and then undone without discussion. I'm not quite sure that was the proper procedure, but it is clear we need to bring this move into the discussion now.
I do believe that MWCD is a well-established Wikipedia:Reliable source. Wiktionary and Wikipedia articles are not, because that is a case of circular logic. An error on one page can not be used to justify an error on another page. Google search results are also not a reliable source. There is plenty of bad information on the Internet, and the mere presence of bad information does not make it correct. That being said, MWCD tells us that Medallion (alli) has three distinct meanings:
- a large form of medal (MWCD does not specifically add "suspended from a ribbon or chain", but this is a common usage)
- a wall ornament (MWCD uses slightly more general terms terms here, indicating possible multiple meanings in Wikipedia terms, e.g. "portrait medallion")
- a round cut of meat (MWCD does not specifically say "boneless", though I've seen it in some other definitions, e.g. Medallion (disambiguation))
MWCD also informs us that in the 3rd sense, and only in that sense, there is a variant spelling "medaillon" (aill). This spelling applies exclusively to the cut of meat, and not to the large medal or the wall ornament.
That being established, I believe the proper way to model this in Wikipedia is as follows:
- Medallion (alli) should go to a disambiguation page. This is why I submitted the uncontroversial technical move request, and why it was granted. The large medal meaning is not the exclusive or primary meaning of the word. Furthermore, there is an additional redirect, Medalion, a misspelling, that currently points to the large medal. Due to double redirects, it cannot presently point to the correct spelling, Medallion. I had intended to redirect both Medallion and Medalion to Medallion (disambiguation), but while doing so, I discovered that it is not the correct naming convention. So to follow the correct naming convention, I submitted the uncontroversial technical move request that was implemented and then undone. I believe that the move is well supported, and that the misspelling Medalion should point to the disambiguation, not to just one of the three meanings.
- Medaillon (aill) should either go to an article on the cut of meat or be deleted. If someone can find a proper article where we can use a section redirect, I would support that and I am actually encouraging people to find that article, as my own search came up short. An alternative would be to create an article, Medallion (meat cut), and have aill redirect there. I attempted to create such an article and had it reverted for Wikipedia:NOTDIC, which I actually agree with. If we don't have the basis for an article, then we're left with creating a redirect to a redlink. Such a redirect would qualify for a G8 speedy delete. This is exactly why I opened this discussion in the first place. Aill is not a misspelling, nor is it an alternative for all three meanings of alli. It an an alternative only for the cut of meat meaning. Currently, Wikipedia is telling users that aill is an alternative only for the large medal meaning, which is incorrect per MWCD.
As I write this, I believe I may have come up with possible compromise for aill, but it depends on the alli move that was implemented and then undone: Redirect aill to alli, which would now be a dismbig page. On the disambig page, we have the redlink Medallion (meat cut) followed by "also spelled medaillon" to indicate that the spelling applies only to the one usage.
As for the name of the redlink, I've seen Medallion (cooking) proposed and Medallion (food) has been used on the disambig page. A medallion is neither a cooking technique nor a kind of food. Perhaps "meat cut" is not the best possible term, and I'm not wedded to it, but it should not be overly generalized to the point that it takes on an incorrect meaning. Perhaps I should renew my call for a butcher or chef to help expand on this third meaning of medallion and perhaps direct us to a better place to land this redlink/redirect. I do think, however, that we've clearly established that this word is not the exclusive domain of numismatists and architects, alone.
Before we close this discussion out, I do believe we need to come to agreement on the language of the disambig page, lest we wind up in an editwar there, as well.
In that regard, if I may, I'd like to quickly delve into a little etymology. Per MWCD, the word "medal" entered the English language circa 1578. The word "medallion" is a case where the French word "médaillon" has been introduced into English not once, but three separate times, each with a different meaning. (Multiple introductions of a foreign word is a very common occurrence in language evolution.) The earliest date MWCD gives is 1658. (Unfortunately the dates appear only in the print version of MWCD, not the online version.) The French spelling has been completely anglicized for the first two senses, but the French spelling remains as a valid alternate for the third. Currently, the page Medallion (disambiguation) claims that Medal is a shortening of medallion. That is incorrect. Medal came to the English language nearly a century before medallion. Medal#Etymology is correct on that point and uses the same dates without citation. (I assume we both used the same source, MWCD, to establish those dates.)
In general, the article Medal is pretty balanced and well written. It could use a little expansion here and there, but for the most part I have no issue with it. What I do have issue with is the mishandling of the terms medallion and medaillon. "Medal" is not the only or primary meaning of those terms. That is the main issue of concern. Let's not get into a game of rapid reverts and circular logic. Let's take our time and figure this out civilly. Thank you. PoundTales (talk) 10:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
- Bundled Medallion to the discussion. The nom had tagged it for RfD, but not added here. Jay (talk) 04:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- Just a note to confirm my previous "keep" per my previous reasons, and to indicate that at the time of my comment, there were 4 mainspace (i.e. article text) links to Medaillon, all of the for art or architecture. Someone who saw my comment or the RfD probably corrected these, meaning that no such links are currently present (and I don't think there is an easy way to find out which links existed in the past), but that doesn't change anything (when someone cleans up a common misspelling, it dosen't suddenly cease being a common misspelling of course). I don't think something needs to change about the whole situation as it existed before this started, and I don't think (at last wrt medaillon) that anyting heated or untowards happened. Much ado about nothing. Fram (talk) 17:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding the incoming links, yes, there were two that were intended for the medal sense, and two for the architecture sense. Under the current structure, they were all redirected to the medal sense. This, in fact, illustrates the problem, which I'm trying to resolve. Also, to be clear, I'm not saying anything "wrong" happened. I assume we're all acting in good faith, but none of us, as far as I know, are admins and we might not all know the proper procedure to follow. I know I'm trying to do the best I can, and I'm learning along the way. I agree, on the whole, that this is "much ado about nothing." That is why I submitted the Medallion move as an "Uncontroversial technical request". It is only because that move was undone that brought it into this discussion.
::I realize that my current proposal has evolved a bit, and may be a bit confusing. Of course, the point of discussion is to uncover mistakes or misunderstood nuances and that a solution will evolve in the course of the discussion. My original proposal, to delete Medaillon (aill), was only made when three other possible solutions proved impossible, and I found myself left with deletion as the remaining option. I still believe that "B) Point the redirect to a better article." is the better solution, but as of yet, no one has proposed a better target. In a good faith effort to solicit more input on that solution, I took the initiative to engage WikiProject Food and drink but have yet to get a response. I am still hopeful that someone may still provide some additional insight that may yet be helpful.
::To be clear, not to repeat myself, but to try to be more precise about it, my current proposal is:
:#Move Medallion (disambiguation) to Medallion - This was submitted as an Uncontroversial technical request, noting that the move was blocked by a redirect (Medallion) with a non-trivial history. The move was made and then undone as an "undiscussed move; not uncontroversial". I still don't see what the controversy is, but that's why I've added it to this discussion. A solution to the other aspects of this discussion hinge on this move. I am realizing now that perhaps, technically speaking, this part of the solution should have been brought to Wikipedia:Requested moves. It does, however, seem to me that closely related changes should be discussed in one discussion.
:#Now that Medallion is a disambig page, redirect Medaillon (aill) and the misspelling "Medalion" to Medallion (alli). In fact, what I originally intended to do was to redirect Medallion, Medaillon and Medalion to Medallion (disambiguation). In the process, I discovered that the standard naming convention was to have the actual disambig text at Medallion and to have Medallion (disambiguation) be a redirect to it. Since this is a standard naming convention, I don't see what the "controversy" is about it. I would be happy with the alternative I started with, but then I suspect I'll be told that it's "non-standard", and have it reverted on that basis. That's why we're having a discussion.
:#We need to come to agreement on the text of the disambig page. I tried to correct a factual problem, and had it reverted, so rather than editwar over it, I've brought that to this discussion as well. Perhaps, technically speaking, that should be a third discussion on a third page, (possibly Talk:Medallion (disambiguation)) but as I said, it seems to make more sense to have one discussion including all related issues, where the effects and side effects can be considered as a whole.
::Why does this matter? What's the big deal? The problem is that Medallion does not have one or two meanings alone, it has three (and possibly four), and no one meaning is overwhelmingly dominant. In a case like this, the redirects should be landing on a disambig page, to allow the user to select the meaning they intended. Personally, the question of where the disambig page is (Medallion (disambiguation) or Medallion) is not a big deal, but I understand there is a standard on this point, so I propose we follow it. What's the "controversy" about that??
::Why don't we leave things alone? Because the redirects are landing on one of the three meanings, even in a case when it is clear that this is the wrong meaning of the particular word. The current scheme gives the appearance that we are denying the existence of other uses of the word. I did not realize that the pages Medallion (architecture) and Medallion (disambiguation) even existed, at first. My solution would make them much more prominent and easier to find. Someone who assumes that their meaning of "medallion" is the only one will be taken to a disambig page that will kindly inform them otherwise and ask them which meaning did they intend? Is that not the point of disambig pages?
::I honestly believe I have a workable solution that can meet the concerns of all parties. I am willing to consider other viewpoints and other solutions. We have documented that all three (or four) senses of medallion exist. I have demonstrated that the existing structure redirects everything to only one meaning of the word and away from the diambig page instead of towards it. I feel that following established standards is reasonable and ought not be controversial in any way. I remain willing to listen to valid concerns and to modify my proposal if better solutions are found.
::P.S.: To try to keep this discussion focused on the main issue, and not get lost in yet another distraction, I have, until now, refrained on getting too involved with a possible fourth meaning of medallion, which was alluded to in the original arguments to keep. This is a bit beyond my personal expertise, but it does appear that "portrait medallions" are a distinct class and a fourth usage of the word. While the medal and architecture senses refer to a three-dimensional object in relief, portrait medallions are two-dimensional objects with a portrait painted on metal, and were typically oval in shape and hand-sized. (MWCD alludes to this meaning under sense 2 with the words "a portrait". It is not unusual that the structure of Wikipedia requires us to be more precise in our article subject matter definitions or scope than a dictionary would be. Architecture and Painting are two distinct fields and tend to call for separate articles with differing incoming links.) This fourth meaning can simply be added to the disambig page without controversy once these other issues are resolved. I mention it now because I alluded to a fourth meaning, and thought I should clarify that comment. PoundTales (talk) 08:41, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
::: Let's see, so your "First of all, the 4 incoming links comment: This is true. But two of these four links are from this discussion, and one of them is from a User page. The only incoming link presently of concern is from Medallion (architecture), where it is used in a {{distinguish}} hatnote. None of the incoming links support an argument one way or the other." comment was just fake, as you knew all along that there were originally four uses of "medaillon" in articles but pretended for the sake of your (extremely long-winded) argument that they were links from this discussion and user space instead? Bye, I have no interest in discussing things with people who use such underhanded tactics. Fram (talk) 09:02, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
:::: There are now currently seven pages that link to Medaillon. One of them is from Medallion (architecture), another one is from your user talk page, and five of them are from the Wikipedia namespace. The five Wikipedia namespace links are from WP:RFD, the "Numismatics" WikiProject, the WikiProject's "Article alerts" subpage, the "Untagged stubs" database report, and the 2022 February 11 daily RfD log page. Also, the four articles previously linking to Medaillon were already corrected before this RfD had been started. Those were Uşak, The Procuress (Vermeer), Joseph Echteler, and Thornton–Smith Building. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:30, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
:::::There is absolutely no attempt to be "underhanded". If you look at the very beginning of this discussion, you'll see that I've been completely forward with my actions: "I attempted to create a mini stub article out of the redirect but was quickly reverted for two reasons: 1. I had forgotten to review pages linked to the redirect. My bad, I was trying to rush it through and simply forgot. I have since corrected those links to either the large medal or the wall ornament meanings, as appropriate. The remaining links are disambigs to my former stub article." The corrections were made after the initial revert, and before opening this discussion. GeoffreyT2000 has correctly identified those links, thank you. I had not taken note of what those links were, unfortunately, and forgotten what they were, exactly, when I opened the discussion. Each of those articles show my edits on 10 Feb. This discussion was opened on the 11th. I was attempting to resolve the reverter's legitimate concerns. The number of incoming links change constantly. This is a wiki. I'm sorry I was not more explicit about that, but I'm trying to keep my comments as concise as possible, as this discussion has indeed become "extremely long-winded". Unfortunately, we seem to be focusing on who did what when rather than the actual issue at hand and seeking understanding and resolution of the issue.
:::::As an aside, The Procuress (Vermeer) is about a painting where it is stated that the rug "shows medallions and leaves" . Uşak contains a reference to the same painting with the same comment. Try as I might, I simply cannot find the alleged "medallions" in the pattern of the rug. I see leaves and leaf-like design features, only. At any rate, I did not see cuts of meat or architectural elements, so I simply let it go to the "medallion" redirect. It probably should go to the disambig, which actually supports my proposed changes. PoundTales (talk) 21:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether it's germane to this Rfd, but I linked from Smiling Girl, a Courtesan, Holding an Obscene Image to medallion (alli) before realising it was a redirect. I'm not even sure the word usage in the article is correct now, since presumably the item the sitter is holding up isn't made of metal at all. Advise would be welcomed. Arlo James Barnes 18:45, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
::This seems to be an example of the "fourth meaning" of medallion, the "portrait medallion" that I was referring to. This is a case supporting my proposal that "medallion" should be the disambig page, and not a redirect to Medal, as per our standard naming conventions. Again, I simply don't see why complying with our standards is "controversial", and I've heard no arguments against that request. Any advice on how we can get this discussion back on track would be most welcomed. PoundTales (talk) 21:35, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
