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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No consensus. More than 7 weeks old and 2 relistings means this request needs to be closed. See excellent arguments both in support and in opposition, but see no general agreement to remove text from this article title. The status quo since 2014 will remain in place for now. As is usual for a no-consensus outcome, editors can strengthen their arguments and try again in a few months to garner consensus for this change.
Kudos to editors for your input, and
Happy Publishing! (
nac by
page mover) Paine Ellsworth,
ed.put'r there17:27, 4 July 2019 (UTC)reply
the purpose is to tell Wiki users the book is about the KKK. The KKK is a major topic of studies in secondary and higher education in USA. Apart from its major role in making the KKK popular the novel is not notable.
Rjensen (
talk)
05:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Support per nom and
WP:OVERPRECISION and
WP:CONCISE. No other article needs the title. Note that this a request to revert an undiscussed move from 2014. Note also that this article is also about the arguably more important play, which bears a different subtitle: "The Clansman": an American drama: founded on his two famous novels: "The Leopard's Spots" and "The Clansman".
Station1 (
talk)
06:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose exactly as
Rjensen says. This isn't a pop album where we need to play hide the artist; brevity and obscurity are not going to help students of secondary and higher education in the USA find part of their history. Truncating the title benefits not a single reader, neither looking for the book, nor looking for something else.
In ictu oculi (
talk)
07:20, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Truncating the title (or, more precisely, not adding a subtitle) may help a reader searching for the book or play, by titling the article with the book's and play's common name (i.e. what most people search for), and not adding an obscure subtitle that might mislead someone into thinking the article might be about something else with which they are unfamiliar.
Station1 (
talk)
08:16, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
is it deliberate hiding?? no, it's just a mistaken rigid clinging to a guideline that does not work well in this case.
Rjensen (
talk)
08:04, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
There is no special case here. Nor, should it be treated as if it is a special case. The presence of the klan in the title or the content of this article affords this article title no special consideration. To do otherwise is agenda pushing. That is a violation of
WP:NPOV.
Mitchumch (
talk)
08:17, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
well no, the NPOV rule says that all reliable sources should be considered. there is no agenda here except the belief that article titles should maximize their use for Wiki readers.
Rjensen (
talk)
08:52, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Let me add that I agree the guideline where it states: When using the title as written by the author, and nothing else, possible implications of POV are the author's and not Wikipedia's. Trying to "purge" Wikipedia page names of an external author's intentions would be creation of a new POV; the Neutral Point of View policy instructs not to "correct" what authors of notable works want to express with the title they give to their work. from
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (books)#NeutralityRjensen (
talk)
11:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - there are other objects called "The Clansman" such as the original title to
The Birth of a Nation, which gets much more page views and many other called "Clansman". Having this be replaced with the short version serves absolutely no one except people that like to see a page become a primary version. I'd also be ok with redirecting the base "The Clansman" to the dab page, given the Birth of the Nation issue. --
Gonnym (
talk)
09:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
"The KKK is a major topic of studies in secondary and higher education in USA." :: not always outside the USA. For example, the
Kesko supermarket chain in
Finland formerly for a long time marked their shops with K or KK or KKK or KKKK according to size, despite the other pre-existing meaning that the letters KKK had.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
05:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. The novel is typically known as just The Clansman in the sources about it, often without any reference to the subtitle.
[1][2][3][4] As such, per
WP:SUBTITLE, the title should go with the common name. There's no risk of confusion with anything else as there are no other articles titled this way (The Birth of a Nation has been rarely if ever known as The Clansman since its premier). Moreover, the title already redirects here, so anyone typing in or clicking on
The Clansman is coming here. No need for extra verbiage.--
Cúchullaint/
c17:37, 29 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. It is a subtitle, and normally I would say that the first sentence, like the title page of a book, is good enough for a subtitle, but this is a special case.
Dixon made The Clansman into a play of the same title, but not subtitle. This play was very successful, had multiple simultaneous touring productions, and got a lot of press. You can see the handbill of the play and confirm that the subtitle is not there
here.
The Clansman really needs a desmbig page, as I can see "The Clansman" being taken as a reference to a Ku Klux Klan member (the Klansman), or some Scottish clan.
The book title spelling is unexpected :: to me here in England, a Scottish clan member is a clansman, and a member of the KKK is a klansman. The KKK was not mentioned in my schooling.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
08:10, 21 June 2019 (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.
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
No consensus. More than 7 weeks old and 2 relistings means this request needs to be closed. See excellent arguments both in support and in opposition, but see no general agreement to remove text from this article title. The status quo since 2014 will remain in place for now. As is usual for a no-consensus outcome, editors can strengthen their arguments and try again in a few months to garner consensus for this change.
Kudos to editors for your input, and
Happy Publishing! (
nac by
page mover) Paine Ellsworth,
ed.put'r there17:27, 4 July 2019 (UTC)reply
the purpose is to tell Wiki users the book is about the KKK. The KKK is a major topic of studies in secondary and higher education in USA. Apart from its major role in making the KKK popular the novel is not notable.
Rjensen (
talk)
05:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Support per nom and
WP:OVERPRECISION and
WP:CONCISE. No other article needs the title. Note that this a request to revert an undiscussed move from 2014. Note also that this article is also about the arguably more important play, which bears a different subtitle: "The Clansman": an American drama: founded on his two famous novels: "The Leopard's Spots" and "The Clansman".
Station1 (
talk)
06:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose exactly as
Rjensen says. This isn't a pop album where we need to play hide the artist; brevity and obscurity are not going to help students of secondary and higher education in the USA find part of their history. Truncating the title benefits not a single reader, neither looking for the book, nor looking for something else.
In ictu oculi (
talk)
07:20, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Truncating the title (or, more precisely, not adding a subtitle) may help a reader searching for the book or play, by titling the article with the book's and play's common name (i.e. what most people search for), and not adding an obscure subtitle that might mislead someone into thinking the article might be about something else with which they are unfamiliar.
Station1 (
talk)
08:16, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
is it deliberate hiding?? no, it's just a mistaken rigid clinging to a guideline that does not work well in this case.
Rjensen (
talk)
08:04, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
There is no special case here. Nor, should it be treated as if it is a special case. The presence of the klan in the title or the content of this article affords this article title no special consideration. To do otherwise is agenda pushing. That is a violation of
WP:NPOV.
Mitchumch (
talk)
08:17, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
well no, the NPOV rule says that all reliable sources should be considered. there is no agenda here except the belief that article titles should maximize their use for Wiki readers.
Rjensen (
talk)
08:52, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Let me add that I agree the guideline where it states: When using the title as written by the author, and nothing else, possible implications of POV are the author's and not Wikipedia's. Trying to "purge" Wikipedia page names of an external author's intentions would be creation of a new POV; the Neutral Point of View policy instructs not to "correct" what authors of notable works want to express with the title they give to their work. from
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (books)#NeutralityRjensen (
talk)
11:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - there are other objects called "The Clansman" such as the original title to
The Birth of a Nation, which gets much more page views and many other called "Clansman". Having this be replaced with the short version serves absolutely no one except people that like to see a page become a primary version. I'd also be ok with redirecting the base "The Clansman" to the dab page, given the Birth of the Nation issue. --
Gonnym (
talk)
09:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)reply
"The KKK is a major topic of studies in secondary and higher education in USA." :: not always outside the USA. For example, the
Kesko supermarket chain in
Finland formerly for a long time marked their shops with K or KK or KKK or KKKK according to size, despite the other pre-existing meaning that the letters KKK had.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
05:03, 24 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. The novel is typically known as just The Clansman in the sources about it, often without any reference to the subtitle.
[1][2][3][4] As such, per
WP:SUBTITLE, the title should go with the common name. There's no risk of confusion with anything else as there are no other articles titled this way (The Birth of a Nation has been rarely if ever known as The Clansman since its premier). Moreover, the title already redirects here, so anyone typing in or clicking on
The Clansman is coming here. No need for extra verbiage.--
Cúchullaint/
c17:37, 29 May 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. It is a subtitle, and normally I would say that the first sentence, like the title page of a book, is good enough for a subtitle, but this is a special case.
Dixon made The Clansman into a play of the same title, but not subtitle. This play was very successful, had multiple simultaneous touring productions, and got a lot of press. You can see the handbill of the play and confirm that the subtitle is not there
here.
The Clansman really needs a desmbig page, as I can see "The Clansman" being taken as a reference to a Ku Klux Klan member (the Klansman), or some Scottish clan.
The book title spelling is unexpected :: to me here in England, a Scottish clan member is a clansman, and a member of the KKK is a klansman. The KKK was not mentioned in my schooling.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk)
08:10, 21 June 2019 (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.