|
→Article move without consensus: Consistency is not a factor in the naming of either of the articles in question here.
|
||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
{{od}} {{replyto|Castncoot}} Respectfully, I think you're mistaken or confused. First of all, {{u|Mathglot}} was arguing specifically ''against'' using parallelism as an argument to move the page title (especially without getting consensus first), and I agree with him. Second of all, the trans sidebar is [[Template:Transgender_sidebar|this template]]. It has the trans flag, not a symbol. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 06:00, 11 July 2017 (UTC) |
{{od}} {{replyto|Castncoot}} Respectfully, I think you're mistaken or confused. First of all, {{u|Mathglot}} was arguing specifically ''against'' using parallelism as an argument to move the page title (especially without getting consensus first), and I agree with him. Second of all, the trans sidebar is [[Template:Transgender_sidebar|this template]]. It has the trans flag, not a symbol. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 06:00, 11 July 2017 (UTC) |
||
:::::::I'm not confused at all. If you look carefully, this article refers to the other in its See also section, but this article is not being allowed into the other article's See also section. These two days of observance fall under the same sidebar and should be speaking with one Wikivoice. For whatever reason, this other editor is preventing that from happening. [[User:Castncoot|Castncoot]] ([[User talk:Castncoot|talk]]) 02:24, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
:::::::I'm not confused at all. If you look carefully, this article refers to the other in its See also section, but this article is not being allowed into the other article's See also section. These two days of observance fall under the same sidebar and should be speaking with one Wikivoice. For whatever reason, this other editor is preventing that from happening. [[User:Castncoot|Castncoot]] ([[User talk:Castncoot|talk]]) 02:24, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
||
::::::::{{ec}}Hi [[User:Castncoot|Castncoot]], thanks for joining in. Just to clarify: I'm arguing neither in favor nor against consistency in article naming, I'm arguing that consistency is irrelevant here. What I'm saying is that [[WP:AT|guidelines on article titles]] including [[WP:COMMONNAME]] govern what the title of this article (and every article) should be, based on the preponderance of usage in [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] in English and on other [[WP:NAMINGCRITERIA|naming criteria]]. If there were a [[:Category:Wikipedia_naming_conventions|naming convention]] for LGBT organizations we might consider that as well, but there isn't one. So parallelism and consistency are irrelevant to questions of proper article naming in this case. The only governing principles to be considered here are those mentioned at WP:AT and associated guidelines. Hope that makes my position clearer. [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 02:41, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
![]() | LGBT studies Start‑class | ||||||
|
![]() | Holidays Start‑class | |||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on November 20, 2013, November 20, 2014, and November 20, 2016. |
TDOR was begun in 1999, not 1998 as shown, in memory of the Rita Hester vigil. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gwendolyn-ann-smith/transgender-day-of-remembrance-why-we-remember_b_2166234.html, an interview with the originator of TDOR.
As written, this makes it appear as if the Rita Hester vigil was the original enactment of a Day of Remembrance, which it was not. It was a local community event. In 1999, Gwen Smith called for an annual remembrance event on the anniversary of the Rita Hester murder. Nancy N (talk) 16:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(scratches head) Why was the TDoR Webcomics Project redirected here after a AFD voted keep? Krisorey 23:21, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the extensive GLAAD coverage. This falls under the no self-promotion rule. There is no reason why GLAAD's communications regarding TDoR should be highlighted here when innumerable LGBT organizations around the world observe the day annually in similar ways. 69.250.207.88 (talk) 00:29, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
These were removed but may be useful for sourcing. -- Banjeboi 01:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Transgender Day of Remembrance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:49, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The article was renamed from "Transgender Day of Remembrance" to "International Transgender Day of Remembrance" on July 10, here, by a single user without any discussion or claim of consensus.
There are approximately nine times as many google exact-phrase results for the former (223,000) as the later (25,100). If you limit it to results only in the last 12 months, the ratio is 10,300::763; and last 24 months: 16,400::1,250. Among institutions using the shorter name are GLAAD, HRC, The Advocate, Transgender Law Center, Lambda Legal, and NCTE.
It may well be that this is the direction that the reality or the name of this memorial is moving, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a leading indicator; we should follow the preponderance of the sources, and at the moment, this move does not seem justified. It should be reverted. Mathglot (talk) 07:13, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Castncoot: Respectfully, I think you're mistaken or confused. First of all, Mathglot was arguing specifically against using parallelism as an argument to move the page title (especially without getting consensus first), and I agree with him. Second of all, the trans sidebar is this template. It has the trans flag, not a symbol. Funcrunch (talk) 06:00, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]