Talk:Man's World (periodical)

On 28 June 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Man's World (2021 magazine). The result of the discussion was not moved.

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Feedback from New Page Review process

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Wow. Thanks for writing the article.

JSFarman (talk) 18:16, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Name

I believe there’s another process and area to discuss disambiguation links, but thought opening a section here could allow for subject-specific idea generation. Another publication, MW (Indian magazine), is based in India and focuses on subjects related to India, and was formerly titled “Man’s World” but changed its name to MW.

“2021 magazine” makes sense in that it includes the year the publication seems to have started, but, might be confusing (started in 2021, but continues to publish, versus only published during 2021). Would it make sense to change the name to “Man's World (magazine)” or is this too nitpicky?

(Edited this comment/section because I accidentally hit “submit” while typing)

Bluetik (talk) 01:14, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think my renaming might be a good start. Biohistorian15 (talk) 06:55, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, none of these are any good. The title in parentheses must be something that does not apply to the Indian magazine. Both are periodicals. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all for your input and discussion on this! Bluetik (talk) 16:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 June 2024

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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Polyamorph (talk) 14:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Man's World (periodical) → Man's World (2021 magazine) – Per my comment above, the current disambiguation is incomplete. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as unnecessary WP:OVERPRECISION. There is no other article on WP about a periodical titled Man's World. That we also have MW (Indian magazine), which was formerly titled Man's World calls for a {{distinguish}} hatnote (which I'll add now), but not a title change. Besides which "2021" does not disambiguate from "Indian"; we'd need either "American" and "Indian" or "2021" and "2000", but for most readers neither of those would help any more that a hatnote. Station1 (talk) 22:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per @Station1. Adding the year makes for an unfortunate disambiguation too, if the magazine is still being published. Killuminator (talk) 13:30, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We can probably add his name

He has fully owned up to being the person who the Guardian doxed and has done several interviews in person. If he denied it then there would be reason to it remain removed for BLPPRIVACY reasons but he seems to have embraced it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that a high number of articles from the author have focused on doxing otherwise not-notable figures. I took a look, and the author identifies this manner of work as activism. That doesn't necessarily mean that is it not true, and it sounds like it may be true here, but if so, perhaps the Guardian pieces with this author should not be considered a Reliable Source on par with other Guardian articles. More like Hope not Hate or the ADL. Still accurate, but the activism should also be of note. Bluetik (talk) 03:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluetik Yes, I agree, that author does that. I wouldn’t be for including if REN was not very, very open about it. He has accepted it, now often refers to himself online with his real name, and regularly shows his own face. He doesn’t actually seem to mind having been doxed? Odd fellow. If he denied it or wished to remain private I would say we not include it a la Stonetoss. But he seems to be OK with it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For examples:

here's him selling a book translation using his real name, tying it to the REN alias [1]
podcast under his real name [2]
another podcast [3]
He writes at The Spectator with his real name [4], with the description "Charles Cornish-Dale runs the X account Raw Egg Nationalist (@Babygravy9)." (yesterday!)
interviewed at far-right outlet GB News using his real name and face but tying it to the alias [5]

Among many other examples. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: he was actually doxed by Hope not Hate. I confused him with Keeperman. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]