→Use of transgender sidebar: Reply to comments in above section
|
→Use of transgender sidebar: Clarify
|
||
Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
:It's also redundant and unnecessary to have both the sidebar and the [[Template:Transgender_topics|transgender topics footer]], which have identical content, on such a short page. Removing the sidebar as well as the large symbol image would greatly improve the layout. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 03:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
:It's also redundant and unnecessary to have both the sidebar and the [[Template:Transgender_topics|transgender topics footer]], which have identical content, on such a short page. Removing the sidebar as well as the large symbol image would greatly improve the layout. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 03:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
||
{{replyto|Castncoot}} I'm replying to your most recent comments in the above section per {{u|Mathglot}}'s request to keep the formatting discussion separate from the title discussion. I disagree that the [[:c:File:A TransGender-Symbol black-and-white.svg|symbol]] is more "timeless" than either the [[:c:File:Transgender Day of Remembrance Memorial.jpg|memorial image on this page]] or on the [[:c:File:Trans Day of Visibility SF 2016.jpg|group image]] on the [[Transgender Day of Visibility]] page. An image showing photos of deceased trans people is exactly what this occasion is about, in any year, and I would say more respectful than including an oversized generic symbol that does not convey the meaning of the occasion or the article. And my image on the TDoV page actually includes the words "Trans Day of Visibility" in it, which I believe helps illustrate the article better than a generic symbol. In any case, Mathglot has [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Transgender_Day_of_Remembrance&curid=1443803&diff=790307650&oldid=790036400 reverted] to the earlier layout on this page, so unless other editors weigh in in your favor, I hope we can leave it this way as there is not currently consensus for your preference. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 22:31, 12 July 2017 (UTC) |
{{replyto|Castncoot}} I'm replying here to your most recent comments in the above section per {{u|Mathglot}}'s request to keep the formatting discussion separate from the title discussion. I disagree that the [[:c:File:A TransGender-Symbol black-and-white.svg|symbol]] is more "timeless" than either the [[:c:File:Transgender Day of Remembrance Memorial.jpg|memorial image on this page]] or on the [[:c:File:Trans Day of Visibility SF 2016.jpg|group image]] on the [[Transgender Day of Visibility]] page. An image showing photos of deceased trans people is exactly what this occasion is about, in any year, and I would say more respectful than including an oversized generic symbol that does not convey the meaning of the occasion or the article. And my image on the TDoV page actually includes the words "Trans Day of Visibility" in it, which I believe helps illustrate the article better than a generic symbol. In any case, Mathglot has [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Transgender_Day_of_Remembrance&curid=1443803&diff=790307650&oldid=790036400 reverted] to the earlier layout on this page, so unless other editors weigh in in your favor, I hope we can leave it this way as there is not currently consensus for your preference. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 22:31, 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]
There seems to be considerable interest in discussing the transgender sidebar, which is fine. In the interest of clarity, it should have its own section, so I've created section, #Use of transgender sidebar, below. I'm going to ask that all discussion about the transgender sidebar be held in the new section. If there is no objection, I'd like to move portions of the discussion above pertaining to the sidebar to the new section.
In the current section, let's continue to discuss the rename of the article from Transgender Day of RemembrancetoInternational Transgender Day of Remembrance. Anything else is off-topic.
So, picking up the thread above: I was asking: why in fact, did you rename the article, Castncoot?Mathglot (talk) 05:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Castncoot: To repeat, since you didn't respond to my point: This is the trans sidebar. I'm bolding the link not to shout but to bring your attention to it. If you click on the bolded link, you'll see that the sidebar shows an image of the transgender flag and a list of links, including the Trans Day of Remembrance and Trans Day of Visibility (under the "Society and Culture" section heading). The large symbol you've repeatedly inserted on this article does not appear, and I do not see any other trans sidebar template in the relevant category. So I don't understand what other "trans sidebar" you are referring to. Funcrunch (talk) 03:17, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Castncoot: I'm replying here to your most recent comments in the above section per Mathglot's request to keep the formatting discussion separate from the title discussion. I disagree that the symbol is more "timeless" than either the memorial image on this page or on the group image on the Transgender Day of Visibility page. An image showing photos of deceased trans people is exactly what this occasion is about, in any year, and I would say more respectful than including an oversized generic symbol that does not convey the meaning of the occasion or the article. And my image on the TDoV page actually includes the words "Trans Day of Visibility" in it, which I believe helps illustrate the article better than a generic symbol. In any case, Mathglot has reverted to the earlier layout on this page, so unless other editors weigh in in your favor, I hope we can leave it this way as there is not currently consensus for your preference. Funcrunch (talk) 22:31, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]