Talk:Twinstick

Merge
Duopoly (broadcasting) and Twinstick refer to the same phenomena, just in different contexts. Since Wikipedia articles are about things, not words, and since our priority of WP:NPOV prompts us to have articles with a worldwide perspective, having two separate articles is a form of content forkery. — Æµ§œš¹  [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 13:52, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree The two articles are just the same thing. But I suggest that "twinstick" be merged into "duopoly" rather than what you suggest since the "duopoly" page contains more info and "twinstick" is technically unused in America (I am Canadian). Fairly OddParents Freak (Fairlyoddparents1234) Megaphone-Vector.svg 23:00, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I would agree that under 2012-vintage content standards, the two articles should be merged (this distinct article was created in 2004, when standards were very different than they are now.) However, I'm not certain that "twinstick", which is a term virtually unknown outside Canada, would properly qualify as its primary title; the merge should probably go the other way. Strictly speaking, which title should be the target and which should be the redirect is not a question of which article happens to contain more information as Fairlyoddparents1234 suggests, but of which title actually qualifies as the primary term for the topic in broad international usage. Bearcat (talk) 16:04, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you're right. A merge the other way does make more sense. — Æµ§œš¹  [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]  15:50, 9 November 2012 (UTC)