Talk:Magnetic influence

What should the target of this redirect be?

(copied from Talk:Magnetic field#Should "magnetic influence" redirect to this article?)

The phrase magnetic influence appears in the first sentence of this article (after which influence does not appear again in the article). A search in Wikipedia on "magnetic influence" redirects to "Magnetic pistol". Maybe "magnetic influence" should redirect to here? Sdc870 (talk) 23:53, 19 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The target should definitely not be magnetic pistol, a pretty obscure subject. I tried Googling "magnetic influence", and the top few hits were to some huckster called Dani Johnson. After which the next hit was Magnetism. So maybe that's the best choice. RockMagnetist(talk) 02:42, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it needs to be marked as "magnetic influence (physics)" [though have not found it mentioned in textbooks] to differentiate it from this definition: (2009) magnetic influence. In: Manutchehr-Danai M. (eds) Dictionary of Gems and Gemology. Springer, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72816-0 :

"a believing that magnetite or magnetic power promotes the user to be straight forward, reality oriented, etc."

Also, right now, the Magnetism article does not address 'magnetic influence' directly, so it would be necessary to modify that article, if redirected there.

Sdc870 (talk) 09:51, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think such information would be appropriate on that page. A disambig page would be better. RockMagnetist(talk) 14:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is also what I was trying to suggest with "magnetic influence (physics)" (but I do not know how to make a disambiguation page). My other point was that right now the Magnetism page does not provide clear information about "magnetic influence (physics)". Did not mean to imply that the superstitious meaning should also be discussed. Sdc870 (talk) 15:00, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Magnetic pistol" isn't a terrible target choice for Magnetic influence, which is a common term for a class of naval weapons that are activated by magnetic fields. All 3 of the existing links to that redirect are correctly retargeted to magnetic pistol. There would be no pointto creating a parenthetically disambiguated redirect. VQuakr (talk) 15:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the more I look into this the more I am leaning towards that point of view. In a search of uses of the term in Wikipedia, almost all refer to the military use. In physics articles, it's just a vague term that should probably be replaced by a more precise term. RockMagnetist(talk) 16:10, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The expression has been used in non-military scientific texts for over 100 years: examples of the use of the phrase ‟magnetic influence” in physics journal articles, but more or less impossible to find in textbooks. Perhaps the word "influence" has to be removed or defined in the first sentence? Sdc870 (talk) 17:13, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to me to be an example of overdefining of terms ("redirect overkill"). Looking at the links given, I don't see that the term has a specific meaning, but as RockMagnetist says is a vague term whose meaning varies by context. Making it redirect to a specific article is implying a specificity of meaning that it doesn't have. I'd suggest deletion. --Chetvorno^TALK 12:11, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think a conversation about what to do with the redirect should be moved over to its talk page (or maybe Wikiproject Physics). As far as this article is concerned, we should begin by delinking it and then come up with a better wording. RockMagnetist(talk) 15:00, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: it isn't linked. I don't know why I thought it was. RockMagnetist(talk) 15:01, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]