Talk:The Real Housewives of New York City

Cast Timeline

The cast timeline continues to be edited and the roles for S12 added in. We know Frankel has departed the cast and McSweeney has joined the cast, but the cast's official roles are not announced until the season's promotional material comes out, like the trailer. I don't think S12 should be included in the timeline until the announcement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.18.70.29 (talk) 19:35, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

TOO much marketing language

Obviously, some intern is editing this article. Too much marketing language. I will try to edit soon...but thought I would comment on the obvious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.171.24.45 (talk) 05:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC) Totes! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.90.79.214 (talk) 19:56, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Simon's hotel

In the March 18th 2009 episode someone mentioned Simon as owning the hotel he works in. Is this true?

According to this article. He does not. http://www.hotelchatter.com/story/2009/3/18/101312/987/hotels/Who_Owns_Hotel_Chandler_Not_Simon_van_Kempen

I have just edited the entry for Simon Van Kempen to correct a couple of "errors". It referred to him as "Simon Cowel" and called him a "tool". My correction needs correcting as I did not have the name of the hotel where he worked, nor his title, available when I edited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.232.4.230 (talk) 20:23, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

School of General Studies at Columbia

The school of general studies of part of Columbia University. I don't know why this article says that it is not. www.gs.columbia.edu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.15.208.241 (talk) 01:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Jill Zarin

What on earth does permanent fixture in the hamptons mean? Sagg Main is a permanent picture, does anyone care to explain how Ms. Zarin is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.63.143 (talk) 01:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I have a feeling these ladies wrote their own bios. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.105.245 (talk) 02:44, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Much of the text seems to have been lifted from Bravo's website. 38.115.185.13 (talk) 22:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)LNelson

I removed the information on where Zarin's daughter will be attending college. This info is only of value to stalkers and does not belong in this entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.241.245 (talk) 20:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

this is not a page to plug merchandise

i removed the merchandise section for several reasons, including the fact that Jill Zarin's merchandise was the only item listed yet all of the cast members are selling various items, those items are listed already on their own sites. This is not a site to advertise and sell items. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4rousseau (talk • contribs) 20:11, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

scrubbing?

there are several sections that have been removed. some stories from Huffington Post and other MSM. some of the behavior may be covered in the tv series however,that does not mean it cannot be covered by news outlets and WP in advance of the airing of the new season. it appears the bios have been cleaned up and Bethenny Frankel among other bios are being written as marketing tools which is against policy. this page and the Frankel page need to be monitored.

Episode list

I don't think that we really need a blow by blow episode list, do we ?

But if we do, can we have more than just one episode ? -- Beardo (talk) 22:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems to have been taken from http://www.bravotv.com/Real_Housewives_NYC/season/1/episodes/101/index.php - is it different enough to avoid copyvio ? -- Beardo (talk) 23:34, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Aviva Drescher Season 6 absence

Aviva Drescher did not appear in the season 6 episode 'The Last Splash' and was removed from the opening sequence, her tagline and image. This should be noted in her bio part. Most media outlets are reporting she will be back but will be absent for at least 3 episodes!

I topo note to that to Zhyboo (talk) 13:15, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I took note to that to, it was confusing Zhyboo (talk) 13:16, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

If you can find some sources for that info (even though I know it's true), feel free to add it to the page pertaining to season 6. Kelege (talk) 13:37, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

I added a note for this issue on List of The Real Housewives cast members, if that helps. Kelege (talk) 13:54, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

This entire article in its current state is a PR piece, not a Wikipedia article.

Anyone that has watched the show would barely recognize the women from these descriptions. None of their negative qualities are discussed. Imagine an article about Britney Spears that solely talked about her record sales without describing her tumultuous personal life. For instance, it is extremely ironic that the "Countess" LuAnn de Lesseps is writing a book about etiquette since she is constantly blunt, rude, petty, and tactless on the show. We get none of that from this article. SubtleGuest (talk) 02:43, 12 March 2009 (UTC)SubtleGuest

Don't read it then...the show is superficial too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.102.73.138 (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

"Don't read it then" is hardly the proper answer to a request to bring an article up to encyclopedic standards. This article as it stands is a disgrace — I don't normally even write about television, but to see an article so baldly written in marketing language, with material lifted verbatim from press releases, and multiple violations of such policies as WP:DATED, WP:TONE, WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:BLP and others demands attention from responsible editors. This is not a fan page nor a marketing page. This article needs to be raised to encyclopedic standards, which means every claim has to be verified by reliable source citations.

I've made edits to the lead and to the first three cast-members, as a start. --Tenebrae (talk) 17:51, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

LuAnn de Lesseps - "Algonquin tribe"

Please note that there is no "Algonquin tribe" in Connecticut. If a person claims "Algonquin" ancestry, it is akin to a person claiming "European" ancestry, or "African" ancestry. "Algonquin" is an umbrella term and not a "tribe". If Ms. de Lesseps wants to claim she is of Algonquin descent, fine. But it is not a "tribe". She needs to do more research into her ancestry and learn exactly which tribe she descended from. She could be Pequot, Mohegan, or any of the others listed here: http://www.native-languages.org/connecticut.htm

The article has been edited to reflect that LuAnn de Lesseps is of French and Algonquin descent, using her official website as a reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Audrey7272 (talk • contribs) 22:47, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Should the article be semi-protected?

There seems to be a great deal of "drive by" IP edits, that are either vandalism, original research, or adding unreferenced controversial(and possibly libelous statements). I was just curious what other people thought about this.WackoJackO 08:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Maybe a good idea. I see Kelly's section has been edited in that way. Hilarious but definitely not neutral and probably dubious. 98.113.199.242 (talk) 15:16, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, anon editors keep deleting the information regarding Kelly Bennsimom's(sp) arrest, despite the fact that it is properly sourced.WackoJackO 13:22, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I am trying my best to bring neutrality to this article. Please don't protect it to the point that it limits my access to bringing updated information to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Audrey7272 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

ramona singer lies about her age.she claims to be 52, she has to be at least 55, as she claims she has been married 18 years, and was alone until she was 37. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.238.147.158 (talk) 01:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Jennifer Gilbert?

Why is she listed in past housewives? She was in the running, and shot a segment for the opening, but was never officially added to the roster. I think a lot of people will have trouble remembering who she even was. She should be taken off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.247.62.162 (talk) 21:02, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Jennifer Gilbert also appeared in Season 5 of RHONY. She helped Heather with her fashion show at the season finale so I think a 'Guest' status should be put in for her for Season 5, like most of the other Real Housewives shows have done, example like Faye or Dana from Beverly Hills, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Real_Housewives_of_Beverly_Hills#Housewives_history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.14.130.145 (talk) 19:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

The above is not true. Jennifer Gilbert never appeared in RHONY season 5. There is no footage of her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.19.51.227 (talk) 15:21, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

• Yes there is, in episode 18, at 21:32 during Heather's fashion event in the silver dress. Kelege (talk) 15:50, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Jennifer should probably be included in the timeline, as she did in fact have a "recurring" role...featured in several episodes, had her own talking-head interviews, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.76.86 (talk) 23:16, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

And she had her own casting photo taken for the third season, so she was a major recurring cast member Zhyboo (talk) 20:47, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

This is true and is featured in both episodes 17 & 18 of Season 5. As a credited cast member, she should have 'guest' status here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Millzipede (talk • contribs) 07:59, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Post an actual reference. Its that simple.TheHotwiki (talk) 10:04, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

. She clearly states and is visible to have appeared as a guest here.

Its a tweet, not a screengrab of the show/her appearance. Also Bravo didn't credit her as a guest, so are we supposed to just take your word. Again, Where is this guest footage?TheHotwiki (talk) 12:36, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

You Can find a screen grab here: https://imgur.com/a/mU1zonZ which clearly shows her in shot with Heather interacting with Aviva & LuAnn as well as the episode and timestamp. I'm not doing this to be difficult but it clearly shows her making a guest appearance in the season and as wikipedia contributors we should be reflecting the most accurate representation of the events of the series. Millzipede (talk) 09:40, 22 June 2020 (GMT)

According to you she is a guest, but what was she according to the network Bravo that airs the show? I question the notability of the person you are claiming as a guest when you cannot even find an actual reference that states that she was a guest in the show. And even though this is a reality show, there is such a role as an Extra.TheHotwiki (talk) 09:18, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

The notability page applies to the necessity for a topic to require it's own individual page: "These guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not limit the content of an article or list". Similarly as you stated, an Extra applies to a paid acting appearance not somebody actively taking part in 'reality'.

The requirement for a reference for every 'guest' appearance would require a review of not only the RHONY page but the wider Real Housewives pages which would be totally unnecessary if there is clear evidence to support an appearance without a verified article or statement by Bravo support this. For example, Dorinda appears in S4 in a brief background appearance, uncredited but visibly on screen with no reference attached to support it. Whether this feature would be classified as a 'Cameo' or a 'Guest' is an entirely separate discussion but should still be credited in the table as such due to her visible appearance on the show. An example where a 'guest' appearance would not be acceptable would be Kelly Bensimon in S9 where despite being in attendance of LuAnn's wedding she is never shown on screen. Despite there being numerous publications and sources crediting that Kelly was there, as she was never showcased on-screen a 'Cameo' or 'Guest appearance would not be applicable.

The Don't Need To Cite That The Sky Is Blue article outlines that "Sometimes editors will insist on citations for material simply because they dislike it or prefer some other material, not because the material in any way needs verification." and that Sense can be used in wikipedia articles if a credited source is unnecessary and logic can be applied.Millzipede (talk) 11:51, 22 June 2020 (GMT)

How credible are your sources though? Your sources from Twitter and imgur aren't really reliable. Now, if your source came from Bravo or the show's official site, then fine. But I highly disagree that your opinion should be the basis for someone to be labeled as a "guest" role especially when the person in question merely appeared for less than a minute. Find a better source preferably from Bravo or the show's production company.TheHotwiki (talk) 11:52, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

The source is literally Bravo's own episode in which she features where she is clearly being filmed on the show. Once again, referencing wikipedia's own sourcing article Don't Need To Cite That The Sky Is Blue a citation/reference isn't required if there is clear and obvious evidence to support information that would be non-sensical to require a reference. I repeat, there are several instances not only in the RHONY article but in the wider Housewives articles where cast members are credited in a 'Guest' role without being credited on screen or having an article. If we determine that 'Cameo' is a better description for her appearance, we an amend her credit in the table aligned to one of the options in wikipedia's Cast-list template [1]. This would however require a full review of all appearances made by all cast members across the franchise however I would argue that this is unnecessary. Millzipede (talk) 13:37, 22 June 2020 (GMT)

Your sources never labeled her as a guest, thats the point of my argument. Just because someone was caught by the camera, it doesn't automatically make them a "guest". So please post an actual reference stating that Jennifer Gilbert appeared as a "guest".TheHotwiki (talk) 13:32, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

References

File:Rhony season4.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Rhony season4.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 11 November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:49, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

NYT: Sonja Morgan bought fake Twitter followers

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/01/27/technology/social-media-bots.html

Devumi also sells bots to reality television stars, who can parlay fame into endorsement and appearance fees. Sonja Morgan, a cast member on the Bravo show “The Real Housewives of New York City,” uses her Devumi-boosted Twitter feed to promote her fashion line, a shopping app and a website that sells personalized “video shout-outs.” One former “American Idol” contestant, Clay Aiken, even paid Devumi to spread a grievance: his customer service complaint against Volvo. Devumi bots retweeted his complaint 5,000 times.

Mr. Aiken and Ms. Morgan did not respond to requests for comment.

Xardox (talk) 18:01, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Infobox

Bethenny goes after Luann in infobox because De Lesseps goes before Frankel. Another user argues that since in French, only Lesseps is considered the last name that Luann should be listed after Bethenny. I feel as if since the article is written in American English, this calls for a discussion. Feel free to chime in! KyleJoan^talk 23:52, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Dispute: The French "de" used in the context of a proper name is "of" and is NOT considered a part of the proper surname "Lesseps" in the matter of alphabetizing. The page may be written in English, but the fact will always remain that Lesseps is the proper surname, French or English being equal or irrelevant, and should be alphabetized as such instead of by the PREPOSITION "de" meaning "of". Also, the "de" is not capitalized which also has a bearing on alphabetical order of a name. "If the prefix consists of an article or of a contraction of an article and a preposition, enter under the prefix: - La Bruyere, Rene - Des Granges, Charles-Marc Otherwise, enter under the part of the name following the preposition": - Musset, Alfred de - La Fontaine, Jean de. Reference: https://www.bookcrossing.com/forum/12/360742 AnAudLife (talk) 00:59, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Another reference; https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2010/07/nobiliary-particle.html "“In the names of Frenchmen and -women, de and d’ are almost always lowercased; treatment of du varies. La and Le are almost always capitalized. In alphabetized lists, names are alphabetized under their first capitalized element." AnAudLife (talk) 01:17, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

And another definitive reference: Merriam-Webster's Manual for Writers and Editors, "In French and Belgium surnames, the preposition de is usually ignored in alphabetization, while the article la usually is not. Lesseps, Ferdinand de and La Tour, Georges de." https://books.google.com/books?id=7C6V9zRxSPkC&pg=PA261&lpg=PA261&dq=alphabetizing+de+lesseps&source=bl&ots=3nu3WCYuLe&sig=ACfU3U2Pe5NoYmSrFOxa0KwUOiGU2y5xkA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjsp4DjxJLjAhUwq1kKHX7EB30Q6AEwEXoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=alphabetizing%20de%20lesseps&f=false AnAudLife (talk) 01:27, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

From my point of view, in the article itself, Luann is referred to as "de Lesseps," which, to me, would be that "de" is included in the titling of her last name. Even on her ex-husband's page, he is constantly referred to as "de Lesseps," which again would lead me to believe that "de" is, in fact, an inclusion of the last name. livelikemusic talk! 14:44, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Completely agree. Also, according to this article containing legal documents that I discovered, "de" is included in her last name. KyleJoan^talk 00:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Since the article you’re referring to is Wikipedia in and of itself then this reference is moot, since we, as the public, are all editing it. I thought the conclusion should be reached by using outside reputable sources, not another Wikipedia page. And I further thought we were supposed to leave the names as is and stop reverting and edit warring until a final agreeable consensus could be reached. I still find numerous articles on the internet (that you always disagree with) and I’ve spoken with 2 English professors casually regarding this debate, all are in agreement, “de” is a preposition in this particular case meaning of, therefore is not part of the proper surname Lesseps. It’s like introducing her as “this is Luann of the Lesseps family”. Lesseps is the proper surname. AnAudLife (talk) 04:22, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

How reputable is BookCrossing.com when the quote provided is by an unverified user? The other two provide inaccurate/irrelevant guidelines, as stated below. Please list these numerous articles on the internet and explain how reputable they are. I personally feel as if a court document listing the name is reputable, but maybe I'm alone in that. Speaking of reverting, I would like to point out that a revert was done even after a third editor joined the discussion with an opposite analysis. Also, do check out WP:OR. KyleJoan^talk 05:46, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

A legal document is not always grammatical and certainly shouldn’t be a reliable source on grammar and punctuation, but maybe I’m alone in that. AnAudLife (talk) 06:12, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

WP:OR. KyleJoan^talk 06:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Conclusion

Due to the above preponderance of evidence in support of my revisions to the alpabetizing of the last name Lesseps and in light of said conclusions I believe a permanent change should be made to the list without further dispute and I have just made said change. AnAudLife (talk) 02:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

• The BookCrossing.com reference leads to a forum where the quote above was stated by a user whose credentials are unknown, undermining the accuracy of the statement.
• The GrammarPhobia.com blog post specifically states that the rule in question encompasses French nationals. De Lesseps is an American.
• The Merriam-Webster guideline makes use of the word "usually," therefore, it is not absolute, only commonly enforced.

More discussion needs to be held on this specific matter. I'll get started on reaching out to more editors. KyleJoan^talk 03:05, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

@KyleJoan: The bookcrossing reference leads to a forum where there are multiple individuals discussing this same issue. The GrammarPhobia reference doesn’t mention French Nationals that I read and even if they did, Luann’s husband is French, she took his French name when she married him so it doesn’t matter if she’s American, he’s French, his name is French. I’m not even going to argue the Webster reference because had you read it all you would understand why the word “usually” was used, they explain the exceptions. AnAudLife (talk) 06:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I was invited here because I had commented at Talk:Luann de Lesseps where I did not give a categorical opinion. {{infobox television}} says the list of stars should be "Organized by broadcast credit order, with new main cast added to the end of the list". Why is this being disregarded? If this is indeed going to be disregarded then Wikipedia's alphabeticisation guideline at WP:MCSTJR has priority over external guidelines. However, our guideline seems to me to leave unclear the situation of an American having a French surname. I suggest we defer to the program credits but, since I have never seen the show, I have no idea where that leads to. Thincat (talk) 08:29, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

The program does not make use of traditional on-screen credit sequences, which made sorting a little tricky. I understand the next guideline is to list in order of appearance, but from my understanding, all of the original cast members appeared on the pilot all together, so that was why the cast was listed alphabetically. KyleJoan^talk 00:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Again, "de" is not part of the proper root surname, therfore Frankel comes before Lesseps, this is the correct way to alphabetize names.AnAudLife (talk) 02:46, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

@AnAudLife: You do realize the sources you provided either were questionable or inaccurate, as pointed out above? KyleJoan^talk 05:37, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

@KyleJoan: Maybe in your opinion they are “questionable and inaccurate”, you provided no proof of such other than your own words and viewpoint. AnAudLife (talk) 06:05, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I have doubts about whether 'bookguide' from BookCrossing.com is reliable. GrammarPhobia.com makes no mention of Americans, only French nationals, which de Lesseps is not. Merriam-Webster makes it clear the guideline is usually followed, therefore leaving room for uncertainty. I've requested for a third opinion on the matter, even though two users already joined in with one opining that "de" is an inclusion of the last name. Let's also be clear that we are in agreement that French nationals would be alphabetized by the first capitalized letter of the last name. This specific discussion is to determine whether American nationals with surnames of foreign origin should be sorted in the same way regardless of one's place of birth and nationality. If I have to provide references as to why in the English language surnames are commonly sorted by the first letter of the last name whether they are capitalized or not, then we'll be here forever. KyleJoan^talk 06:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

@KyleJoan: You do realize that Luann is an American that married a French man therefore her last name is French? I don’t understand why I’m even having to mention this. Even in the English language a French surname should be alphabetized in the manner intended, did you not fully read the sources? Example: Lesseps, Ferdinand de and La Tour, Georges de." Those two names are French, yet we alphabetize them as stated in English reference. AnAudLife (talk) 06:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm not disputing that the surname is of French origin. However, as an American, Luann de Lesseps still falls under the American naming system. I just re-read the sources again, and the Grammarphobia reference states that Charles de Gaulle, a French national, is known as de Gaulle instead of simply Gaulle. How about that? Would he be considered an exception? Who decides these exceptions? If a French national can be an exception, can an American national with a French surname while being under the American naming system be one as well? KyleJoan^talk 07:07, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Allow me to repeat this again...Example: Lesseps, Ferdinand de and La Tour, Georges de." Those two names are French, yet we alphabetize them as stated in English reference. AnAudLife (talk) 07:14, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

"In French and Belgium surnames, the preposition de is usually ignored in alphabetization, while the article la usually is not." "Usually." Not absolutely. "Charles de Gaulle, always known as “de Gaulle,” and Daphne du Maurier, whose last name is written as “Du Maurier” when it appears alone, are indexed with the D’s." Charles de Gaulle. A French national. KyleJoan^talk 07:24, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Again...Example: Lesseps, Ferdinand de and La Tour, Georges de." Those two names are French, yet we alphabetize them as stated in English reference. In other words, here in Wikipedia, in an actual brick and mortar library here in the United States of America, those names are listed as:

• Lesseps, Ferdinand de
• La Tour, Georges de

AnAudLife (talk) 07:35, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

See third opinion below. KyleJoan^talk 07:38, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

While it's not an absolute rule, it seems to me that the simplest solution is to use the English Wikipedia editing guideline at WP:MCSTJR, which suggests that for names of American people (but not those who are actually French), we follow alphabetical order including the de prefix. In particular, the page Luann de Lesseps has been consistently alphabetised in WP category listings under the 'd' since at least 2017 (see this page, for example), which seems enough of a precedent to me. Anaxial (talk) 07:28, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

@Anaxial: Thank you very much for your input! Cheers! KyleJoan^talk 07:38, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

The debate is whether we should add a new rule to WP. If we don’t adhere to “correct” alphabetization across the board then there will be inconsistencies throughout Wikipedia. AnAudLife (talk) 07:41, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Then the debate is on the wrong page; it should be conducted here and preferably through an RFC to ensure the maximum amount of input from established editors. Anaxial (talk) 07:52, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I actually started a discussion over on the MOS page at the suggestion of an administrator, over a month ago when this user started the edit war and now I’m having trouble finding it. AnAudLife (talk) 08:15, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

That was attempted here with 0 support and 1 oppose. KyleJoan^talk 07:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

@KyleJoan: I think we should do as NinjaRobotPirate has suggested and read Wikipedia:Dispute resolution before anymore changes are made regarding alphabetization. AnAudLife (talk) 07:51, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I did. That's how the third opinion was generated. KyleJoan^talk 07:52, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Since it is her former husband's family name, and he is French, we alphabetize at L. We don't alphabetize the wife differently from the husband. This doesn't change because she got divorced, and Wikipedia isn't 'the encyclopedia of today' anyway. Note that prefixes and particles remain part of the surname regardless of how we alphabetize. Almond Plate (talk) 15:00, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your input, I completely agree. Allow me to also add that I have provided numerous references in support of my claim as well as examples of other names, some exact, that are alphabetized by the surname and not the particle, example,

• Lesseps, Ferdinand de
• La Tour, Georges de

The other user and her 2nd and 3rd opinion provided opinion alone, no supporting references. I'm still unclear on why we're ignoring precedent and accepting opinion only. In the MOS discussion I started here, if you read through you will see throughout the discussion that there were other users who agree with me, even if they didn't write "Support" in bold as I asked. AnAudLife (talk) 17:08, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Request for comments on alphabetizing cast members

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Moved to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RFC on Sorting of Names with Particles

Closing this redundant thread as moot and unproductive, per WP:MULTI. There's an active RfC about this question more broadly, at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RFC on Sorting of Names with Particles, a higher-consensus-level venue. And someone already removed the RfC tag from the discussion on this page, so it's unlikely to receive any further commentary, or to receive an analytical closure before being archived. Even if it did, if it doesn't end up agreeing with the broader RfC's results, it would be considered overturned anyway. There is thus no point in this remaining open. (non-admin closure)  — AReaderOutThataway ^t/_c 18:33, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

---

Should Luann de Lesseps, an American woman with a French surname, be alphabetized as de Lesseps, Luann or Lesseps, Luann de? KyleJoan^talk 23:59, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm still not sure why nationality plays a part here. Luann de Lesseps, an American, married a Frenchman, Alexandre de Lesseps. He is French, his name is French therefore so is Luann's. Another example: Lesseps, Ferdinand de and La Tour, Georges de." Those two names are French, yet we alphabetize them as stated in English reference. In other words, here in Wikipedia, and in an actual brick and mortar library here in the United States of America, those names are listed as:

• Lesseps, Ferdinand de
• La Tour, Georges de

So I think Luann de Lesseps should be alphabetized by family surname Lesseps as opposed to the particle de, to remain consistent and grammatical across Wikipedia. AnAudLife (talk) 00:23, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

I would agree that as an American the name should be listed on English Wikipedia following American conventions. Whatever those are. In South Africa we do it differently, but that is not relevant to this case. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 07:43, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

WP:MCSTJR states: American, Australian, Canadian, and English names generally sort on the prefix, regardless of capitalization, so according to American conventions would be de Lesseps, Luann. KyleJoan^talk 10:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

As mentioned above, it is the family name of her former husband, who is French, so according to English-language rules we follow French conventions and list at Lesseps. Almond Plate (talk) 12:45, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

@KyleJoan: The quote you referenced above says American, Australian, Canadian, and English NAMES, yet Lesseps isn't an English name, it's French. So according to that reference it still should be alphabetized Lesseps, Luann de. AnAudLife (talk) 21:35, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

The name is undisputedly French. However, I interpret American in the quote as the names of Americans. Otherwise, what would constitute an American name? Other interpretations could include names of North American or Native American origin or names that are considered common in America. I say all of the above. In that sense, the guideline outlining the alphabetization of American, Australian, Canadian, and English names apply, correct? The discussion is to determine which of the two holds priority: the origin of one's name or the naming system under which one falls. KyleJoan^talk 22:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

I think that reference is made because all those nationalities are English Speaking. However, as far as indexing applies, the name is French, therefore it should be alphabetized by the family name Lesseps, not the particle/preposition de. And let's keep in mind, with identical names (Lesseps, Ferdinand de) and similar names (La Tour, Georges de) they are alphabetized by the family name/surname and it doesn't matter if their spouse was American, Russian, Irish, etc ., it is still indexed under the French family name/surname.AnAudLife (talk) 22:28, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

@AnAudLife: If the guideline references English-speaking countries, then why aren't all countries where English is a major language listed? Also, both Ferdinand de Lesseps and Georges de La Tour were French nationals born with their respective names. Had they been American citizens who adopted the surnames de Lesseps and de La Tour from marriages to French nationals, then the same discussion would take place. I understand that you prioritize the origin of the name de Lesseps over the American naming system under which Luann de Lesseps falls, which is valid. Let's see if other users agree. KyleJoan^talk 23:36, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Myself and others still don’t know why you think her nationality is a factor at all. The name is French, her husband is French. Therefore it should be indexed as such. We’re all here to discuss this topic. AnAudLife (talk) 23:51, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

The question on the top of the RfC reads: Should Luann de Lesseps, an American woman with a French surname, be alphabetized as de Lesseps, Luann or Lesseps, Luann de? I've repeatedly stated that I believe nationality plays a factor because it distinguishes the naming conventions one falls under. Agree or disagree, that is relevant to the question. If you're only interested in discussing French names being indexed as such without wanting to hear other views with regard to other factors, then feel free to start that discussion. Thanks! KyleJoan^talk 01:04, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

We’re here to discuss, we won’t all agree. You’ve shared your opinion and I’ve shared examples, reference and facts. So it’s good we’re here to get other people’s input, as we have already gotten a couple. AnAudLife (talk) 01:15, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Hobby programmer's view: This is about sorting names. Why on earth would this task depend on the nationality of the person having the name? ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:39, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

I believe it distinguishes the naming system under which one falls. Wherever their name originates, an American falls under the American naming system, correct? KyleJoan^talk 20:15, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Not when she uses her husband's surname and her husband is French. Almond Plate (talk) 20:32, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

@KyleJoan: By your logic, Luann de Lesseps would be alphabetized differently within Wikipedia than her ex-husband, Alexandre de Lesseps, who is French and whose name she bears, simply because she is American and he is French??? I'm sorry but that makes no sense and doesn't even seem logical. AnAudLife (talk) 21:00, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

I believe having to repeat points over and over isn't very productive. Every point that every active user in this discussion has made is readily available above. As of now, there seem to be users that agree with me and users that disagree. If a consensus isn't reached, I'll close the RfC and request dispute resolution. KyleJoan^talk 21:12, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

There seems to be 2 people that agree with me and only 1 person agreed with you. AnAudLife (talk) 21:17, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

You seem to be forgetting the third opinion. Besides, that's not WP:CONS. KyleJoan^talk 18:45, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

@KyleJoan: What I'm not forgetting is your argumentative insistence on this topic. Also, you apparently didn't learn much from your 1 month suspension from editing Wikipedia because I have observed you still consistently undoing edits, reverts, basically edit warring with several other users/editors...and that's on this page only, who knows about other pages you're monitoring. You've made this debate personal while I have tried to convey reason, facts, historical data, norms and yes opinions. You don't own this page, neither do I, it's for everyone, please stop being the "hall monitor", stop bullying everyone else and their edits. AnAudLife (talk) 19:21, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

@AnAudLife: If you feel I've been exhibiting chronic, intractable behavioral problems, feel free to report me here. Thanks! KyleJoan^talk 23:14, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

I closed the RfC because I have new discoveries to bring forth. Per Wikipedia:Categorization of people#Other exceptions: Names with particles or prefixes are a complex field and there are exceptions and inconsistencies. Examples of particles are al, dall, de, della, di, dos, du, el, la, o, and von. Whether or not to include the particle in sorting can be up to the individual's personal preference, traditional cultural usage or the customs of one's nationality. Let's examine the three categories mentioned.

The individual's personal preference: This New York Times article provides a quote in which de Lesseps refers to herself as Mrs. de Lesseps.

Traditional cultural usage: As referenced above, Ferdinand de Lesseps and Georges de La Tour are alphabetized as Lesseps, Ferdinand de and La Tour, Georges de, respectively. However, Charles de Gaulle is alphabetized as de Gaulle, Charles, providing an exception to the common way of alphabetizing French surnames.

The customs of one's nationality: As an American, Luann de Lesseps falls under the American naming system. Per Wikipedia:Categorization of people, American, Australian, Canadian, and English names generally sort on the prefix, regardless of capitalization. However, there are discrepancies between different sources on whether to sort on the prefix or not.

Only one of the three categories is a certainty: the individual's personal preference. Traditional cultural usage and the customs of one's nationality follow guidelines that have exceptions to them, therefore negating each other and making her personal preference the most justified category to have precedence. Due to this, I believe that alphabetizing her as de Lesseps, Luann is the more correct and appropriate solution. KyleJoan^talk 19:10, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

I do not see this as an appropriate decision and you haven’t stated anything new here. Per Wikipedia, the source you cite above, it specifically says “American, Australian, Canadian And English NAMES”, not referring to people’s nationality, but the origin of their names, Luann’s is French so this rule does not apply. As far as how either Luann’s ex-husband or herself refer to their last names, that is how their name is spoken, that doesn’t mean that is how it is correctly alphabetized. And I don’t think she has ever stated how she prefers it to be alphabetized. I still feel a consensus needs to be reached with further comments from other users. I believe you closed the RFC because you didn’t like the results you were getting. AnAudLife (talk) 19:43, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

OK. Let's resolve this through the dispute resolution process I requested, then. KyleJoan^talk 19:57, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Fine with me. I 100% agree. AnAudLife (talk) 03:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Great. In the meantime, can you explain to me what defines an Australian name? Would it be names that originated in Australia? If so, I'm having trouble finding one because not a single name listed on the List of most common surnames in Oceania#Australia article are of Australian origin. Same with Canadian names; at least two of the names listed on the List of most common surnames in North America#Canada (Canadian) article are of French origin, which brings me back to my point that the WP:MCSTJR guideline regarding American, Australian, Canadian, and English names can be interpreted as names of nationals of those countries. After all, the same section in the article also states: Whether or not to include the particle in sorting can be up to the individual's personal preference, traditional cultural usage or the customs of one's nationality. KyleJoan^talk 07:13, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

By your logic, every single person of any nationality whatsoever can relocate to the USA and live here and their names should be alphabetized under "American Standards" because by living here and hence becoming an American citizen they forfeit their former identity. That's absurd. The FRENCH name "de Lesseps" is French, it is recognized by the family name "Lesseps" not the preposition "de", meaning of. Luann, an American, married Alexandre de Lesseps, a Frenchman, so now she is also recognized as Luann de Lesseps...the literal translation of her name is Luann of (the) Lesseps (family). It makes no sense to index her name under the "de" meaning "of". AnAudLife (talk) 17:56, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Edited to add: Let's look at it in simpler terms. Imagine, for argument sake, there are 5 million people in the world who use "de" preceding their family name. Such as:

• John A. de Smith
• Mary D. de Jones
• James L. de Johnson
• Susie M. de White

Can you imagine indexing all 5 million people by the "de"? No, because it makes indexing names easier to do and of course easier to locate a certain name by alphabetizing them by their family names, not by the particle, in this case meaning of...which is a preposition. AnAudLife (talk) 22:35, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Sometimes reality is absurd. In South Africa there are a large number of names that start with "van", "van de", "van den" or "van der", They are all listed under V in directories, so the examples listed with "de" would all be indexed under D, as would names prefixed with "del", "de la", "della", "del", "du", "d'" and all the rest. Absurd or totally reasonable? It depends on what you are familiar with. As for whether a name is American or Australian or French, I would say it depends on the nationality of the person, not of their ancestry or other connections, as that is an easily applied objective rule, if you need a rule. I would also accept personal preference if and only if it can be reliably established. There are English names that came over with the Norman conquest, are they to be considered French? How many generations are needed to naturalise a name? · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 06:41, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

• This really needs to be hashed out at WT:MOS, where there's already a thread open about it (more broadly). In this particular case, this is obviously correct: "Luann de Lesseps, an American, married a Frenchman, Alexandre de Lesseps. He is French, his name is French therefore so is Luann's." It's not the Anglicized name "De Lesseps" (usually alphabetized under "D"), it's the French name "de Lesseps" (alphabetized under "L"). Similarly, if Emma Vandenberg was born Emma Shtoop in the Netherlands and married an American named Jim-Bob Vandenberg, she's alphabetized as Vandenberg, Emma, regardless of the fact that her next door neighbor growing up in Amsterdam was Jan van den Berg, alphabetized under B. This is about languages and conventions within them (more precisely, the average conventions of publishers who focus on works in that language, as encapsulated in the majority of style guides and other reliable sources on what to do in those particular languages) – not where a specific individual was born. PS, regarding "Charles de Gaulle is alphabetized as de Gaulle, Charles], providing an exception to the common way of alphabetizing French surnames." No, it's just a sorting error, at odds with how the rest of our French bios are sorted.  — AReaderOutThataway ^t/_c 09:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

  @AReaderOutThataway:Please feel free to offer your opinion at the RFC in this discussion, it's located here. Thanks! AnAudLife (talk) 16:47, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

  Already did; it's why I was referring people to that page. :-) I'll make it more explicit by closing this thread.  — AReaderOutThataway ^t/_c 18:33, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

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.

KyleJoan's disruptive edit

So User:KyleJoan, you have been warned for edit warring and still reverted the page to your version. Stubborn much? No need to mention who are returning cast members as they didn't leave the last season aired to begin with. That's like mentioning Jeff Probst is returning for another season of Survivor in the article of Survivor or mentioning Ellen Pompeo is returning for another season of Grey's Anatomy in the article of Grey's Anatomy, when both people didn't leave their respective shows. Only changes to the main cast should be mentioned. The current cast members are already mentioned in the opening section and there's a timeline for the cast members as well. Also stop with your passive aggressiveness by thanking my edits, when you've been reverted or warned. TheHotwiki (talk) 19:38, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

@Hotwiki: I'm going to stop adding the names of the returning cast per this explanation: The current cast members are already mentioned in the opening section and there's a timeline for the cast members as well. However, I'm reinstating the oxford comma before McSweeney's name and the conjunction between de Lesseps and Singer's names in the lede and rephrasing the description of Radziwill's departure in the overview and casting section for grammatical purposes. I'm also putting back the three citations you removed because the information regarding the returning cast for the twelth season in the lede and in the cast table would be unsourced without said citations, and you know what they say about unsourced information. If that's still considered disruptive, you know where to go. Cheers! KyleJoan^talk 02:29, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

KyleJoan's Persistant Edit Warring.

@KyleJoan: Consider this your formal warning for edit warring. You've now reverted my edit 3 times. If you do it again, I will report you for edit warring and it may be your final block since you have 6-7 blocks for edit warring already. AnAudLife (talk) 06:22, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the formal warning! KyleJoan^talk 06:28, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Rescued from Sonja Morgan redirect

'''Sonja Tremont Adams Morgan''' (born November 25, 1963) is an American television personality, fashion designer, and entrepreneur. Morgan is most notable for appearing on [[Bravo (U.S. TV network)|Bravo]] reality television series [[The Real Housewives of New York City]]. Morgan has starred in the series since the middle of the third season. She was previously married to [[John Adams Morgan]], whose father was the co-founder of [[Morgan Stanley]] and great-grandfather was [[J.P. Morgan]], who founded J.P Morgan & Co. Morgan started a fashion line called Sonja by Sonja Morgan<ref>{{cite web |url=https://sonjabysonjamorgan.com/}}</ref> in 2015.

Jerod Lycett (talk) 04:38, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• LM Edit.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Elyse

[2] Nothing in that link stated she joined the cast as an official friend of the housewives.TheHotwiki (talk) 02:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Again, my edit was reverted and now I'm being accused for disruptive editing. The article was locked in the first place due to false information coming from IP editors who are persistent of claiming that Elyse is a recurring cast member when she's isnt. She's a guest just like Dale. There's a difference between "Ramona's friend" and being a "friend of the Housewives". Friends of the Housewives is a special term for cast members who aren't considered as a main cast member of the show. Also, I wasn't the only one who agreed that Elyse isn't a friend of the housewives in the latest season. User:Livelikemusic also reverted the same edits in this article and stated why Elyse isn't a "friend of the housewives".TheHotwiki (talk) 07:02, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Spam Edits

Can an admin block user KingPags1201 from editing, they are spam editing all the Housewives pages with unconfirmed information that has no source(s). --Yankeesman312 (talk) 21:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Jill zarin rhony.jpg
• Ramona singer rhony.jpg

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:37, 16 April 2022 (UTC)