Talk:Winterval

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Christmas task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Holidays: Christmas Low‑importance

	Holidays portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of holidays 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.HolidaysWikipedia:WikiProject HolidaysTemplate:WikiProject HolidaysHolidays
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Christmas task force.

Birmingham Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Birmingham, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Birmingham 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.BirminghamWikipedia:WikiProject BirminghamTemplate:WikiProject BirminghamBirmingham
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

"Despite"

I've removed a section that states "Despite the explicit inclusion of Christmas and church festivals at the centre of the season," and continued "the name 'Winterval' has since become used in the UK as shorthand for an attempt (real or, more commonly, imagined) to "rebrand" Christmas so as not to exclude non-Christians." (The second half of the sentence is still there). This is because the section as previously written implies that the view that Winterval was an attempt to rebrand Christmas is wrong. Not only is this original research, it is OR that doesn't make any sense. Supposing an organisation did indeed attempt to rebrand Christmas - they would need to include Christmas events and symbols within their new brand. Otherwise, it wouldn't be a rebranding of Christmas, it would just be something completely new.

I also note that the opening paragraph sets out the "The intention". It doesn't state whose intention this is, but I assume it means the intention of the people who introduced Winterval in Birmingham. Yet later on, the article states that the person responsible for the initiative in Birmingham intended it to be a "vehicle which could cover the marketing of a whole season of events", including Christmas events, as well as a brand. This might reasonably be seen by some people as "rebranding". I certainly don't suggest that the article should suggest it was an attempt to rebrand Christmas, but neither should it imply that such a suggestion is necessarily wrong. When it comes to setting out the "intention" of the people who introduced Winterval, surely it is best to stick to the words they actually used, which do seem to be all about brands and marketing vehicles? Hobson (talk) 18:50, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

The new information about Waterford having a go at doing Winterval has been moved to the Legacy section; I'm not bothered about this in principle, but I'm not sure it matches the other content in that section; the other content is broadly discussing the negative fall-out from the Birmingham incident, whilst - at the time of writing - Waterford's use is a positive act, rather than a 'legacy' of the Birmingham fall-out. Which does make me think further about the article as a whole - as it currently is it's an article specifically about what Birmingham did in 1997 & 1998 and the media response to that. The addition of Waterford using the word makes me think a slight rewrite of the intro and general article headings is in order.Star-one (talk) 15:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Winterval. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080316070109/http://www.churchinwales.org.uk/press/display_press_release.php?prid=4542 to http://www.churchinwales.org.uk/press/display_press_release.php?prid=4542
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-419740/Campaign-real-Christmas-Religious-leaders-unite-political-correctness.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-2058830/Clarifications-corrections.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:45, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]