Talk:Roulettes

File:Roulettes flying in formation.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Roulettes flying in formation.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 15, 2010. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2010-09-15. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 21:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Picture of the day

The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) Roulettes aerobatics squadron at the 2008 Australian Grand Prix. The squad was formed in 1970 to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the RAAF and perform about 150 flying displays a year throughout Australia and neighboring countries.Photo: Fir0002

Other RAAF teams

See http://www.abc.net.au/gnt/history/Transcripts/s1095478.htm for a little of the broader history. The accident which took the lives of the Red Sails is particularly noteworthy, and should be documented somewhere in Wikipedia (despite the understandable reluctance of the RAAF to talk about it). Andrewa (talk) 20:21, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 28 June 2020

Roulettes → Roulettes (aerobatics) – the clear primary topic for "roulettes" is as the plural of roulette. In a search of Gbooks (which concentrates reliable sources, per WP:AT), the aerobatics team has very few hits. The bare title "roulettes" should be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to roulette. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

• Disambiguate Roulette doesn't appear to be a countable noun (most Google results aren't for it) and "Roulettes" doesn't appear once in that article however there is Roulette (curve) (which is a countable noun) which gets 947 views and The Roulettes that gets 401 views compared to 346 for this article[[1]]. Probably redirect to Roulette (disambiguation) but a plural DAB page could be created. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:PRECISE. This is the only article using the precise title. As mentioned, roulette is not usually pluralized. Just add Roulette (curve) and/or Roulette (disambiguation) to the hatnote. Station1 (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

  Roulette (curve) is also likely a title match and The Roulettes is potentially one and as noted both of those get more views. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

  There's no reason to believe large numbers of readers are searching for those articles or expect to find them under "Roulettes". But I agree they are worthy of a hatnote and/or dab page listing for the benefit of the minority. Station1 (talk) 21:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

  I agree the other uses individually are less likely to be searched for than this under this term but I'm not convinced that this meets the criteria of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, it might meet the 1st but its highly unlikely to meet the 2nd. In this case we should probably disambiguate which would mean that no hatnotes are needed and every article is 1 click away for every reader per WP:NOPRIMARY. Note that the unqualified title for the category Category:Roulettes (which should also probably be disambiguated) is indeed for Roulette (curve) Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

  If every article were 1 click away for every reader, it would mean the majority of readers would be 1 click further away than they are now, while those looking for The Roulettes would be no better off. Station1 (talk) 21:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

  But there isn't a primary topic (WP:NOPRIMARY) and there are more than just 2 articles anyway. I would note that Google results are mixed between the aerobatics and the band. Additionally the casino meaning shows up in ads at the bottom. Images mainly returns wheels (which doesn't appear to relate to an article here) and Books appears to be split between the casino and curve meanings. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:01, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

  This has nothing to do with primary topics. There's no primary topic between pears and bananas but that's irrelevant because they are different topics with different article titles. Roulettes, The Roulettes, roulette and roulette (curve) are all unrelated topics with different titles that can happily co-exist as they are. For the few people who might possibly be confused, hatnotes are sufficient. There's simply no problem here that requires any kind of solution. Station1 (talk) 06:24, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

  Pears and bananas are 2 completely different topics with completely different names, "Roulettes" is a homograph in that it can refer to at least to different topics and judging by the page views, Google and long-term significance there's no clear primary topic for this term. WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT says that a topic can be primary for more than 1 title and WP:NOPRIMARY says that even if there are just 2 ambiguous topic and none is primary that the reader should be taken to the DAB page. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:11, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

  Just like pears and bananas, Roulettes, The Roulettes, and roulette, are different topics with different names; just not as obviously different. The only time primary topic comes into play is between roulette and roulette (curve), because those are different topics that have identical names; we must choose a primary topic between those two, but we are not required to choose a primary topic among non-identical titles, and I see no compelling reason to do so in this case. Station1 (talk) 18:53, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

  There different topics but the names overlap, in the same way for example Gasoline and Petrol are different names for the same thing, "roulettes" can be the name for the band and the curve and possibly the casino term. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:44, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@Station1, your objection is invalid. See WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT:

The fact that an article has a different title is not a factor in determining whether a topic is primary

. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:19, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I've already cited policy and explained how this move would be a net detriment to WP, however slight. Perhaps you could explain why you believe it would be a net benefit. Station1 (talk) 07:01, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

As far as I can see the only policy that you have cited is PRECISE which tells us that usually "unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that" the current title likely doesn't since there are other topics that need the title to (per (PRIMARYREDIRECT) similar to the fact that there are several articles titled "Libel" (such as the film) but "the article at Defamation is still the primary topic for that title and the film must be disambiguated". In this case the other topics listed on the DAB page likely prevent this one from being primary but there probably isn't a primary topic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 07:57, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

• Strong support per Gbooks "roulettes are" test. @BrownHairedGirl: you are wasting your time - Station1 has been disruptively opposing titling policy on endless RMs for years. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:29, 3 July 2020 (UTC)