- 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: moved. Consensus to move to be grammatically correct and consistent with other such titles. (closed by non-admin page mover) Raladic (talk) 22:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Films about intersex → Intersex representation in film – This or films about the intersex experience (or a better grammatically phrased title), based on the Wikidata description. Intersex is mainly an adjective, but even as a noun it sounds strange this way. The new title, Intersex representation in films, fits better. I'm not sure if all of these films have intersex characters, but if they do, we could rename including the word characters. Note: the word intersexuality is avoided due to conflation with orientation, and intersexness is a protologism I guess. Web-julio (talk) 20:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Note: WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, WikiProject Lists, WikiProject Human rights, WikiProject Film, and WikiProject LGBTQ studies have been notified of this discussion. Web-julio (talk) 20:52, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Support (but maybe with alt proposal "Intersex representation in film")—Yeah, intersex is usually used as an adjective. The closest other article I can find that is similar in scope is Women in film, maybe indicating that the -s should be left off per WP:CONSISTENT. I think either title would be preferable to "Films about intersex," however. Spookyaki (talk) 22:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Move to Intersex representation in film to be WP:CONSISTENT with Women in film. Theparties (talk) 05:13, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Support Intersex representation in film. This suggestion is so non-controversial (especially since the original title uses such poor grammar), that I don't even think it needed a move discussion. I would've just followed WP:BEBOLD. But hopefully we'll get a WP:SNOWCLOSE. Lewisguile (talk) 11:18, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Oppose this particular title since this will make it inconsistent with literature about intersex and television works about intersex. I think all three of these should have consistent article titles. I also find all of these articles to be list articles, so the titles should reflect that. I'm not quite sure how to name them, though. List of films with intersex themes? And I'm a little surprised this discussion is happening without a certain 2024 film not being listed here. Erik (talk | contrib) (ping me) 15:17, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- In that case, I think all three titles should be changed (maybe ("Intersex literature" per LGBTQ literature, therefore "Intersex film"/"Intersex television works" or "Intersex representation in film" per Women in film, therefore "Intersex representation in literature"/"Intersex representation in television works"). I also don't know if they're strictly lists. Compare to List of LGBTQ-related films, which is literally just a bulleted list of films with a country year. There's a bit more going on in each of these articles. Spookyaki (talk) 15:46, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- I think the latter would be a bit more WP:PRECISE given the scope of the article right now, but again, either preferable to the current title. Spookyaki (talk) 15:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- I didn't saw the other list articles. Anyways, I don't know how to sort multiple RM discussions into 1.
- There was a CfD: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#(LGBT identity) fiction, so following that discussion, "literature about intersex" should be renamed into Intersex literature. Television works might have a different outcome though, as I don't think "intersex television works" would work harmoniously/agradably/pleasingfully. Web-julio (talk) 00:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Category:LGBTQ-related films implies it should be Intersex-related films, right? Web-julio (talk) 17:51, 18 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- I think as a category/list that's a bit different from the other articles mentioned. The scope is different. Spookyaki (talk) 18:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Note: since no one supported "in films" I changed the RM request to reflect that now I support this version. Web-julio (talk) 00:11, 16 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
- Hmm. I think Intersex representation in film would be good and I support that rename. It may be time to brush up the Intersex characters in fiction page (since it was *originally* a list, which is part of the issue as to why it isn't as good as it could be, but I did some work on it some years ago) at the very least.Historyday01 (talk) 23:52, 18 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.