This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America 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.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change 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.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
Thanks for starting the discussion. Although, consensus is first needed before it is added which was cited per WP:ONUS in the edit summary. Maybe I am wrong and I am open to discussion, but the term standing rock protests is something googled as people using the terms to search for where the protests happened. The name and what it commonly or alternatively referred to are different. If it was something that people used to describe it, that may be different. I am open to hear your thoughts and hopefully we can reach a consensus. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The ngrams speaks for itself. Your presumption, that the term standing rock protests is something googled as people using the terms to search for where the protests happened is not what Ngrams measures; it measures "how those phrases have occurred in a corpus of books". The WP:ONUS is now on you to explain why you think MOS:LEADALT and WP:COMMONNAME shouldn't apply here.
Actually, if you want to discuss without contention, I would be happy to do so. Maybe I am reading into your style of writing but it does seem contentious which is not the best way help others see your point of view. Threatening to escalate to RfC without engaging in a discussion can also be seen as WP:TE although I do not believe we are there yet. You are citing an essay (BRD) over a policy (ONUS). If you want to use BRD, then you are correct, we are in the discussion stage. I would not recommend restoring the content without consensus as you are now edit warring. BRD specifically says (emphasis added) - "To follow BRD specifically, instead of one of the many alternatives, don't restore your bold edit, don't make a different edit to this part of the page, don't engage in back-and-forth reverting, and don't start any of the larger dispute resolution processes."
On to the actual discussion...measuring how it is used in books or how it is used to search Google does not matter in my opinion. It is still describing the location and not how it is commonly or alternatively used. Again, maybe I am wrong and I am happy to discuss (again, peacefully though). --CNMall41 (talk) 21:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see you escalated which is unfortunate, especially with such little discussion. Would suggest the discussion continues as I am not sure the redirects you created are appropriate. A proper RfC could ask if it should be added to the page, if the redirects should be kept, or both. But, here we are. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Given how many times "Standing Rock" has been mentioned by the article alone, this needs to be mentioned as an alternative title. >>> Extorc.talk09:40, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Standing Rock protests should be in the lead sentence. It has been widely used by all the major newspapers, including but not limited to: The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, The Globe and Mail, The Times, Wall Street Journal, The Boston Globe, Associated Press, The Independent, The Canadian Press, Los Angeles Times. Also found it being used in at least a dozen scholarly journals. Unclear why a RfC was needed for this.Isaidnoway(talk)23:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
