Talk:Stéphane Huet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Stephane Huet)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved, having followed this discussion for days and the subject of diacritics in article titles for some months, I have closed this to avoid becoming a Buridan's ass. On one side of the dilemma is the hay—those who support English language names without diacritics because that’s what English RS use (albeit inconsistently). On the other side is the pail of water, those editors who support accurate, diacritic encumbered foreign names. One cannot contest either side on policy/guideline grounds alone because the policies and guidelines themselves are contexually contradictory. There was no clear consensus to make these moves as requested by the participants in this discussion, that is a given. However, I can honestly say, neither sides’ policy/guideline arguments can be discounted until we either move the hay or the pail of water closer to the center. Until then, these diacritic based title discussions will put anyone trying to decide them in the position of Buridan's ass Mike Cline (talk) 22:13, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


– Per (1) Wikipedia:Article titles where WP:UE allows Søren Kierkegaard as the only non-cyrillic foreign name example, (2) Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies which gives François Mitterrand as example, even though the quality press such as WSJ, Times and Telegraph habitually printed "Francois." (3) WP:RS where the more reliable sources in these BLPs (e.g. local French press since these are of marginal notability outside France) give "Stéphane", "Frédéric," but where the external links to sports-indexes/tournament-registrations websites are diacritic-disabled input and consequently can't reflect even René Lacoste. (4) WP:CONSISTENCY with the 100s of existing WP bios for other Stéphanes and Frédérics, (5) Wikipedia:WikiProject France bios use é in Title and lede, (6) WP:CONSISTENCY with the rest of category:French male tennis players (for some reason these 3x "Stéphane", and 2x "Frédéric" were left accentless, all the others already have accents including Stéphane Houdet, Stéphane Robert, Stéphane Simian already with 'é') In ictu oculi (talk) 07:09, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support all; moves to more accurate name. Presumably there will be redirects from the previous titles. bobrayner (talk) 13:17, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Come on old chap, :) would anyone expect the Hamilton Spectator to use a diacritic? As far as the Independent goes they do use French diacritics in the international news pages: As the wife of President François Mitterrand... première dame.. office in the Elysée. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:01, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion is now moot following the revelation the the Encyclopedia of Tennis 1974 uses diacritics. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:54, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A book published in 1974? Huet's not even listed. There are lots of tennis reference books. The top ones are John Parson's The Ultimate Encyclopedia of Tennis and The Bud Collins History of Tennis (2010). No diacritics there, or at least not in the old 1997 edition that's online. Kauffner (talk) 10:57, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all HandsomeFella (talk) 20:22, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all - We have the ITF and ATP sources on all these articles. The only diacritic sources given are from foreign papers which are pretty useless with all the English sources we have. Wiki tells us to "Follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language." We usually have full names in the article body but the title should be kept at the sourced English alphabetic spelling. This submitter is doing a lot of these move requests as of late to try and remove anglicized names from wikipedia article titles and even from use as an alternate spelling in the main article body. It's tough with multiple nominations since each can be very different but we have Huet at Getty Images, Sansoni at LA Times, Grenier ‎LA Times but Grenier ‎had less English source articles found than the others, Fontang at Tennis World Magazine, Vitoux at UK Independent. There are lots of these type English sources for this English wikipedia as opposed to the foreign language that most English readers can't fathom. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:52, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all. The proposed spellings are correct (Huet, Sansoni, Grenier, Fontang, Vitoux) and proper English (per authoritative sources). Sports writers' non-use of accent marks is no excuse for misspelling living persons' names in a reference work. The current titles deviate from established practice and fail WP:UE ("Stephane Huet" is not an anglicized spelling like Florence; it is a common misspelling like "Soren Kierkegaard"), WP:BLP (we must write encyclopedically and "get the article right") and WP:V (sources whose house styles lead to constant spelling errors are not reliable on the relevant spelling issues). Prolog (talk) 12:04, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose WP:UE, you should use English sources to back up your claims for English language usage, since this is the English Wikipedia, not the European Wikipedia. If you can show that WP:UCN in English uses accents, then that's fine, if you can't, then it's not English usage. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 02:51, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment: from WP:COMMONNAME: "Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined by reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources". These are clearly inaccurate spellings. HandsomeFella (talk) 13:15, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment - not in the English alphabet they're not. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:36, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Correct because diacritics fall into the English orthography not the alphabet. So yes these would be inaccurate as simply stripping the diacritics and not translating properly is an error. -DJSasso (talk) 01:11, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Simply adding diacritics is also inaccurate, since they do not exist in English orthography, therefore do not represent the same things they do in the source language. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 05:30, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Ahh but they do exist in the English orthography that was my point. It's the English Alphabet they don't exist in. -DJSasso (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Show me a textbook that tells me how to write and interpret English with accents, like I have for French and other languages. 70.24.244.198 (talk) 06:39, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Different languages often have different names for the same thing. When the guidelines talk about "accuracy", it should not be interpreted to mean that one language is accurate and others inaccurate. It means that some RS has established that a particular form of a name is inaccurate. Kauffner (talk) 06:14, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That isn't what we are saying, there is a way to properly translate names with diacritics and there is an incorrect way to translate them. Simply removing them is the incorrect way to translate them thus per WP:COMMONNAME simply removing them is inaccurate and should not be used even though they may be used that way in reliable sources. -DJSasso (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:DIACRITICS addresses the issue of diacritics specifically. To interpret the accuracy guideline this way is handwaving. Kauffner (talk) 16:01, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all for the reasons above and for scholarly accuracy. Doremo (talk) 09:00, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all. The subjects are notable for actions in countries where their names are spelt using diacritics. We don't typically "translate" modern names. —  AjaxSmack  01:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support all per nom. This is simply the right thing to do. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 09:15, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


  • Oppose all. We should use that spelling favored by reliable sources, whether or not we think it's "correct". Until reliable sources favor using the diacritic, we should not be adding it.--Aervanath (talk) 14:21, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Aervanath, have you looked at the articles? For each of the 5 French living people nominated to being allowed to keep French names, we already "know" the correct name since it's in the first words of the lede, and based on the only reliable sources on spelling in the 5 articles = French language ones. Further, good English RS do use the diacritic for 100s of Stéphanes and Frédérics, as per the rest of en.wp BLPs. WP:US [unreliable sources] don't. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all. Follow usage in English WP:RS. Totally agree with Aervanath: "Until [English] reliable sources favor using the diacritic, we should not be adding it." --Born2cycle (talk) 01:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Trouble is many of the good "follow the English sources" tennis editors have thrown up their hands in disgust and moved on these days. Can't blame them but now suddenly every English placed tennis player is under assault... one which had just had two recent move requests fail and now put up again. And it's being drafted that English sourcing and comman name be changed permanently at wikipedia right here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The sources presented to support the diacriticless spellings do not meet WP:V and WP:RS regarding the spelling of French personal names. The systematic non-use of accent marks is part of the house style in newspapers and sports writing, but it should not be brought here. Prolog (talk) 09:44, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So "sports writing" is not RS with respect to the names of athletes. I hope this is a joke. Oh, and tell me when you've found a publication that doesn't have a "house style". Kauffner (talk) 11:41, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The reliability of a source depends on the context (WP:SOURCES). Our house style, like those of other general-purpose reference works, is to spell non-anglicized foreign names in proper English; correctly with the necessary diacritical marks. Prolog (talk) 12:10, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have real guidelines on this issue, you know:

  • "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language, as you would find it in reliable sources (for example other encyclopedias and reference works, scholarly journals and major news sources)." (WP:ENGLISH)
  • "follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language" (WP:DIACRITICS).
  • "The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage" (WP:UE) Kauffner (talk) 13:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I take it that you agree that your views are against current policy and practice. People who barely feature in any English-language sources obviously do not have anglicized names. Even Søren Kierkegaard (an example at WP:UE) and Paul Erdős (an example at WP:MOSPN) have not gained English spellings, despite having their name commonly spelled without diacritics for decades. Prolog (talk) 14:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Where next after close above? Please forgive a comment...[edit]

Half of me disagrees with the above close (or stall), 8 support v 5 oppose: Because nobody has yet proved that the popular US/UK/Aus sports sources are reliable authorities on the spelling of "foreigners'" names, and because those who commented above in favour of accurate spelling of living people's names did so largely from WP guidelines, which overwhelmingly support the canal for Living Persons' names already being in Panama (at WP:MOSPN#Diacritics for example). But the other half of me thinks, yes, well something better is needed. I too, like the closer, have followed this only for a couple of months. But what I have seen suggests that WP:BLPs need a clearer guideline - it isn't just the constant disruption on tennis stublets, or previously ice hockey, we'll also get random RMs like the Alfredo Simón one as long as the tension between MOS/encyclopedic sources and popular sports publications/websites exists. Therefore I propose inviting everyone who has taken part in a BLP name RM in the last 30 days to WT:BLP. That's going to be 100+ editors... In ictu oculi (talk) 23:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To further follow up on that. The discussion took place here Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons/Archive_34#Sum_up. Of around 100 who took part in diacritic related RMs in the 30 days preceding 90 vs 10 were for use of Latin-alphabet diacritics in BLPs. Of those invited 17 for and 8 against showed up, with some additional comment from the more regular inhabitants of WT:BLP. That's where it stands, at this point anyone else coming across this can, I understand, hopefully correctly, ask Mike Cline to reopen/relist the RM above. I don't think I should be the one as the original proposer. Either way, the number of Latin-alphabet name BLPs on en.wp which do not follow the native spelling/nationality of the subject is infinitesimally small... Hopefully that fact will mean that disruption from the remaining corners where tabloid-MOS is prefered will be minimal. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, a year later I have just relisted one of the above Frederic Vitoux (tennis) → Frédéric Vitoux (tennis). But mainly to remove the "Frédéric Vitoux professionally known as Frederic Vitoux" statement from the lead, in the absence of any mechanism to hold a RM on a lead sentence. Such a statement is more of a problem in relation to WP:BLP / WP:OR than a low-MOS title. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:00, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Legoktm (talk) 20:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Stephane Huet → Stéphane Huet – BLP that got left behind on WP:FRMOS. Note also that WTA and ITF websites now use French accents for French people, see footnotes In ictu oculi (talk) 11:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stéphane_Huet&oldid=1207662322"