This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tennis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to tennis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TennisWikipedia:WikiProject TennisTemplate:WikiProject Tennistennis articles
Other : *Sign up as a
member of the project. Tag more articles with our standard
project template. Help with the creation of yearly main articles and drawsheets for every
Open Era ATP and WTA tournament.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Agree that the two articles cover the same thing and should be merged. However, I prefer the "#whereispengshuai" title, or
Where is Peng Shuai?.
Much like
Where is Kate?, the speculation, hashtag, and public/media response seem more notable here than the known facts of her absence. And the WTA ban/reverse. "Disappearance" is probably
WP:UNDUE for the title, especially now that she has "reappeared".
"Where is Peng Shuai?" is the "central question" of the affair and is the question and hashtag used by the people bringing light to the matter. The "social media campaign", external concern for her, WTA ban, and the investigation into her whereabouts is more notable than her "disappearance" itself. Merged article should be titled Where is Peng Shuai?.
The social media campaign is only one facet of the four things you've stated. The other four are just impacts of her disappearance and I don't see how they count towards making the hashtag the article title.I also don't get your argument with undue. NYT also left it in quote marks, and nothing you've said means that sources don't agree that she disappeared, which is what the invocation of undue would lead one to believe.
Aaron Liu (
talk)
22:14, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If two articles cover the same topic, standard merging would be to merge the newer entry into the older entry. This is to preserve history if that is also being merged. The fact the whole world became aware by the term "Where is Peng Shuai" might also indicate a better choice of title due to notability.
Fyunck(click) (
talk)
18:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tennis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to tennis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TennisWikipedia:WikiProject TennisTemplate:WikiProject Tennistennis articles
Other : *Sign up as a
member of the project. Tag more articles with our standard
project template. Help with the creation of yearly main articles and drawsheets for every
Open Era ATP and WTA tournament.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Agree that the two articles cover the same thing and should be merged. However, I prefer the "#whereispengshuai" title, or
Where is Peng Shuai?.
Much like
Where is Kate?, the speculation, hashtag, and public/media response seem more notable here than the known facts of her absence. And the WTA ban/reverse. "Disappearance" is probably
WP:UNDUE for the title, especially now that she has "reappeared".
"Where is Peng Shuai?" is the "central question" of the affair and is the question and hashtag used by the people bringing light to the matter. The "social media campaign", external concern for her, WTA ban, and the investigation into her whereabouts is more notable than her "disappearance" itself. Merged article should be titled Where is Peng Shuai?.
The social media campaign is only one facet of the four things you've stated. The other four are just impacts of her disappearance and I don't see how they count towards making the hashtag the article title.I also don't get your argument with undue. NYT also left it in quote marks, and nothing you've said means that sources don't agree that she disappeared, which is what the invocation of undue would lead one to believe.
Aaron Liu (
talk)
22:14, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If two articles cover the same topic, standard merging would be to merge the newer entry into the older entry. This is to preserve history if that is also being merged. The fact the whole world became aware by the term "Where is Peng Shuai" might also indicate a better choice of title due to notability.
Fyunck(click) (
talk)
18:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply