Wikipedia

Talk:Twitter#Old moves

Twitter is X

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Already brought up many times before, see the FAQ, helpless discussions popping up. Cwater1 (talk) 23:19, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since twitter is now x should we change the name? Yrawfdatrærb (talk) 04:45, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the FAQ. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 04:52, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, it should be changed, I don't know why it wasn't done, it adopted the name for over 1 year now. StormHunterBryante5467 (talk) 23:59, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We're about to do another move request in a few days. Turtletennisfogwheat (talk) 03:41, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go again. 🙄 GSK (talk • edits) 03:45, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lol we’re deadnaming X As Twitter 36.230.49.118 (talk) 11:39, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
>"""""""""deadnaming"""""""""" X 1101 (talk) 07:32, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am new to the hullabaloo, but came here wondering the same thing. —  AjaxSmack  04:20, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
came here and thought the exact same thing. It's called X. why is the article called Twitter? Is it going to be that way in 20 years when Twitter will be as archaic a word as Ask Jeeves? I can't help but suspect that it's a political influenced stance to not change the name. Binglederry (talk) 21:44, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia doesn't use official names, it uses common names, as per article naming policy. 1101 (talk) 11:45, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say at this point in time, X is now the common name. At least, within my information space, I've heard more people start to say X than I've heard people say Twitter. Binglederry (talk) 17:26, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
lol you must hang out with Elon fanboys then. I don't know a single person who calls it X. It will always be known as Twitter to everyone except Elon's pathetic worshippers. 199.255.217.212 (talk) 22:00, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move it to X asap, especially now after merging with xAI.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The letter X already a page. 1101 (talk) 22:45, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We are talking about the social platform. It is supposed to be X (social platform), not just the letter X. Formerly Twitter. StormHunterBryante5467 22:50, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, apparently there's a six-month moratorium on requests to move the page according to the FAQ and if I move it without a request it'll almost certainly be reverted so I guess we'll have to wait before deciding on a new name. 1101 (talk) 00:51, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The moratorium ends tomorrow, or today in the UTC time zone, March 30. StormHunterBryante5467 00:52, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you think it should be X (social network)? At least that seems more common than social platform.
See also: Threads (social network), Mastodon (social network), and Gab (social network)
1101 (talk) 04:35, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
environment pictures 112.79.110.8 (talk) 05:26, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

For FAQ, can we add a source for Twitter/X "remaining widely recognizable to the general public due to its history and cultural impact."?

[edit]

Not saying that this is invalid, but I believe to stay neutral and relevant, perhaps we should either add a source for this or rephrase it to say instead "have been considered in consensus to be widely recognizable to the general public due to its history and cultural impact". We could even link to articles related to other countries or past discussions where this point was made, or if there are several, we can link to the one with the most prominent information. We perhaps should have a link to the discussion where the statement was made thatthere is "no consensus that Twitter and X are such radically and fundamentally different products that they should be covered entirely separately".

Discussion is encouraged and appreciated! Theadventurer64 (talk) 07:11, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Theadventurer64: The FAQ is intended to summarize the sentiments expressed by editors in the now 11 RMs linked in the second sentence. Any editor can edit the FAQ page and is welcome to discuss possible improvements if they believe it is not an accurate summary of the consensus, though few concerns have been raised thus far. The quoted sentence in particular is from this RM's closing statement; the most recent RM and RfC have reaffirmed this finding of no consensus, so I will update the FAQ accordingly. InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:43, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Theadventurer64I 94.201.14.208 (talk) 20:11, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why Twitter?

[edit]

Hello, I’d like to propose that we update the name of the platform in the Wikipedia article to reflect its current rebranding from Twitter to X. As of 07/23/23, Twitter officially rebranded itself as X following the acquisition by Elon Musk. This change has been widely reported by reliable sources, and the official name of the platform is now X. While I understand that many people still associate the platform with its previous name, the rebranding process has already taken place, and the company is actively promoting its new identity as X. Given that Wikipedia aims to reflect the most accurate and up-to-date information, I believe it’s time to update the article accordingly. I also understand that some may be concerned about the historical significance of the Twitter name. However, Wikipedia guidelines state that the current, widely recognized name should be used for articles unless there's a compelling reason to retain the former name. This is especially true as X is becoming more prominent in the public discourse, with major media outlets already adopting it as the default name. To address this, perhaps we could add a note in the lead section or a disambiguation page explaining that Twitter was formerly known as Twitter, which would ensure historical accuracy. But I think we should move forward with reflecting X as the current name of the platform. Vanleos (talk) 17:09, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the moratorium on move requests started in September 2024. Since it is six months long, it should have expired in March 2025. It is now April 2025, and it is still unavailable to be moved. What happened? Vanleos (talk) 17:16, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is already a move proposal here as well as a proposal to split the article into two. The moratorium did indeed end on March 30, 2025, and both proposals were opened that same day. As for it is still unavailable to be moved, Twitter was move-protected by an admin in 2012, so it stands to reason that someone with admin level permissions will take care of the move, should a proposal reach consensus. GSK (talk • edits) 17:26, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Id like this. Twitter and x are arguably separate but connected entities now. X is very well it's own thing and I only ever see it being called anything close to Twitter as "xitter" DarmaniLink (talk) 05:57, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Xitter lol. I dunno who all these Elon lovers are, claiming everyone they know calls it X and not Twitter. Certainly isn't the case for most people 199.255.217.212 (talk) 22:01, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it is referred to as "X" on many other pages, including List of most-visited websites. So, wouldn't it be inconsistent to not change the name to X on the other pages? The only reason we are even arguing about this (as we should all know) is because "evil Elon" changed the name. Vanleos (talk) 20:44, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Another 3+ month moratorium

[edit]

Given the extensive discussion, we should impose another 6 month 3 month (or more) moratorium on discussing the title. Mast303 (talk) 03:36, 29 April 2025 (UTC) Edited 22:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

3 months should do it. JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 14:28, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, six months is too long.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:31, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Moratoriums are not to be used lightly, as they are contrary to the open nature of Wikipedia. The current level of activity certainly does not justify one being imposed; it was only put in place last year because editors were abusing the RM process by opening one every other month, which was becoming disruptive. This fervor has largely died down by now, which means the moratorium worked. If repetitive WP:DEADHORSE discussions continue to emerge, just hat and close them. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:14, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This article should be renamed to "X" because most reputable news sources and academic papers now refer to the platform as X. JustMakeTheAccount (talk) 20:25, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
a moratorium of six months seems unnecessary. give it 3 months, and then let's see where we're at. isa.p (talk) 16:10, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It IS X

[edit]

At this point Wikipedia is starting to look funny or stubborn or biased. It is known as, and referred to as, X, by the vast majority of outlets at this point. The article looks outdated at this point. “Twitter, known as X” whatever. MatthewS. (talk) 19:01, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Common Name rule.
If a topic is mostly known by a name that is not official, it tends to be used. No one says Joanne Rowling, it is JK Rowling and Wikipedia reflects that, even though Joanne Rowling is her official and legal name. 2409:4060:2D05:3CE3:74B0:8222:795E:B6F0 (talk) 07:48, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to most sources, X is now the common name.
However, X is a letter of the Latin alphabet. So I think it should remain Twitter to avoid needing a disambiguation. anikom15 (talk) 16:10, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
X is a letter, but X is also a trademark and a social media platform. So a disambiguation is needed and Wikipedia should reflect reality, not opinions and political biases. MatthewS. (talk) 04:18, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia reflects verifiability, not truth, and if multiple verifiable sources refer to it a Twitter, it should be Twitter. However, the current name and the former name are used in verifiable sources, so I believe it should be named something that reflects both names. --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 11:45, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do X, formerly known as Twitter, is a.... Rowling's page starts with her actual name. — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 13:36, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The current (permalink) revision of the page uses "Twitter, officially known as X since 2023, [...]". I belive it's useful to include the year it was changed, so if the page is moved, it could be something like "X, formerly known as Twitter since 2023, [...]", although I still think the page name should reflect both names somehow. --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 11:49, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here and here are examples of recent news sources using both names. Simply naming it "X" or "Twitter" isn't going to accurately reflect the current state of the app. --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 11:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This page should have been renamed years ago. There is obvious political bias against it. Sickpanda42 (talk) 23:41, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not even liberal and I disagree. Twitter is still the WP:COMMONNAME, plus I'd imagine needing a disambiguation is a general tiebreaker even if it weren't. Not sure why this needs to be said on the talk page over and over again.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We’ve had this argument almost every month at this point. There is much more record of Twitter being called Twitter than X, in historical contexts and to this day many places refer to the name Twitter. It is a name more widely recognized and understood than X, even if both names are technically known. Pages can often have different names just because it is the most recognizable. Again, see WP:COMMONNAME. So long, and thanks for all the fish (talk) 00:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose/disagree per everyone above and per COMMONNAME - It'd be no different if Zuckerberg renamed Facebook to F .... It'll still be known as Facebook to everyone. Here's to hoping Elon sells X and that X will go back to being Twitter ..... One can dream. –Davey2010Talk 02:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Here's to hoping Elon sells [what?] and that [what?] will go back to being Twitter"? So what is it now then? Oh it's not "Twitter"? OMG how dare you. JK. But you just proved my point right there. It is X. People need to get the politics out of this. And anyway Musk just turned on Trump so I guess it's about time to put the correct name now? :) MatthewS. (talk) 03:23, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sir this is a Wikipedia talk page. WP:COMMONNAME still applies and unless you can give substantial proof that it isn't the case, the page will stay as Twitter. So long, and thanks for all the fish (talk) 04:03, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's funny how Wikipedia chooses not to change the title of the article follwing the official name change of the website only based on how much the society of Wikipedeans hates Elon Musk. :P I think it's cute. Czyszy (talk) 03:42, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why do I think it's a political motivated thing? Take a look at this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Audition If you type Cooledit in the search bar, you're redirected to Adobe Audition, which is the software's current official name. But for years it's been known as Cooledit before Adobe acquired it and renamed. Why not use the COMMONNAME vooodoo in that case then? Czyszy (talk) 03:51, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedeans, please. I know that no sane person likes Musk and his dumb decision to change the name of the platform but be consistent. Be unbiased. Czyszy (talk) 03:53, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please assume good faith. There's plenty of reasons why this page hasn't been moved apart from COMMONNAME. One of which I've seen is that this would mean having ton split the numerous articles on X/Twitter based on the names (for consistency). --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 06:48, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
BBC News has been one of the longest adherents of the "X, formerly known as Twitter" wording in its news stories. However, in more recent news stories such as this one from June 2025, it simply says X. So maybe it is time to start thinking about renaming the article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:05, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I would prefer a title that reflects both the official name and the former name (as they are still often used together), but I don't know that could be achieved. --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 07:58, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but look at the wiki pages for China and Taiwan. China is officially called the People’s republic of China and Taiwan is officially called the Republic of China. But we don’t say the full names just cuz they say that’s their name. Same goes with TWITTER. Posts are called “Tweets”, not “Xs”. CukormentesKenyer (talk) 13:10, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Circular effect

[edit]

Whether it is right or wrong, popularly utilized in a similar or fashion or not, I personally use Wikipedia as a way to identify what something is genuinely called. Wikipedia is such a powerful object for myself and I am assuming other people, with how high it shows up on Google, etc., that it can almost define what something is referred to as itself. Wamalotpark (talk) 06:05, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]