Talk:Violence against transgender people in the United States

Requested move 25 October 2021

 * 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 discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved as proposed. I will do my best to clean up following this scope expansion (including updating categorization, and links to this page from other articles which might no longer be appropriate), but the article will also require significant editorial expansion which I am not equipped to do - for that, the best I can do is add a clean up tag. (non-admin closure) Colin M (talk) 19:10, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Violence against transgender women in the United States → Violence against transgender people in the United States – There is no specific article covering violence against transgender people in general. The closest, "violence against transgender people in the United States," redirects to a history article listing specific examples. This is despite the fact that trans men and non-binary people are also at risk of violence to a significant degree. PBZE (talk) 02:34, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Support: The article can easily support expansion to the broader category of transgender people. I also presume there will be many sources that discuss the larger topic, and having a collective article will allow this broader discussion as well as (potentially) comparisons. — HTGS (talk) 03:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Support: I agree that there's no reason to separate the topics out this way, even if Wikipedia's coverage of violence against trans men needs to be expanded. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 23:51, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Support Taylor 49 (talk) 12:01, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

This move fails WP:AT (which is policy) and WP:APPNOTE. In addition, although the consensus is unanimous, it is weak, and none of the arguments cited policy, merely preference. This is not a valid reason to change an article title. This is a mistake, imho. Nevertheless, it can be mitigated if the current mismatch between content and article title is rectified by bringing the content in line with the title within a reasonable period. This is a volunteer project and no one should feel compelled to do that, and if the situation is not rectified I’ll probably try to overturn it and restore the previous (accurate, precise) title. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Could you expand on how you see this violating WP:AT and WP:APPNOTE? In my experience, it's not uncommon for discussions like this to go through WP:RM, where what's being discussed is more like an expansion in scope (with a straightforward corresponding change of title), rather than a matter of naming per se. And in these cases, it's normal for the conversation to focus more on content questions than naming policy. Colin M (talk) 22:47, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Only 12 hours have elapsed and several people have already edited the article, gradually adjusting the content to the new title. Taylor 49 (talk) 10:02, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to see that. Mathglot (talk) 09:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)