Jump to content

Talk:The Purple Revolution: The Year That Changed Everything

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 9 September 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to not move, therefore, not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 22:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Purple Revolution: The Year That Changed Everything → The Purple Revolution – Per WP:SUBTITLE. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 03:16, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Hhkohh (talk) 03:17, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Hhkohh: How do you reconcile your position with our book-specific guideline, WP:SUBTITLE, which states:

Usually, a Wikipedia article on a book (or other medium, such as a movie, TV special or video game) does not include its subtitle in the Wikipedia page name, per WP:CONCISE. The only exception to that is short article titles, for disambiguation purposes.

142.160.89.97 (talk) 03:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SUBTITLE is not a policy, just a guideline, see also WP:COMMONNAME and other related policy Hhkohh (talk) 10:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Power~enwiki: How do you reconcile that position with WP:SMALLDETAILS?
And are you accusing me of "POV pushing" for having proposed this? Because if you look through my history, you'll see that my concern here is with misnamed book titles, not British politics. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 05:13, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Editors should also consider all five of the criteria for article titles - I'm not accusing you of POV-pushing intentionally, I'm simply saying that a title that implies that Brexit is a Colour revolution is promoting a POV. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Power~enwiki: Ahh, so which of the criteria are you referring to specifically, then?
It's not often that a title best meets all five criteria, but I believe in this case, it does.
  • We've just established through WP:SMALLDETAILS that the precision criterion is met.
  • Regarding the recognizability and naturalness criteria, one is no less likely to use the title without the short title in prose. To suggest otherwise without establishing the article's subject to be exceptional amongst books would be to contradict the centrally established consensus documented at WP:SUBTITLE. And when we consider what "editors would naturally use to link to the article from other articles", that's even more in this title's favour, given that editors are already aware that, barring exceptional circumstances, articles about books are referred to without subtitles in accordance with WP:SUBTITLE.
  • It should be self-evident that the proposed title best meets the conciseness criterion.
  • And finally, regarding the consistency criterion, we're blessed to have a topic-specific naming convention codified at WP:NCBOOKS, the relevant portion of which is quoted above.
Regarding the suggestion that the phrase The Purple Revolution implies a POV, yes, it certainly does. That's because it's literally the title of a book written from a particular POV. It implies no less of a POV than The Purple Revolution: The Year That Changed Everything. (In my personal POV, the Brexit vote did not, in fact, "change everything", but that is neither here nor there with respect to referring to a book's title.) The same goes for other books of a political nature, such as Worse than Watergate.
To suggest that we need to include the subtitle because of the book's POV is itself a violation of WP:NPOV. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 05:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please respect the consensus-building process. 142.160.89.97 (talk) 18:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why is that in itself a reason to oppose? 142.160.89.97 (talk) 18:42, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am leaving things open for The Purple Revolution (book) in future. There is a political issue here which is getting in the way of common sense. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:53, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Frayae: Could you clarify what the political issue is that you have in mind? And why would The Purple Revolution (book) be left for the future as opposed to now? 142.160.89.97 (talk) 19:28, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The people opposing above are chiefly doing so on the grounds that this article is about the Brexit political issue, and the color revolution is also a political issue which is not related to the Brexit. They do not want the two political issues confused and are citing policies that have nothing to do with article titles in general. It may be easier to accept that this move is undesirable and after this RM is closed, propose to move it to The Purple Revolution (book) instead. Of course there is nothing against proposing that now, if anyone else agrees with my reasoning. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 19:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Purple_Revolution:_The_Year_That_Changed_Everything&oldid=1205660338"