Talk:Double hat-trick

Is this right?
I don't really think this redirect is appropriate. The Hat-trick page does not define a double hat-trick. Logic suggests that it ought to be either 6 goals (2*hat trick) or 4 goals (hat tricks+1, ala "double eagle" in golf, etc.), and some original research suggests that 6 is the more common usage. But the redirect's target article doesn't make this clear, perhaps because it is simply not clear or there are no reliable sources for it.

I guess an argument could be made for trying to improve Hat-trick to better address this, so the redirect would be merited, but it's not clear to me that's practical. (I don't really expect many people to see this talk page discussion, but I'm throwing it up here anyhow.) jhawkinson (talk) 21:43, 29 August 2020 (UTC)