Talk:Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014

Requested move 12 May 2014

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

---

Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (S. 994; 113th Congress) → Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 – The preemptive disambiguation is unnecessary. WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISION control. When people now refer to the "Digital Accountability and Transparency Act", they are referring to the act of Congress (this), not those works which are not acts of Congress but merely bills or proposed acts. I also intend to further propose that this article be renamed the "DATA Act", but I did not want to conflate issues which do not pertain to the "(S. 994; 113th Congress)" part of the title and confuse the arguments. Int21h (talk) 05:11, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Support - Now that the bill is officially a public law, I concede that the disambiguation is probably no longer necessary. Congress will not reuse this name now that it has become law. That said, I do not believe the disambiguation was "preemptive" when the article was created, since there already was an article on the House bill by the same name at the time that this article was created. The disambiguation at that time was necessary to distinguish between the two separate bills that share a name. Having a shared name does not mean that they have the same contents or even the same supporters. Legislation and how Congress puts it all together is a more complicated subject than many people think (don't get me started on legislative vehicles!) - sometimes naming things gets complicated too. Thanks. HistoricMN44 (talk) 14:17, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 24 July 2014

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

---

Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 → DATA Act – While both short titles are official, "DATA Act" is shorter and easier to wikilink against. It is also the most commonly used short title at this point, likely because of the same. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 12:19, 31 July 2014 (UTC) Int21h (talk) 19:17, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Oppose The Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 is the law's correct title. It also gives more information than the acronym - a reader immediately knows what year the law is from, that it relates to digital material in some way, and that it at least claims to address transparency. Those are not facts that you pick up immediately from "DATA Act". A simple redirect on DATA Act that leads here will allow those who want to link to the acronym if that is their big issue. There are other cases where we use the official name instead of the common name - the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act instead of Obamacare for instance. There are plenty of people who recognize the name Obamacare and not PPACA, which is why there is a redirect to the correct title. That said, I don't oppose this strongly enough to have an edit war about it, so long as the appropriate redirects are in place. Thanks. HistoricMN44 (talk) 14:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

DATA Act is an official name--also called a "short title"; Obamacare is not. The comparison is flawed. This fact is also obscured by the technical deficiencies of {{Infobox United States federal proposed legislation}}, which does not have a parameter for other short titles (all short titles are official names, not to be confused with acronyms, nicknames or colloquial names). Int21h (talk) 18:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

The point I was trying to make is that just because a name is more commonly recognized by people doesn't mean Wikipedia uses that name as the article name. There needs to be a stronger reason than "common use" to change the name. I do realize that "DATA Act" is an official short title, but I still think it is better with the longer name, an equally official short title that provides more contextual information and disambiguation. Thanks. HistoricMN44 (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose the acronym is opaque. Also Data Protection Act, Bundesdatenschutzgesetz (Federal Data Protection Act), Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2013 (H.R. 2061; 113th Congress), Data Quality Act, DATA 2000 -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 07:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose as above. Mauls (talk) 13:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014. 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/20140802034533/http://www.opencongress.org/bill/s994-113/show to http://www.opencongress.org/bill/s994-113/show

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 01:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)