Jump to content

Talk:Trans

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 15 November 2024

[edit]
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. The primary argument presented by the nominator and one supporter was that Transgender is the primary topic per WP:PT1, however a convincing objection was raised that the second part of that criterion, namely, that Transgender is not more likely than all the other topics combined[] to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term, arguing that the WikiNav data used to come to that conclusion was incorrectly interpreted. The counter-objection was merely pointing to other sources where the primary usage of "trans" was indicated to be "transgender", however this was replied to by arguing that the discrepancy in Ngram hits before and after "transgender" became a commonly used word was not significant enough to indicate that "trans" was being used primarily to refer to that. Additionally, the argument that dictionaries prioritize the meaning of "trans" as "transgender" was unsuccessful, as they simply pointed out that "transgender" is the most common meaning of "trans" currently, as opposed to one that is more likely than all the other topics combined[] to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term. Meanwhile, as for WP:PT2, the nominator did not give a rationale as to how "transgender" has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term, and the only supporting !vote was WP:per nom, while some opponents did specifically indicate that they believed that PT2 was not met, so it appears that there was also no consensus that PT2 was met, and thus neither criterion for Transgender being the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC was met. (non-admin closure) JJPMaster (she/they) 02:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trans → Trans (disambiguation) – Per the clickstream of WikiNav and the Massview Analysis for the current DAB page - The majority of people came here looking for the article Transgender (or to vandalize it to that effect as the article edit history has shown for which I just requested indef semi protection to stop it). A lot of time has passed since the old RM in 2019 and since then, RS are regularly using the term "Trans" as interchangable with Transgender, which is also why dictionaries, such as Merriam-Webster have amended their entries for "Trans" to that effect and list other uses as secondary to that of Trans being a clipping of Transgender. Since DAB pages are supposed to help people with navigation, it makes sense to move the DAB page to Trans (disambiguation) as the current navigation, a large chunk of it being people typing "Trans" and expecting to land on "Transgender", but instead land on the DAB page, which is waste navigation. Transgender satisfies WP:PT1 by a long shot over all other articles and it is also without question that the term is not going away, so it's long term significance is also given. So I suggest that Trans be redirected to Transgender per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT and the current DAB page be moved to Trans (disambiguation) to aid users who are indeed not looking for the page they most likely did based on the objective data. Raladic (talk) 23:35, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Sexology and sexuality and WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies have been notified of this discussion. Raladic (talk) 23:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. I am not 100% opposed due to it clearly being more popular in the present day to refer to transgender or transsexual, but on the basis that it's an extremely common word/prefix and with higher percentages of users finding the articles they want to navigate to landing here first (e.g. Trans (film) with 8.89% of people landing here first before navigating to that article as opposed to 0.21% for Transgender), I am probably more in favor of leaving it as-is. Waddles 🗩 🖉 02:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The DAB page won’t go away, it will just show up separately as "Trans (disambiguation)" in the search, from the direct navigation for those that just want to go straight to the main article based on the absolute navigational numbers. That’s why we commonly have a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT for cases exactly like this where there is one article that has significantly more than all other navigations combined. Which is why I summarized the policy-based reasons for the move above with the supporting data for it. Your argument is to maintain the current title and cause several hundred people from misnavigating, because 20 people per month may have to do an extra click for an article that receives about 10 total hits per day. That is not a good policy-backed reason to oppose this move. The primary purpose of WP:DAB pages is Ensuring that a reader who searches for a topic using a particular term can get to the information on that topic quickly and easily, ideally directly without needing to go to a DAB page itself if there is a topic that is much more likely than others to be the target, which is what we call a primary topic and then have a (disambiguation) DAB page for the rest, as is the case here. Raladic (talk) 03:24, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Raladic: I'm aware that the disambiguation page won't go away, but it is still useful to about 40% of the people who searched 'trans' and want to go to transsexual or any of the other articles instead of transgender, none of which articles show up in the search bar. It will be even more difficult to find for inexperienced users when one of those article titles is disambiguated.
If it were less balanced than that—closer to 25% vs. 75%, for example—I would most likely be more favorable towards this decision. Additionally, considering that the article for transgender shows up upon typing 'tr' in the search bar and that the plurality of users landing on the article are from internally searching 'transgender', I don't believe it is much of a priority in the first place to have 'trans' redirect to that article. I think that it is fine as is. Waddles 🗩 🖉 05:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The disambiguation page would still show up in the search results - it would show "Trans (disambiguation)" right below "Transgender" which would become a hit-enter when people type "Trans" instead of currently being the 3rd topic (the current DAB page being first, Transport Layer Security second and Transgender third).
People landing on the DAB page instead of on Transgender are the clear majority of navigations at 60% consistently from clickstream, which is more likely than all the other topics combined per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC policy. So this shifting of the goal post feels a bit like a WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT. Raladic (talk) 05:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Raladic: The only reason "I just don't like it" is because I don't believe that it is necessary when 'trans' is a term that has pre-existed transgender and is continued from then on to be used by other topics unrelated to the supposed primary topic. That is why I don't exactly like it.
Another example where there's an obvious primary topic is at Ford, which is Ford Motor Company, one of the most well-known brands in the world. However, the word 'ford' predates the company's usage, and 'ford' is just one piece of the company's name/article's title, be it in the names of various people and places or when referring to an at-grade crossing of a stream. I don't think it is fair for people looking for the type of river crossing or the proper noun to land at the article for the car company when it's as many as 30-50% of people trying to find something other than that. Yes, it's a minority, but it's not just a dozen people out of several hundred. Equate Ford Motor Company to transgender (the primary topic, often colloquially referred to with a shortened version of its full name), ford (crossing) to transsexual (a minor, but not insignificant topic), and everything else called 'Ford' to everything else called 'Trans' (the remainder of minor topics which add up to a large amount of people who would be lead to the primary topic before they've found what they're searching for). As with Trans, I think that the way Ford is is acceptable. Waddles 🗩 🖉 03:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, Trans is closer to Einstein redirecting to Albert Einstein and Einstein (disambiguation) or Ovens to Oven and Ovens (disambiguation) per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT.
Even the two major English language search engines of trans - Google Search and trans - Bing Search both give Instant answer results for "Transgender" when searching for the term "trans" as it is the very clear primary term as I have now extensively presented and there are no results that are not discussing trans/transgender until you get past the entire first page of the search results.
Not that I was surprised to encounter it, which is why I was well equipped with the evidence that would easily pass for any other topic based on the evidence, but sadly, improving LGBTQ coverage on Wikipedia to address the WP:Systemic Bias against LGBTQ_and_Wikipedia#LGBTQ_coverage still faces outsized opposition for no reason. Raladic (talk) 01:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Raladic: 'Einstein' is an obvious one. Most, if not everything on that page, is named for Einstein. For 'Ovens', it depends how you interpret it. 'Ovens' can be either a plural noun referring to an oven or a singular proper noun. With that considered, I probably think it should redirect to the DAB page but at the same time I think the current configuration makes sense.
My opposition for redirecting 'Trans' to Transgender has nothing to do with any bias I have regarding the LGBT or transgenderism itself. I'm opposed to the idea of redirecting an extremely common prefix used in at least 1,000 English words, and that seems to be the root of everyone else's problems here. If 'trans' was a slang term that directly came from 'transgender', and words like 'transform' or 'transport' or anything named 'Trans' that came before the popularity of transgender topics did not exist, I would not all be opposed. Waddles 🗩 🖉 05:19, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The nominator makes a convincing argument that WP:PT1 is satisfied, one that alone would convince me. However, I'm not wholly convinced that Transgender satisfies WP:PT2, particularly over Transsexual, given that (from my understanding) the latter term was used for many decades before "transgender" started to gain popularity as a term. I would, however, support moving both terms up to the top of the dab page and saying Used alone, "trans" most commonly refers to... as a sort of compromise, perhaps. estar8806 (talk) ★ 03:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A primary topic designation doesn't need to satisfy both PT1 and PT2. Some satisfy just one, but do so convincingly, which is definitely the case here, based both on the clickstream, as well as the massview total page views - In most cases, the topic that is primary with respect to usage is also primary with respect to long-term significance; in many other cases, only one sense of primacy is relevant per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC.
The top of the article would receive a Template:For hatnote anyway to point to the dab page, so some people may have an extra click, but MOST people wouldn't anymore, which is the point of WP:PRIMARYREDIRECTs. Also since you specifically called out Transgender (a term around since around 1965) vs Transsexual (a term popularized in 1960s) (refer to Transgender#Terminology for the history of both) for long-term significance - Both terms were little used and Transgender overtook Transsexual in 1997 (27 years ago) and has been on a meteoric rise based on the ngram data ever since then, so it's hard to argue that Transsexual has any long-term significance over Transgender either as Transgender has been in use just a bit less than Transsexual, so I think in this case, it's easy to argue that even PT2 is given for this term. Raladic (talk) 03:54, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 10:37, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:DPT, let's actually analyze what the usage data shows. WikiNav says that in October, 1.6k readers saw the page Trans (from pageviews: 1566), and we could identify 254 outgoing clickstreams to the proposed primary topic, and a sum of 181 clickstreams to other topics. Another 245 clickstreams were filtered, which typically happens because of anonymization (<10 source-destination pairs each). So all we can be sure about is that the first link in the list had 254/1566 = ~16% of readers click on it, and in the absolute theoretical best case 499/1566 = ~31%. This is absolutely not a proof of primary topic by usage - it means we can't even estimate that one half of people who came here proceeded there.
Likewise for the mass views statistics - they show the proposed primary topic has an advantage over other topics in raw volume, but this does little to prove it has the same advantage for the shorter term 'trans' - the latter could just be considered generally ambiguous.
More generally, navigation should be organized to suit readers (WP:RF), so the idea that we use the behavior of editors, let alone crude vandals, to guide decisions on this - is I'm afraid entirely misguided.
As there's little to prove that this word became overwhelmingly associated with a single topic, and there are others with substantial long-term significance, notably transsexual and trans fats, I'm not convinced that this move would improve navigation outcomes for the average reader. It could well just lead to over half the people looking up "trans" having to click the hatnote to navigate further. (Oppose) --Joy (talk) 14:31, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then what about the doubling of ngram usage of the word "trans" at the exact same time as the longform transgender.
The major English language dictionaries - Merriam-Webster, dictionary.com, Oxford English Dictionary, Collins dictionary, Oxford Learners Dictionary - list the adjective term for transgender as the primary topic use for the word trans. the OED even added another special one for Trans* 6 years ago to their entries that made the news.
This is very clearly the primary use of the term "trans" and has been for many years. Raladic (talk) 15:22, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Ngrams graph you posted is another example where you're apparently misreading statistics. There is indeed an increase in usage of the word, but it doesn't exceed the baseline. The graph shows the previous usage at ~13 on the X axis fairly consistently, and then it grows to ~20. The most obvious explanation for the current state is that 13/20 is for other uses of trans, and 7/20 is for transgender. Why would this graph make us assume that at the same time this meaning grew in usage, that all others also declined?
That graph is not an indication of a primary topic by usage, either, only of a new trend emerging. Yes, it's important to organize navigation to match that trend so readers navigate efficiently, and that's what we're doing by listing the most popular meaning first. The threshold for employing a primary redirect is higher - it's used where the average reader would usually assume the redirected term is synonymous with the destination, and hatnote serves to accommodate a much smaller minority of readers. These ratios shown here are simply not there yet.
I also disagree with your characterization of what those dictionaries do.
  • MW lists the proposed primary topic as first out of three meanings, and then lists a bunch more.
  • Dictionary.com shows American meanings first, where it's first out of two and the second is marked as no longer common; if you click the top British link, then it lists five meanings, none of which are transgender, confusingly enough.
  • OED lists two items, and both of these explanations in turn talk of two meanings.
  • Collins lists it as first of many meanings.
  • OLD lists it as a single item, and links half a dozen things as "All matches" on the right-hand side, including the prefix one (that the other ones do list inline)
Each of these sources do basically the same thing that we do - show the most common meaning first, while not hiding the listing of other meanings behind another click. --Joy (talk) 16:19, 17 November 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.

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2024

[edit]
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Don't think trans is at all a common term used to refer to transracial, need a source for this Cannolis (talk) 08:34, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To add Transracial to sociology 124.190.18.110 (talk) 08:41, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sociology

[edit]

  • Trans, a sociological term which may refer to:
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Trans&oldid=1262661802"