Talk:Sociotype

Accusation of vandalism
2 warnings have been given to open a topic on the talk page of the article. This user avoid all warnings and refuse discussion. This is not conform to the wipedia dispute policies. --Philogik (talk) 00:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Philogik, the onus is on you to start a discussion in favor of your suggested revision away from the prior consensus. Moreover, both Ifnord and I have tried to explain this to you multiple times. Your assertion that Ifnord has refused discussion is verging on gaslighting at this point, and anyone can review this discussion on your talk page for evidence. signed,Rosguill talk 00:22, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Argument for the status quo
I want to put this matter to rest, so here's an argument for why we should keep the current redirect. This revision is somewhere between a disambiguation page and an article, and is further tagged as a category, and I honestly can't tell which it's even supposed to be from Philogik's perspective. As far as its merits, it falls short either as a disambiguation page, or as an article. As a disambiguation page, it doesn't disambiguate between articles, but rather purports to provide examples of sociotypes, and provides links to two articles, neither of which actually mentions the word "sociotype". As an article, it falls afoul of WP:DICDEF. The mere existence of a page on French Wikipedia does not mean that we should have a direct translation on English Wikipedia, and I think it's further possible that these terms are used differently in English and French. In sum, these changes are not an improvement over a redirect to Socionics, which actually discusses sociotypes and is therefore useful to readers who want to learn more about the subject. signed,Rosguill talk 00:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)