Talk:Sintra Bronte

Renaming

The principle source on which this article is based is: http://muzilog.com/archives/728

The source clearly states: "The model is Trinidadian Sintra Arunte-Bronte…"

Therefore, I request any interested person not to rename the article or modify the text.

If there is anything else, please discuss it here. --Muzammil (talk) 16:52, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

The first-person account in this article (http://www.afrobella.com/2015/08/25/sintra-bronte-afrobella-jamaica-poster-girl/) clearly states that her name is NOT "Sintra Arunte-Bronte" but "Sintra Bronte". Therefore, it *should* be renamed correctly.

-- Jalabi99 (talk) 06:48, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Do you represent the website? --Muzammil (talk) 10:23, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

No, but I believe if the woman herself is saying that this page is getting her name wrong, we should assent to her wishes and refer to her properly. Do you represent Muzilog.com?

-- Jalabi99 (talk) 16:38, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jalabi99!! Thnx for your reply, it's lovely!!! Maybe User:Doug_Weller, User:Cactus.man or any other admin can decide on renaming! All the best Jalabi - take care. --Muzammil (talk) 17:43, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Tricky. One source even uses aboth. Arunte-Bronte is the most common use, but the interview says she uses just Bronte. See [1] and [2]hen there's the Tinken bit.[3]. Both names must be in the lead, one must be a redirect. Doug Weller (talk) 17:23, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Doug, for the input. Jalabi99, I think this should work. --Muzammil (talk) 17:30, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jalabi99, the Afrobella link doesn't serve any purpose other than arguing for name-change. I suggest removing the link from the article. --Muzammil (talk) 13:47, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

I disagree. For one thing, you are not a neutral observer in this, since by getting rid of the Afrobella link it would leave only the link you provided as justification for the leaving up the wrong name. For another, no, the Afrobella serves more of a purpose than just "arguing for a name-change". -- Jalabi99 (talk) 22:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jalabi99, you seem to be getting personal with the remark "you are not a neutral observer in this" - anyway, my question is - What other purpose does Afrobella serve other than just "arguing for a name-change", which you've mentioned above? --Muzammil (talk) 12:38, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Your perception is wrong. I am not "getting personal", unless you define "getting personal" as "I am making an observation based on your actions in this case." I'm not insulting you or anything negative like that; why would I? The thing is, I am not involved with Afrobella in any way, whereas you are directly involved with the Muzilog site. That makes your advocacy for keeping the wrong name a little less neutral than my advocacy for changing the name to the correct one (as testified by the woman herself). Removing the link to Afrobella would serve the purpose of maintaining your site as the sole arbiter/source of her name, which according to her own testimony (via the Afrobella site) is not correct. Hence my statement that "you are not a neutral observer in this", which I should probably change to "you do not seem to be a neutral observer in this." Do we want to bolster our ego by having our blog be the sole source of information on the subject's name, despite her own testimony that it is wrongly rendered on Wikipedia, or do we want to provide accurate information on this topic? That is my entire point. All of that said, I think Doug Weller's solution is entirely workable, since it keeps the wrong name in the title but has the right one in the lead of the first paragraph, and keeps both links (to your Muzilog site and to the Afrobella site) intact. -- Jalabi99 (talk) 18:01, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

"your Muzilog" site? Its very weird thing to hear - Just because I revealed my real name and the first 3 letters are common in my name and Muzilog doesn't mean I own it. Moreover, English is not my principal editing Wikipedia and I haven't quoted Muzilog ref on any other article on any other website. --Muzammil (talk) 05:41, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

This one is a fresh attempt at disruptive editing when meaningful conversation is apparently in progress. --Muzammil (talk) 18:34, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

There are several ways forward. If everyone agreed, there's dispute resolution - WP:DRN. Otherwise you can either do an WP:RFC or a move request WP:RM#CM but I'd suggest the first two as it is a bit more than a move request. Doug Weller (talk) 19:12, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

• Calm down guys. :) "No, but I believe if the woman herself is saying that this page is getting her name wrong, we should assent to her wishes and refer to her properly." -- that's we should not follow, IMHO. WP:RS needed.
  If you want to change/don't change the article title, you may show a few sources those mention desired name. --Tito Dutta (talk) 10:55, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Afrobella is a blog which itself might not be reliable. Other sources which support the current names are Alicia Keys remakes T&T's Sintra Arunte-Bronté's 1972 Jamaica poster, back on the block with her world famous wet t-shirt Poster, History of the 1972 Jamaican Poster Girl and TRINIDAD MADE JAMAICA HOT! to name only a few of the sources. --Muzammil (talk) 13:01, 6 December 2015 (UTC)