Talk:Breaking Barriers 50km

Article title
Ok, this is still a few minutes away from hitting the main page but I shall post this under "current DYK". Breaking Barriers 50km – are we really sure that this is correctly titled without a non-breaking space between the number and the SI units disregarding the guidance given at MOS:UNITNAMES? Ping (nominator),  (reviewer),  (prep promoter), and  (queue promoter).  Schwede 66  23:58, 24 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Per Unit names and symbols, General guidelines on use of units, Numeric values "Use a non-breaking space nbsp between a number and a unit symbol, or use nowrap " Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers — Maile  (talk) 01:32, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * , most of the sources have been surprisingly inconsistent regarding what to call this race over the past three years, but i believe, during the last year, "Breaking Barriers" and "50km" have generally been used as part of the name. in particular, the official site and world athletics both do not use a space before the unit symbol.  in addition, none of the sources cited use "50 km" in their titles.i was aware of mos:unitsymbols when i titled the article, but as "Breaking Barriers 50km" is a proper name and not a descriptive title, i believe mos:unitsymbols is not applicable in this case.  however, i am not particularly certain about this point, so thanks for bringing this up.  if mos:unitsymbols indeed overrides the style used in proper names, then i agree that a non-breaking space should be used.  dying (talk) 01:52, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't have any strong opinion either way. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:11, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I would argue in this particular case, "50km" is part of a proper name, rather than a measurement of distance. The version of the name with a space should be a redirect. Also worth adding a note to the Talk page, etc., and embedded at the top so that other editors resist the temptation to move the article. Cielquiparle (talk) 03:34, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I expected to hear that 'most sources use the unspaced version' and OFFICIALNAME. There are WP guidelines in other areas that encourage that minor stylistic issues get fixed rather than adopted. What comes closest, as least as far as I'm aware, is MOS:SIC. I don't feel too strongly about this either but thought it's worthwhile to be deliberate about it. And yes, once this discussion is over, we should probably copy it to the article's talk page.  Schwede 66  05:33, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Some previous discussion Art LaPella (talk) 14:28, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:TITLETM and MOS:TMRULES generally says to avoid slavishly copying typographical oddities from "official" names and instead adopt normal MOS rules, which would indicate adding the nbsp. -- Jayron 32 17:49, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * , i admittedly don't think wp:titletm applies here. the race name already follows "standard English text formatting"; the practice of including a space before a unit symbol is not a standard rule of english text formatting, but a guideline in our own internal manual of style.  in addition, versions of the name without a space before the unit symbol are collectively "demonstrably the most common usage in sources independent of the owner of the trademark".  (in fact, it seems to be about the only thing about the race's name that reliable sources have generally agreed upon.)  wp:titletm also addresses capitalization, which does not appear to be in question here.  mos:tmrules, in addition to covering the aforementioned formatting and capitalization issues, also addresses the use of special characters.  had the race used the stylization " &#x16d5;&#x16d6;", i would have agreed with you.interestingly, mos:tmrules also explicitly states to "not 'correct' the spelling, punctuation, diacritics, or grammar of trademarks to be different from anything found in reliable sources", and gives the example of "National Basketball Players Association" being correct, not "National Basketball Players' Association".  to me, this actually seems to be a strong argument that "50km" should not be "corrected" to conform with mos:unitsymbols., i'm also glad that we are being deliberate about this now.  i wasn't sure about this point when creating the article, but hadn't brought it up because i didn't know if the matter was important enough.  surprisingly, Jayron32's reference to mos:tmrules now has me fairly convinced that mos:unitsymbols should not override, and Art LaPella has also helpfully linked to a discussion that i was previously unaware of.  dying (talk) 21:18, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

 Schwede 66  05:36, 26 May 2023 (UTC)