--- George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, no. I think it should be called the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. You're overgeneralizing my position.
Maybe. Is it also possible that I'm undergeneralising it?
If the military operation name is the most common western, english language designation for an event ("Desert Storm") then it probably should be the article name.
Ive never read a "probablility" clause in WP:NPOV. (Maybe I should read it again...)
If the military operation name is not the most common western, english language description for the event ("2003 Invasion of Iraq") then it should not use the military operation name. The military operation name should exist as a redirect to the event article, in that case.
It's a western-english-culture-centric approach, not a pro military or anti-military terminology approach. The article should be named the way "normal people" will most likely look for the article. In some cases that is, and in some cases that is not, the military operation name.
Thats all nice and good, but what does "western-English-culture-centric" nomenclature have to do with NPOV?
Robin Lakoff is the wife of UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff; both of whom have been writing widely on linguistics of military and political actions, from a left-wing viewpoint, for about 20 years now. Your argument may be of independent origin but it's precisely some of their points. See [[George Lakoff]] on en.wikipedia
Sound like smart people. Maybe they would agree with our NPOV policy.
Its also possible to take the Pentagon too seriously too.
Of course.
I think I will put that CIRCA poster back up.
-Stevertigo
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com