Talk:Anti-Mask League of San Francisco

Name of article
Should the name of the article be the Anti-Mask League of San Francisco, or just the Anti-Mask League? The latter redirects here and seems to be the name used in most sources. --Bangalamania (talk) 01:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , I wavered between Anti-Mask League, Anti-Mask League of 1919, and Anti-Mask League of San Francisco. I went with SF as most descriptive and in case there was ever an Anti-Mask League anywhere else. The article could be moved to Anti-Mask League and then Anti-Mask League of San Francisco would be redirected to it. Not sure how much of an improvement that is. Schazjmd   (talk)  19:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, and me neither tbh. I've changed the initial bolded text in the article so that it's clear the organization's proper name was just the Anti-Mask League. --Bangalamania (talk) 20:18, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

The 1919 report on efficacy of masks
is reverting content taken from the source they had added to the article. The 1919 study states: The conclusion is definitely established that, applied in this manner, the mask is ineffective and the reason, as in the case of closing, is also easy of explanation and does not necessarily disqualify the mask as a useful agent for application by the intelligent individual as a means of personal protection." It then goes on to explain that where and when the mask is worn made a difference, as did the materials used, including "Another most important reason for the failure of the mask, when universally worn, lies in the fact that the majority of masks worn under compulsory ordinances were not properly made and could not reasonably be expected to have any value whatever." Failure to include that additional information provides a misleading interpretation of the source. Schazjmd   (talk)  19:57, 15 September 2020 (UTC)