Talk:Mutual Building

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Architecture Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Skyscrapers High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. South Africa Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hello Htonl. Thanks for your contribution to the page on the Mutual Building in Cape Town, but by changing the title from "The Mutual Building (Mutual Gebou), Cape Town" to "Mutual Building" we have three problems: a) unskilled wikipedia users who have the original title in the bookmarks (and those receiving early emails about the page - including a large number of students in Cape Town who were given the previous title just the other day!) now get the Revision History details which are user unfriendly, b) we lose the significant fact that the English and Afrikaans versions are BOTH on the building, and c) we run the risk of confusion with many other "Mutual Buildings" around the world.

I was going to undo the change, or put a re-direct into place from "The Mutual Building (Mutual Gebou), Cape Town", but as a newbie to wikipedia I thought we should discuss this first.

Any comments? AndyB (talk)

As a general response: Wikipedia:Article titles provides us with five principles for choosing the title, and conciseness and naturalness are, I think, the significant ones here. A person looking for information about the building on Wikipedia is likely to search for "Mutual Building", and much less likely to search for "The Mutual Building (Mutual Gebou), Cape Town". To respond to your specific concerns:

• A redirect is already in place from the original title to the new title, so people who have been given the old link will be automatically directed to the article, as you can see if you click on this link: The Mutual Building (Mutual Gebou), Cape Town. They should never get the revision history details unless they explicitly click on the "History" tab at the top; if you are seeing those history details without clicking on "History" then something somewhere has gone very wrong.
• Acknowledging the Afrikaans name of the building is something to be done in the text of the article, not in the title; the title is specifically meant to be the most common English-language name. As you may notice, I've now added the Afrikaans name in the lead sentence of the article, and it's already listed in the "infobox" on the right-hand side.
• Confusion with other "Mutual Buildings" is a very valid concern. I moved the article to the plain "Mutual Building" because that name was not associated with any other article; if there is confusion we could certainly change it to "Mutual Building (Cape Town)". - htonl (talk) 08:56, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

a) My mistake - I was using a link from my browser history which directed me to the history tab (Sorry about that, I must pay attention to details!).

b) Thank you - I'm not going to argue with that.

c) Quite so - let's see what happens.

Thanks again for the other contributions, especially the map - I never stopped to work out how to do that yet. AndyB (talk) 11:43, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have reviewed the initial review comments and undertaken extensive edits. Also, the comment that this "looked like a gallery" seemed unfair so I cleared that out also. All further comments are welcome.

I intend to add a proper gallery when I have got back to the building with access to the significant areas. AndyB (talk) 17:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Basic content completed - it's now down to fine tuning. AndyB (talk) 19:52, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks to GH for help with flora, fauna and coats of arms - verification of Bloemfontein and East London coats of arms is still needed AndyB (talk) 09:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mutual Building. 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/20110721190934/http://www.bowker.info/IvanMitford-Barberton.htm to http://www.bowker.info/IvanMitford-Barberton.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101125140156/http://www.decopix.com/LR_Murals_Gallery-Final/index_6.html to http://www.decopix.com/LR_Murals_Gallery-Final/index_6.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 14:45, 9 February 2018 (UTC)Reply