Talk:Hepburn (surname)

	Anglo-Saxon England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anglo-Saxon KingdomsWikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsTemplate:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon KingdomsAnglo-Saxon Kingdoms articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthroponymy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the study of people's names on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

North East England Low‑importance

	North East England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North East England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North East EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject North East EnglandTemplate:WikiProject North East EnglandNorth East England articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

(I removed the redirect to Talk: Hepburn romanization)

Untitled

I personally think that this article should either be about Hepburn as the family name, with other parts moved to Hepburn (disambiguation), or that this should be left as the disambig page and the information at the top moved to Hepburn (family name) or Hepburn (name). Any thoughts? Either way, the link to Hepburn romanization in the very first line should be moved, it implies there's only one other thing to do with Hepburn, not many. Satan's Rubber Duck 19:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Hepburn romanization is not only a very common use of the word "Hepburn", but probably the only one where it's common to use the word "Hepburn" alone ("that document is written in Hepburn", "this IME supports Hepburn", etc). If you look at what links here, you'll see dozens of Japanese articles doing just this. (Of course, they should be linking straight to Hepburn romanization, but this calls for a very visible redirect link, not something buried two pages down in the Hepburn family tree.) Jpatokal 12:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Japanese writing is admittedly an area I know absolutely nothing about, I hadn't heard of the term before. How about my first idea then - moving the large paragraphs to Hepburn (family name), replacing it with something like "Hepburn is also a common family name, go here for information on the history of the name". I don't normally mind when disambig pages have extra info on them, but this had enough that I didn't even realise it was a disambig page for a bit (hence my confusion). Satan's Rubber Duck 02:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the Hepburn is the most well known as the surname. Also, the changes made on the article were nearly all correct. I think that any person with an account, should be allowed to edit it as they please, as I am aware many Wikipedia administrators do not know about the topic of the surname, and it is mostly right. I also think that before the changes are deleted, the user should be consulted, so he can back up his evidence. 05hepburn4 13:36 10 July 2007 (05hepburn4 12:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]