Talk:David Bauer (ice hockey)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

someone should turn this into a disambiguation page for David Bauer (actor) and Father David Bauer. -- Antaeus Feldspar 02:39, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming?[edit]

Was appropriate consideration given to the criteria of "which name is this person best known by?" Since, when Waterloo named a roadway after him, it wasn't "David Bauer Drive" but "Father David Bauer Drive", I think it's quite possible that he's better known as "Father David Bauer" and not just "David Bauer". -- Antaeus Feldspar 16:33, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Antaeus, thanks for bringing this up, but some thought was given to this, and I think the move is well justified on several grounds:
  1. He was far from universally known as Father David Bauer, it was more in the way of a knickname for him, although technically he was entitled to the style. But for instance, Maurice Richard is under his own name rather than "Rocket Richard". Going by what one town named a street is pretty thin justification. Anyway, people are more likely to assume that just typing in the name will get them what they want — quite aside from the fact they are lazy and more likely to type just "David Bauer" rather than the whole deal.
  2. The name is misleading, since it is not the vocation for which he was primarily known. If David Bauer is switched to a disambig page, I am in favour of making the article title "David Bauer (hockey player)" or some such;
  3. The use of what amounts to a title in the names of articles is widely deprecated (with the exception for some reason of Peers, but you already know this).

Cheers, Fawcett5 20:18, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was going by more than what one major city named a street (and what, I have since learned, Calgary named an arena); I was going by the fact that a Google search for "'Father David Bauer' -Wikipedia" gets 22,100 hits. So far none of them seem to put the "Father" part in quotes, whereas searching for "Rocket Richard" overwhelmingly turns up "Maurice 'Rocket' Richard" or "Maurice 'The Rocket' Richard". I'm afraid that saying that "Father David Bauer" was more of a nickname still seems to me to be missing the central point, as does pointing out that he wasn't best known for the vocation literally designated by the "Father" and that it amounted to a title; sometimes people are best-known under a name that isn't real, that isn't accurate, or that isn't relevant to their claim to fame (as Baroness Orczy's title had little to do with her literary work), but it's the fact that it's how they are best known that matters.
As for locating the page at David Bauer or David Bauer (hockey player) and letting Father David Bauer be a redirect to it, that seems acceptable. However, right now the only explicit confirmation that the reader has that this "David Bauer" is the same person widely known as "Father David Bauer" is the mention that Waterloo named the street Father David Bauer Drive after him. This, I think, needs fixing. -- Antaeus Feldspar 19:34, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Antaeus, after further investigation, I'll conceed that he seems to have been refered to as "Father David Bauer" more often than not, and the remainder of your arguments are reasonably persuasive as well. I have clarified the name within the article. I will move it back and create a disambig article. Regards, Fawcett5 19:50, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sounds good! I'll start a page for the other David Bauer, the actor. Thanks for making this pleasant and productive! -- Antaeus Feldspar 22:38, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Granted, it was not a nickname, but you still cannot leave the title in the article. Notice that Henri Nouwen, Karl Clemens, etc. do not have "Father" in the title. Carolynparrishfan 23:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I get 589 Google hits for "Karl Clemens" and just 13 for "Father Karl Clemens". I get 502,000 hits for "Henri Nouwen" and 495 for "Father Henri Nouwen". Neither of these examples is comparable to Father David Bauer because clearly, the name by which they were best known to the public was not "Father Karl Clemens", "Father Henri Nouwen", whereas the subject of this article was best known to the world as "Father David Bauer". Should we move the article on Mother Teresa to "Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu", or maybe just to "Teresa", because we cannot include her title in the article name, even if it is being included as part of the name she is best known by? Diana, Princess of Wales to just "Diana"? This is getting really absurd, and I'm changing it back. -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:35, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You're being ridiculous. You can't compare the three. Of course he was known as Fr. David Bauer, he was a priest. So was John Donne, must we move his article to Father John Donne because he was entitled to that title?. If you mean that he is today popularly known as such, I must dissent as I have never once heard him so called in conversation. And I live in Canada. Carolynparrishfan 23:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
John Donne was best known to people as "John Donne"; that indicates his article should be at John Donne. Why do you keep bringing up people who were not best known by appellations that included a title (to which they were or were not entitled) and saying "See, these people don't have articles under their titles!" as if they were relevant?The issue was not "was David Bauer entitled to the title of 'Father' or not?" but "was David Bauer better known to people as 'Father David Bauer' than otherwise?" Show me Father John Donne scholarships. Show me John Donne being inducted into a Hall of Fame under the name "Father John Donne". Show me Father John Donne Arena or Father John Donne Drive, and then John Donne will be something other than a straw man. You seem to think that no research was done before asserting "yes, he really was generally known as 'Father David Bauer'", or that your personal experience automatically outweighs all the research that anyone did before you. I can't decide whether that's more or less insulting than your repeatedly trying to argue that the "don't include titles" rule outweighs all others by bringing up examples where nothing else is ever in conflict with that rule, let alone outweighed by it. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:06, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression that it was generally Wikipedia policy to omit titles or prefixes, of whatever type, from the article title (provided of course it is the most recognisable form of that name). This is the case with many articles: Francis Xavier instead of 'Saint Francis Xavier', George W. Bush instead of 'President George W. Bush', Stephen Hawking instead of 'Professor Steven Hawking', etc.

I was searching for the specific guideline on priests, and came across Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Western clergy), which gives comments on conventions for Popes, Cardinals, patriarchs and Saints, but, oddly, nothing on Priests. Unless I've missed something, I'm going to bring this up on the talk page there, so that similar cases in the future will be clearer. For what it's worth, I think this page should be made into a redirect and a disambig page created; it seems almost unencyclopedic when prefixes like 'Father' are included in the article title. Only notable exceptions (Pope Benedict XVI) should ignore this rule. (IMVHO.) Nuge | talk 23:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're entirely correct, omitting titles is indeed the general Wikipedia rule. However, it isn't the only applicable policy. Wikipedia:Naming conventions says "Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature." This is why Mother Theresa, Diana, Princess of Wales and Baroness Orczy all have their articles under the names they do: the names appear to violate the "omit titles" rule. But as the reminder right at the top of WP:NAME says, "these are conventions, not rules written in stone." (By the way... ummm... what do you mean by "this page should be made into a redirect and a disambig page created"? There already is a disambig page at David Bauer, which is IMHO the right place to disambiguate between the various people named David Bauer. I'm not sure what you're suggesting.) -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm not mistaken, property owners on Father David Bauer Drive in Waterloo unsuccessfully lobbied the city to shorten the street name. Anyway, the difference between (Father) David Bauer and people like U Nu, Mother Theresa and Pope Benedict XVI is that Bauer used a first and last name. I would be surprised to see another article title that used a title, first name and last name. Two of the three, yes, but not all three. -- Mwalcoff 03:44, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That may be true; I can't think offhand of an example of someone else who was best known by an appellation consisting of <title> <first name> <last name>. However, I also don't know why, if Father David Bauer turned out to be the only encyclopedic figure who matched that description, why this would be considered a reason that he shouldn't be at Father David Bauer. There already is a rule which helps us determine where an article should be located, and it's "under the name they are/were best known by". Why there seems to be this obsession with removing the "Father", and why people are citing straw men of Fathers who are not best known as "Father" anything, and seemingly trying to find any reason why the simple rule of "the name they were best known by" should not be the one that applies, I really don't understand. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If we were to take the "best known" name rule to the letter, we would have President Bush and Former President Bush, rather than George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush; Princess Di rather than Diana, Princess of Wales; and Mrs. Wallis Simpson rather than Wallis, The Duchess of Windsor. -- Mwalcoff 00:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, when I tried to look up Diana, Princess of Wales, the first title I tried was in fact "Princess Diana", and a look at "What links here" shows that a lot of other people, when trying to link to her page, did the same thing. I guess I just don't see why it's preferable to make people guess whether we chose to put the page at "David Bauer (athlete)" or David Bauer (hockey player)" when "Father David Bauer" is a disambiguated name for the person in question that doesn't depend upon which other David Bauers Wikipedia has articles on and whether any of them are also athletes and if so what kind of athlete. But do what you want; I'm through with this. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry, I didn't realise there was already a disambig page. I would in fact support Father David Bauer becoming a redirect to something like David Bauer (hockey player). Nuge | talk 13:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've created a redirect from David Bauer (hockey player) to Father David Bauer. Lest anyone accuse me of some sort of sneaky skullduggery, let me explain: as long as that page has no other history than as a redirect to Father David Bauer, the software should not put up any obstacles to the page being moved to the location of the redirect. This will, in other words, provide no obstacle to moving Father David Bauer to David Bauer (hockey player), should that be a consensus reached after fair and respectful discussion; it merely ensures that if someone does put "David Bauer (hockey player)" into double brackets, they will get the article they were looking for. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Watermark on File:Sir Edgar J Bauer photo circa 1900.png[edit]

@Flibirigit: you could request the removal of the watermark from this public domain image at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Photography workshop. Yoninah (talk) 01:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is he called "Father" David Bauer?[edit]

The "renaming" section of this talk page mentions a lot about the "father" in his name, but why is it that the main Wiki article does not have a section on why he is named "Father" David Bauer? That is highly unusual and deserves a subsection of its own. Dr. Universe (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Father is an honorific title used for a catholic priest. (See Father (honorific)) It is very common and not at all unusual. Details for Bauer's ascent in the church are covered in the section "Entering the priesthood". Flibirigit (talk) 02:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Traumatic experience[edit]

Does anybody have any more info on the traumatic experiences that Bauer had?

The first paragraph reads: "He was offered a playing contract by the Boston Bruins at age 15, but declined on the advice of his father to complete a proper education. The experience was traumatic for Bauer, who then committed himself to look for more meaning in life and play a role in world peace." But it's not clear what experience was traumatic: being offered the contract? taking his father's advice? completing his education?

A later paragraph places his traumatic experiences at professional training camp. It includes a quote from Bauer about his early commitment to world peace, but the quote does not link that commitment to the trauma. Can anybody flesh this out more? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.253.126.95 (talk) 15:13, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The traumatic experience was not pursuing his childhood dream of playing professional hockey. Flibirigit (talk) 20:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:David_Bauer_(ice_hockey)&oldid=1204681203"