Talk:Intake (disambiguation)
 | Disambiguation | |||
| ||||
Requested move 2 March 2017 edit
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 01:04, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
– Intake is a word with a broad range of meanings, and I don't think that the current article at intake (opening on a car or aircraft body) satisfies WP:PRIMARYTOPIC criteria. Actually, google:Intake produces a mixed bag of links, and I don't think there is primary topic for "intake", thus it should be a disambiguation page. No such user (talk) 13:27, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
Now, I don't feel strongly about the second part of the move, i.e. proposed target for the current article, but "air intake" (while still somewhat ambiguous itself) already redirects there, and we probably lack a better name for this rather broad concept. It is at least consistent with spinoff articles such as Cold air intake or Ram-air intake. No such user (talk) 13:27, 2 March 2017 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 17:36, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. I have cleaned up the dab page, and no other article (they're mostly places) comes close to being the primary topic. An intake is an encyclopedic subject; any other meaning of the term is a WP:DICDEF. Well over a hundred articles link to intake, and only about ten use air intake instead. Also, for the ease of making links in the future, let's keep the two pages as they are. — Gorthian (talk) 19:27, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
- A vast majority of those hundred links come from template {{Automotive engine}} – however, there is no simple way to count them separately short of editing the template to point to a redirect (which is doable but I don't fancy violating WP:BRINT just to prove a point); in any case, sorting those links out is not a major issue, and I volunteer to do that should this RM succeed.
FWIW, the relevant pageviews can be seen here – the Intake article has ~100 pageviews daily, while Intake (disambiguation) is at ~2. No such user (talk) 10:24, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- A vast majority of those hundred links come from template {{Automotive engine}} – however, there is no simple way to count them separately short of editing the template to point to a redirect (which is doable but I don't fancy violating WP:BRINT just to prove a point); in any case, sorting those links out is not a major issue, and I volunteer to do that should this RM succeed.
- Oppose per WP:NOTDICT. The places listed on the DAB page are minor. — AjaxSmack 01:02, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
"Intake, California" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Intake, California. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 6#Intake, California until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm Bacon 20:47, 6 December 2020 (UTC)