Talk:Deadname

The "#fragment" suffix here... no longer works as intended

Someone changed the name of the section being linked to

As shown in the DIFF listing for this EDIT, (the edit of "12:21, 28 May 2020") now, ever since that edit was done, ... the Wikipedia article (section) that the "redirect" page ("Deadname") used to redirect to ... is no longer called "Transphobia#Misgendering and exclusion".

Now, it is just called "Transphobia#Misgendering".

Plus, (see e.g. the edit comments -- and the EDITs themselves -- for two or three edits 'before' the ['12:21, 28 May 2020'] edit that was mentioned above), apparently there is now a Wikipedia article called "Deadnaming", -- ["!"] -- so ... now might be a good time to reconsider the whole reason for having a "redirect" page called ("Deadname").

so now, this "Redirect page" no longer works ('as intended')

Now, when someone clicks on -- or even hovers their mouse pointer over! -- a link "such as" the link in the entry for "Deadname" in the "See_also" section of [the article about] "Birth_name", the result could be confusing! If you "click", then ... it takes you to the top of the article about "Transphobia". Even if you just (have "Page previews" enabled in [the "section-rendering" option ...or some kind of option... within your "Preferences", *and* then ...) 'hover' your mouse pointer over .. a hyperlink to "Deadname") ... it starts showing you the beginning of the article about Transphobia.

One might even start 'wondering' what "Transphobia" is doing in (the "See_also" section of) the article about "Birth_name" ... because it might not be clear, -- at first -- what "Transphobia" has to do with [the concept of] "Birth_name". But now, ... for anyone who is "wondering" about that ...the question is now answered succinctly by (the first paragraph of) the [new] article about "Deadnaming". (Good!)

OPTIONS!

One thing (perhaps the simplest) that could be done, would be: to just change the forwarding the redirect (for "Deadname") to point to (the new name of) the section that it was pointing to before. That section used to be called "Transphobia#Misgendering and exclusion", but now, its new name is just "Transphobia#Misgendering".

However, in light of some of the comments above, e.g., in the last paragraph of the first sub-section above ["Plus, (see e.g. the edit comments ...)"], and in the last paragraph of the second sub-section above ("One might even start 'wondering' [...]") ... perhaps some other options should be considered.

Any comments?

Thanks for listening. --Mike Schwartz (talk) 19:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Why not simply redirect to Deadnaming, now that that exists? --ColinFine (talk) 16:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

​I've done as Colin suggests here above. But other options are updating this page to reflect to new section header, or you can do as I've done here and create an {{anchor}} that incoming links can go to. – Thjarkur (talk) 16:25, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

• The use of bold text and enlarged fonts above is not helpful, Mike Schwartz.
• When a redirect is targeted at a section name in an article, there is the inherent risk that normal editing will make the link fail to go to the intended section, and instead go to the top of the page. This is simply a cost of using the ability to redirect to a section. It can be made less likely by inserting an anchor and linking to that -- an anchor is far less likely to be changed by normal editing.
• When editing causes a redirect to cease to link as intended, the normal response is to fix the redirect by pointing it to the best available section, or by creating an anchor and linking to that. There is no need to make a large drama of a very normal editing process. When a better target is available, re-targeting a redirect is also normal. As ColinFine suggests above, why not redirect to Deadnaming instead? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:32, 4 June 2020 (UTC)