This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is now about the overall inauguration, but in my view we should also have an article dedicated solely to the speech, which has been discussed countless times in secondary sources over the years. This article would contain a summary and a link to the larger article on the speech, and instead this article should deal with the particulars of the overall inauguration. How was the weather, how many people were there, what was security like, what were the contemporary reactions to the ceremony, did all the networks televise it, how many inaugural balls were there, etc. etc. An inauguration and an inaugural address are distinct topics. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 19:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
This is getting riduculous. First, without any discussion the name is changed. Then, two different proposal templates are made. There is already developing a consensus that particularly notable inauguration speeches warrant their own articles. The following from WP:NAME seems to have been totally ignored by the editor who made the change:
The purpose of an article's title is to enable that article to be found by interested readers, and nothing more. In particular, the current title of a page does not imply either a preference for that name, or that any alternative name is discouraged in the text of articles. Generally, an article's title should not be used as a precedent for the naming of any other articles. Editors are strongly discouraged from editing for the sole purpose of changing one controversial name to another. If an article name has been stable for a long time, and there is no good reason to change it, it should remain. Especially when there is no other basis for a decision, the name given the article by its creator should prevail. Any proposal to change between names should be examined on a case-by-case basis, and discussed on talk pages before a name is changed.
I am restoring the previous name until a consensus is reached on this discussion page to make a change. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I suppose I should also note that I concurr with Bigtimepeace above that Kennedy's speech deserves its own article and that article already existed before it was changed. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 20:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)