Wikipedia talk:Brooke Vibber Day

message: *I Bhadani salute you - Brion Vibber. I also wish you all the best! BTW, I learnt of this fact from Wikipedia:Esperanza. --Bhadani 13:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Namaskar|Salute you]]

message: So, Since today I'm flying from Singapore towards France, I'll have three dinners. À ta santé ! ♦ Pabix 03:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hi Brion 

message: I checked this page to see whether it reflected this user's recent change in name (and presumably gender), and I'm happy it was. But what happened to the obligation to greet one another in Esperanto on Brion/Brooke Vibber Day? Steinbach (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: As an Esperanto speaker, I am indeed sorry to see the mentions of Esperanto by Jimmy Wales go away, because Esperanto played a major role in Brion's early involvement with Wikimedia - particularly the introduction of Unicode into MediaWiki several years before Unicode got mainstream, motivated by the language's phonetic spelling and the corresponding use of diacritical characters. Read here an account by the founder of Esperanto Wikipedia. I oppose that the passages of Jimmy Wales' declaraion of Brion Vibber Day hinting at Brion's involment in and passion for Esperanto had to go away recently, apparently just because of someone's feeling uneasy about the eponym's birth name having been used in the relevant sentences. Blahma (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Esperanto 

message: Why did you remove the decree section that is incorporated on all the other holiday pages? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I imagine because it included Brooke's former name. But I've checked with Brooke on Mastodon and she said that taking the approach we'd take in mainspace—quoting but with bracketed name/pronouns—is preferable to truncation or omission, so I've restored it thusly.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 21:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume that was the thinking as well, but I am concerned about this kind of presumption and radical change with no discussion. Even at that, it's not obvious to me that the person who has the day namesake gets ownership over these documentation pages, but it is certainly wise to get the courteous check-in. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh and to be clear, I support being bold as well as the rename, in case that was ambiguous. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Good deal. Thanks for responding and being supportive. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ABrooke_Vibber_Day&oldid=prev&diff=1215347271 ??? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @Koavf: I think one of us must be misreading something here. The way I read it: Seddon originally switched to a paraphrase based on an assumption of what Brooke would want. Brooke clarified that she preferred the full citation, and that's (as you've noted) the standard practice regardless, and so I reverted. Seddon signaled no objection (and in fact off-wiki thanked me for resolving the matter). Jimbo then came here and said he "endorse[d]" the current version and "regret[ted] that [he] was too slow" to make the change. Even you, in your post at the start of the thread, were in favor of keeping the citation. Where, then, are you getting a consensus to return to the paraphrasing approach? To me this reads as the exact opposite, unanimous consensus to maintain the citation, with former name bracketed out as we would in mainspace. I have no doubt you're trying to do the best and most respectful thing here, but I think there must be some misunderstanding.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 21:05, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the timing on this sequence of events is wrong. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Which part? You made your edit 3 hours after Jimbo's comment above. This is what the article looked like (and, with respect to the part in question, had looked like for 10 days) when Jimbo commented.  -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 21:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unexplained removal