The Iraq War article has recently been formed to
consolodate the term under something a bit more
substantive than a disambiguation. There remains the
issue of unnecessary dating of events, where such
events are uniquely enough referenced and titled to
warrant more common terms. There are thousands of
cases where we use the common term instead of a more
official term, so why then is there a persistence in
using a unique standard using titles prefaced with a
date?
In many cases, the date doesnt actually offer any
disambiguation, and seems to be in the interest of
making the title more NPOV. In fact it makes
longer-running events to be segmented and devoid of
context. In the above topic, Ive repeatedly tried to
change the situation, only to be outright reverted by
known and respected pov-pushers. It would appear that
the climate has settled into some more conciliatory
acknowledgement of non-official concepts regarding the
war, and thus the recent move hasnt yet been reverted.
Small topics like the above may fall only to the
interest of a few, but the date in title policy issue
needs some fixing.
SV
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com