| Revision as of 22:23, 23 November 2024 editDeCausa (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers38,348 edits →MOS:NICKNAME: rTag: Reverted← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:08, 25 November 2024 edit undoGiantSnowman (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators599,947 edits archivingTags: Replaced Manual revertNext edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| {{User:GiantSnowman/Archive}} | {{User:GiantSnowman/Archive}} | ||
| {{TOCright}} | {{TOCright}} | ||
| == ] == | |||
| Noticed that you took the nickname out of the opening sentence of ] with the edit summary MOS:NICKNAME. Since it's well-sourced I couldn't see what in NICKNAME indicates it should come out and have reverted it. Then I got nosy and looked at your contribs and noticed you've done this a fair bit previously. What am I missing? what's your thinking on that? ] (]) 10:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :If the nickname is so commonly used, the move the article accordingly. If it's not, the it should not be there. We do not have 'George W. "Dubya" Bush' or 'Paul "Gazza" Gascgoine' do we, so why should we have 'Henry "Dog" Smith'. I have no issues with the nickname being mentioned elsewhere in the article (with appropriate sources), just not in the very opening. ]] 11:30, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Ok. Thanks. That's a reasonable point of view but I don't see anything in ] that says that. I guess by that logic it should be really be treated as an ALTNAME i.e "'''Henry Smith''', known as "'''Dog'''" '''Smith'''..." ] (]) 12:45, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::I suppose it's my view of NICKNAME, having used and applied it for many years, and it does state that "complicated naming should be explained separately" and that "if a nickname is used in place of the subject's entire name, it is usually given separately". Also consider e.g. the ] example; because his article is located at the 'Bunny' name it makes total sense for the 'Bunny' nickname to be in the opening name. I agree with your suggestion of ALTNAME, I've edited the article accordingly which I hope is a fair edit. ]] 12:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Yes. Looks good. Thanks. ] (]) 22:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:08, 25 November 2024
 Archives |
|
2006 • 2007 • 2008 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 • 2014 • 2015 • 2016 • 2017 • 2018 • 2019 • 2020 • 2021 • 2022 • 2023 • 2024 • 2025 • |