Talk:Wupperman Block/I.O.O.F. Hall

Article name
Per WP:NC-SLASH, slashes in article titles are alright, but mess up the talk pages. I've moved it to "Wupperman Block" to avoid this problem, since there's nothing inherently requiring the slash in the title. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:53, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Name Reversal
I returned to page to its original title for three reasons:
 * Should SarekOfVulcan had taken the time to look at the references he would have seen that “Wupperman Block/I.O.O.F. Hall” is the proper name of the building
 * By removing the slash and “I.O.O.F. Hall”, which follows, deprives the building of its historical integrity and part of this article deals with its historical nature. There are also those who might be interested in the Odd Fellows organization and will overlook this page as it would no longer identify it as such.
 * The page that SarekOfVulcan refers to, WP:NC-SLASH states clearly that “article names can contain slashes if appropriate – there is no need for such titles to be fixed.” The slash in this title is appropriate.

Any attempt to reverse this change will be considered an act of vandalism and will be reported as such. Farragutful (talk) 15:09, 23 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It does indeed appear that the majority of the sources use the slash. However, the argument that the name of this article deprives the article of its historical integrity is pure bunk. If you believe that the name of the article must exactly match the name of the thing described, I suggest you go move Republic of Ireland to the name supported by the vast majority of sourcing, and see how long it lasts. The Odd Fellows connection is maintained by the article text and at least one category. I would argue that while the title is "acceptable", it's not clearly "appropriate", which is why I moved it in the first place. I have no intention of moving it back at this point -- however, I reserve the right to discuss standardizing the usage of "IOOF" in article titles later, after I have a clearer idea of what the standard should be.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:39, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I noticed this and another one or two abrupt moves by SarekVulcan recently, for pages indexed by List of Odd Fellows buildings or similar, which were mostly created at their NRHP listing names. Thanks for moving back, Farragutful.  I don't think the slash presents any serious problem as there are not multiple subpages, in fact not any subpages of this Talk page.  The Talk page works fine.  By NRHP listing guidelines, the NRHP listing name is usually a well-considered name and should not be changed to just anything else.  SarekVulcan, please consider using the requested move service for anything like this in the future. --doncram (talk) 19:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't think it was controversial in this case, so I Boldly went ahead and did it. Farragutful Reverted, and then we Discussed. Looks to me like the system worked. :-) Note, of course, the link up top to Talk:Wupperman Block, which is the reason I moved the page in the first place. (And I think it's Category:Odd Fellows buildings in the United States I've been working off, fwiw)--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * SarekOfVulcan, in my asking you to use the Requested Move service for anything similar, I am responding to your abrupt tone above, your referring to another's view as "pure bunk", your derogatory or argumentative suggestion equating Odd Fellows building article names to Republic of Ireland type controversy. Your statement "I reserve the right to discuss standardizing the usage of "IOOF" in article titles later" directly suggests you are considering embarking on a renaming campaign.  Anyhow I ask that you use the Requested Move service first, rather than performing abrupt moves on any of the Odd Fellows buildings ones (indexed by the list-article and pretty much identically indexed by the Odd Fellows buildings categories).  I probably have them mostly watchlisted, but please give me a courtesy notice if I do not notice and respond promptly (within a day or two) to a move request on any one of these.  Thanks. --doncram (talk) 16:16, 24 October 2010 (UTC)