Talk:Waitangi dildo incident
Latest comment: 9 months ago by Giantflightlessbirds in topic Not actually a dildo
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.JPG)
Not actually a dildo
editThe article states that the object thrown was not actually a dildo, but a dog toy. Given this, shouldn't the lead not say that it was a dildo? And maybe even the article title needs adjusting? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:55, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- It's referred to in all the reliable sources as a "dildo" – see the references – even after it was revealed to be a dog toy, and that's what anyone searching for an article on the incident will be using as a search term. So the article certainly shouldn't be renamed. I think mentioning that it was a squeaky toy rather spoils the lead, personally. There are other facts more important than that to summarise in the lead if we felt it needed expanding. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 06:45, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- I disagree. It's not a dildo, and that's important.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:49, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I've edited it. Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 04:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree. It's not a dildo, and that's important.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:49, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Does this actually need to be a page?
editI question the notability and importance of this page. Mechachleopteryx (talk) 12:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
- What's your basis for questioning that? Just looking at the references section shows it obviously meets WP:N—ample coverage, domestic and international, in multiple independent reliable sources. And the incident is referred to every year in the media coverage of Waitangi Day, New Zealand's national day. So it seems to be an important event in NZ's recent political history. Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 04:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)