Jump to content

Talk:Saša Tuksar

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

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: page moved. While the discussion is somewhat split, I'm moved by the overwhelmingly one sided decision on the RFC noted in the section immediately below this poll. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:53, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Sasa Tuksar → Saša Tuksar – Revert undiscussed move back to original title with correctly spelled name of living person. The reason the International Tennis Association removes the diacritics from all tennis players names may be because Wimbledon and French Open scoreboards only have 26 letters? I don't know. But whatever the reason, that doesn't automatically mean WP should be doing so. This name is an illustration of why not: the male name Saša (pronounced "Sasha") becomes sasa (windflower, pronounced "sassa") when the "š" is changed to a "s". These diacritics have meaning, they tell readers how the names are pronounced, and this living Croatian gentleman's name is pronounced "Sasha" no matter that the Wimbledon scoreboards can cope with. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:24, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose WP:Use English, if the English usage is without the accents, as seems to be claimed by the nominator, then it should not have accents. And since the French Open is in France, where many accents exist in the French language, and they don't use this accented form either, it doesn't seem to support using the proposed accented form, since even a place with a language that uses accents doesn't use accents for this person. 70.24.251.224 (talk) 04:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Does WP:Use English cover diacritics in BLPs? See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(proper_names)#Diacritics In ictu oculi (talk) 03:14, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I get 96 Google News results for this subject. Four of these use the diacritic, all of them non-English. ESPN, Sydney Morning Herald, USA Today, and the BBC all drop the diacritic. WP:DIACRITIC says to, "follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language." Ideally, we should follow reference works rather than news accounts. This subject was not mentioned in any reference work that I checked, and sports reference works generally drop off the diacritics anyway. The title should provide useful information to the reader by telling him how the subject is usually referred to in published English. The version of the name with diacritics can be given on top of the box, as well as boldface in the opening, so no information regarding pronunciation is lost. Kauffner (talk) 04:43, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kauffner - I see you've edited from "Sasa Tuksar (Croatian: Saša Tuksar)" to Saša Tuksar in the first line. This is an improvement, but I can't actually see from the above why WP would want undiacritic as the page location for BLP, but diacritic in the first words in lede of BLP. Can you for my benefit state again why/where that is documented in MOS or BLP. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:27, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I base my edit on WP:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#First_mention, which states: "While the article title should generally be the name by which the subject is most commonly known, the subject's full name should be given in the lead paragraph, if known." IMO, the "common name (native name)" format is a most awkward way to begin an article, certainly not the way anyone off Wiki does it. None of the examples given in the guideline support doing it this way. Kauffner (talk) 04:33, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:40, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per encyclopedic consciousness over "ITF regulations". Also the same for Nikola Cacic to Nikola Čačić. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 07:22, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This person didn't play tennis under his "real name", he played tennis as "Sasa Tuksar" WP:STAGENAME. If he was worried about that name then he could have asked the ITF to change it to "Sasha Tuksar" anytime. WP policy doesn't ask us to put every article at the "real name", we are required to put it under the most common name that is connected with their notable activity. His "real name" in native spelling is given at the very start of the article, so there is no problem at all. MakeSense64 (talk) 07:43, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
MakeSense64 you've claimed stage name before, but does WP:STAGENAME have any relevance to the fact that due to ITF regulations and technical issues with scoreboards ITF players are not allowed to register with their own names? You should be citing Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(proper_names)#Diacritics, but it appears that the ITF regulation is distorting usage in this case. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:13, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why does that matter? It's been like that since the 1920s plus all the other English sources use Sasa Tuksar too. It's his common name in the English alphabet. Remember, wiki doesn't care a bit about what you think is right or what I think is right... wiki cares about what we can source. And that is overwhelmingly Sasa Tuksar. We don't put things here at wikipedia at official names or unofficial names or nicknames or casual names. We put them at their most common name. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:32, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's a common rendering of his common name, one using English alphabet only. If he called himself e.g. Jack Green at ITF, that would have been a cause to invoke the stage name policy. If he called himself e.g. Sasha Tuxar, that would have been a cause to invoke the use English policy. If he was best known as Aleksandar Tuksar, that would have been a cause to invoke the common name policy. Here, you just want to strip diacritics for no real reason and the invocation of preponderance of English-language sources serves as a nice crutch to achieve a goal that those sources do not strive for. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:15, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You can use different semantics if you like. For whatever reason: the English speaking world, the English press, All authoritative agencies of Tennis... these sources call him and spell his name as Sasa Tuksar. He is notable only for playing tennis or there wouldn't even be an article on him. He belongs at Sasa Tuksar. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:38, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - this is the same typical tennis-specific trivial diacritic censorship we've seen plenty of times now at Talk:Mate Pavić, Talk:Saša Hiršzon etc. There is no benefit to removing the diacritic in the person's name. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment reverted Fyunck's edit "Saša Tuksar, professionally known as Sasa Tuksar, (born 12 May 1983)" back to normal WP:MOS per Kauffner. Asked for advice on WP:STAGENAME discussion page. Also note question on Tennis Project page re claim that Britannica doesn't use diacritics for some Tennis BLP. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:35, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Typographic jingoism has been rejected again and again and again. It's a WP:BIAS and WP:SOAPBOX problem. The essentially one-editor essay/proposal on forcing all tennis player names to never use diacritics raises WP:V/WP:RS, WP:NPOV/WP:UNDUE, WP:NOR, WP:NOT, WP:AT and other problems, and certainly does not represent a consensus even at WP:TENNIS much less Wikipedia-wide. PS: People citing WP:USEENGLISH need to actually read it. It says very clearly that diacritics are "neither encouraged nor discouraged" by naming policy. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 18:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC) PS: Moving this to "Sasa Tuksar" is particularly absurd, since "Sasa" and the real name are not pronounced the same. The current name is directly misleading. Any well-read English speaker recognizes "š" and knows it means /sh/.— SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 18:45, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:USEENGLISH is a guideline and if you want to cite then why not cite all relevant parts: "The use of modified letters (such as accents or other diacritics) in article titles is neither encouraged nor discouraged; when deciding between versions of a word which differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language".
We find the same in WP:UE policy, which states: "The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage". Notice the should, because it is a policy. Well, if we apply that to this tennis player then we find that common English-language usage in virtually all our sources is "Sasa Tuksar". So the concensus based on policy is very clear. MakeSense64 (talk) 05:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC) (Note: I have no idea why this appears underlined)[reply]
  • Support per WP:COMMONNAME which says "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." Just because the ITF incorrectly changes the names by just stripping the diacritics instead of translating doesn't mean we should. -DJSasso (talk) 15:57, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, but does that mean a person can be required to stick to those "book" rules when he spells his own name in English? I don't think so. For ordinary words it makes sense to require that they are properly translated according to the rules that exist for the given language. As for a person's own name, he is free to deviate from those rules. Somebody explained that "Saša" should be spelled as "Sasha" in English spelling. Well, what if mr Tuksar likes "Sasa" better? His tennis name as it is spelled on the ITF site and picked up there by English-language media, is fully under his own control. Anytime he can log on to IPIN and change his first name to "Sasha" if he wants. All English-language sources will then start using that name for him. We cannot reasonably make the case that the name is a "mistake" or "inaccurate" when it is the person's own choice. Then some basic respect should take precedence over spelling rules. MakeSense64 (talk) 16:44, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • He isn't spelling his own name that way. The Federation is. We have no way of knowing its his own choice, and failing any proof its his own choice it is a mistake and we need to go with proper spelling. -DJSasso (talk) 17:31, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I fail to see how the quoted guideline is relevant. Diacritics are a style issue. The current title is supported by dozens of sources. No RS has been cited to support the claim that it is inaccurate. Kauffner (talk) 02:07, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. "Sasa Tuksar" is not favored by WP:UE, because it is not an anglicized spelling. It is also not a different name from the proper name, so it is not supported by WP:COMMONNAME. We should do what we and other English-language reference works normally do with foreign names; get the article right, as required by WP:BLP. Prolog (talk) 20:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That's a wrong interpretation of WP:UE. It is angliciced but maybe not according to whatever "rules" exist for anglicization from the given language. That doesn't make it any less anglicized. Otherwise you could argue that Nuremberg (one of the examples given there) is also not anglicized spelling, because "Nürnberg" should be written "Nuernberg" or something like that. MakeSense64 (talk) 05:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:UE is part of Wikipedia:Article titles, i.e. it relates to titles/page names not first line of lede where BLP would prioritise accuracy. Personally I have no problem (as Kauffner) with the actual page being at a non-diacritic location, the issue for me (again as per Kauffner's edit and explanation above) is that the first line in the lede of a Spanish/Czech/Croat etc. Latin-alphabet BLP should give the most accurate form of the name of the BLP subject according to his/her current citizenship. ... moreover I'm fully in favour of WP:UE for titles when it refers to non-BLPs. I've made many RMs to move Latin/Greek/Hebrew terms to English equivalents, as you can see from attempts like Passover sacrifice (although that particular RM failed spectacularly because I bungled presentation of the Google hits) so I'm not against WP:UE in titles, far from it. It's just that BLPs have the extra onus of accuracy in the lede, not necessarily title. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:04, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are quite right that the question of moving an article is a different issue from the question what should be in the lede. The latter is handled per WP:MOSBIO and WP:LEAD as far as I know. But this discussion is about moving the page, so considerations about the lede are a moot point here. It can be addressed after the RM is closed. MakeSense64 (talk) 09:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. My reason for emphasizing Kauffner's point about Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biographies#First_mention relates more to the edit (corrected by Kauffner, in my view correctly) which makes it appear that the name minus the accent is a WP:STAGENAME which I think we've all agreed it isn't by now. Also as a secondary issue, thinking about my own rationale of accuracy of pronunciation (which is the only reason for a diacritic in the first place), I wonder do ESPN and other broadcasters make an effort to pronounce names correctly? For example Anglicized as "Sasha" /ˈsæʃə/ not Anglicized as "Sassa", for Sasha (name), Anglicizations of foreign pronunciations /ˈsæʃə/ are never exact, but English speakers do say "Re-nay La-cost" not "Reen La-coast", "Byorn Borg" not "Ba-joorn Borg." To be quite honest in terms of BLP accuracy adding "(pronounced Sasha /ˈsa:ʃə/)" to the lede line is more important than the hacek over the 's' in this case. Many people would see the hacek over the 's' and not know it was "sh" anyway. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:31, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think adding the pronunciation is always recommended in articles when there can be doubts about the pronunciation. As for the name minus an accent not being a STAGENAME, I wouldn't be too sure about that. Have a look at Celine Dion if you want. According to the Talk page that article has also had some moves, but it is now kept at her stagename , which only differs in one diacritic from her "real name". We cannot argue that it is an "error". And this is an article with FA status. MakeSense64 (talk) 11:15, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nuremberg is an anglicized spelling as it has entered the English language, as documented by authoritative sources such as dictionaries. Martina Navratilova is also an anglicized spelling as she adopted the diacriticless form after becoming a U.S. citizen. Lech Walesa, however, is not an anglicization despite it being the common spelling in English, which is why it receives very little support in dictionaries and encyclopedias. Similarly, Sasa Tuksar has not been established as an anglicized spelling, and the name should therefore be presented in the correct orthographic form. Prolog (talk) 20:00, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just to confirm that what Prolog says is in line with what Djsasso previously said re WP:COMMONNAME which states "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." Is that the British quality press - Guardian, Times, Telegraph and so on - for years as reliable sources had "Lech Walesa" (which was naturally misread by many people when Solidarity first appeared as "Letsch Wales-ah," except that the BBC pronounced Lech Wałęsa correctly as "Lekh Va-wen-sa" , yet WP following the underlined guideline above maintains the full Polish spelling in (1) the lede and (2) title. This is a very potent and clear demonstration of WP practice with BLPs: accuracy in WP:BLPs is paramount, irrespective of the Times and Telegraph inability to print "ł" or "ę" (both papers do now often use German and French accents, inconsistent on Spanish, rarely for Eastern Europeans). And the Times and Telegraph are a lot more WP:RS than ESPN or ITF. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:53, 23 March 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.

Proposal to require no-diacritics names

[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis/Tennis names#RfC: Can a wikiproject require no-diacritics names, based on an organisation's rule or commonness in English press?. This is directly relevant to the ongoing WP:RM, above. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 18:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC) — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 18:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One thing to note for the closing administrator. That discussion is strictly for a particular essay and whether that essay should use "no-diacritics" regardless of sources. It was a very poor choice of wording for a rfc on that essay. Other huge debates at talk:Novak Djokovic have gone the other way. Otherwise thanks for taking the time to sift through all the stuff here. I 100% disagree with your choice, but I know it's a thankless job. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The RfC was presented in bad faith. The proposer immediately voted against his own proposal. A rejected proposal is not a proper basis to take a positive action. We've had a whole series of RfCs on this issue, and this one is hardly the best reflection of editor opinion. Kauffner (talk) 11:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The RFC is not about the essay, as the opening question and comments clearly show. The discussion was mentioned on several relevant talk pages; its actual location is largely meaningless. Prolog (talk) 17:55, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah right. This was about the essay only, nothing more. It was mentioned on a couple talk pages near the bottom where votes were being cast and no one gave it any serious thought. I know I didn't. It's title was ridiculous and it's placement was laughable for anything other than that essay. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:12, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion is linked from WP:VPP, WT:MOS, WT:AT and WT:NCP, among others. So far, everyone seems to have commented on the issue itself and not the essay. Prolog (talk) 19:40, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't matter... it was a query about an essay and a badly written question at that. It's useless except for the essay it was referring to. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:37, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As the outcome shows it does matter. All the voters are sided with the use of diacritics and it's clear for anyone who reads the RfC. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 16:22, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If a ban is rejected, that is not the same as a mandate to do anything. This is hardly the only diacritic-related RfC Wiki has held. WP:UE and WP:DIACRITICS are still in force. Kauffner (talk) 17:48, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All the dicaritic RfCs held through the years have mostly fallen 50/50ish. Suddenly this one is skewed... why?... the RfC titling was on-sided and it was about a personal essay. The other editors who push to follow wiki policy and guidelines, as with Djokovic, didn't care about this essay RfC. Not a big enough deal. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:37, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Fyunck, with respect, how many times has it been stated that players with cyrillic names are not pertinent examples to Latin names. I myself have said it getting on for eight times I would think, and I've seen others say it as well, so why are you continuing to cite a cyrillic name as an example? Could you try and keep any future discussion to Latin-alphabet names please?

Hi Kauffner,
I generally thing you're right with non-BLPs, but the two guidelines:
  • WP:UE cites on only one Latin-alphabet bio name, Søren Kierkegaard.
  • WP:DIACRITICS contains the following which appears to support use of diacritics on the common name where there is a reliable Czech/Croat/etc. source:

The policy on using common names and on foreign names does not prohibit the use of modified letters, if they are used in the common name as verified by reliable sources.

In ictu oculi (talk) 12:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the first sentence of that policy you can read: "...follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language"
So, reliable Czech/Croat sources are not usable to determine what is the common name for English WP. The reliable Czech language sources are useful to find the common name for Czech WP. The reliable Croat language sources are useful to find the common name for Croat WP. It has nothing to do with Cyrillic names, we are looking for the common name in English sources because that's the name most English readers will look for when they try to find the article about a certain player. MakeSense64 (talk) 13:11, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Saša_Tuksar&oldid=1210771050"