Revision as of 22:29, 25 March 2010 view sourceAlfietucker (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users10,265 edits →Nina Valentinovna Anisimova: Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:20, 26 March 2010 view source Ezhiki (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators165,314 edits →Nina Valentinovna Anisimova: rspNext edit → | ||
Line 108: | Line 108: | ||
::Gee, thanks, way to pass the buck here :) However, Russavia is correct that disambiguation of Russian people by patronymic is our standard practice—occupational monikers should only be used when the patronymic is not known (or for people who share the exact same first and last name ''and'' the patronymic). There are great many reasons for this, not the least being that a person only has one patronymic, but disambiguation monikers can be many, varied, and not always intuitive to guess. Creating redirects with various monikers is by all means encouraged, but the target article's title should be as unambiguous as possible. Cheers,—] • (]); March 25, 2010; 13:16 (UTC) | ::Gee, thanks, way to pass the buck here :) However, Russavia is correct that disambiguation of Russian people by patronymic is our standard practice—occupational monikers should only be used when the patronymic is not known (or for people who share the exact same first and last name ''and'' the patronymic). There are great many reasons for this, not the least being that a person only has one patronymic, but disambiguation monikers can be many, varied, and not always intuitive to guess. Creating redirects with various monikers is by all means encouraged, but the target article's title should be as unambiguous as possible. Cheers,—] • (]); March 25, 2010; 13:16 (UTC) | ||
:::It's a fairly late hour here, and I've just seen your replies, so forgive any lack of focus in the following. I can see your point to an extent, but it seems to me common sense to make an exception here to the 'standard practice' you mention (btw, I can find no ruling on this 'standard practice' at the ] Russavia provided) when - as I say - the vast majority of English-speaking users, certainly those wanting to know more about the ballet dancer, will not be familiar with patronymics, and IMHO will find the Nina Anisimova they are interested in more quickly if the heading to her article includes her profession. I notice that Russavia seems to have tacitly accepted this on the ], not having changed the link "Nina Anisimova (dancer)". Besides, adding a descriptive parenthesis not only works well enough for articles on non-Russian individuals (such as the various men named Michael Oliver, for instance) but is also so widely used on Misplaced Pages that I would imagine most Misplaced Pages users think in those terms more readily than having to discover the correct patronymic to find their article. In other words, I'm all for making access to desired information as straight-forward as possible, rather than placing yet another hurdle in the way of users less familiar with the conventions of Russian naming. ] (]) 22:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC) | :::It's a fairly late hour here, and I've just seen your replies, so forgive any lack of focus in the following. I can see your point to an extent, but it seems to me common sense to make an exception here to the 'standard practice' you mention (btw, I can find no ruling on this 'standard practice' at the ] Russavia provided) when - as I say - the vast majority of English-speaking users, certainly those wanting to know more about the ballet dancer, will not be familiar with patronymics, and IMHO will find the Nina Anisimova they are interested in more quickly if the heading to her article includes her profession. I notice that Russavia seems to have tacitly accepted this on the ], not having changed the link "Nina Anisimova (dancer)". Besides, adding a descriptive parenthesis not only works well enough for articles on non-Russian individuals (such as the various men named Michael Oliver, for instance) but is also so widely used on Misplaced Pages that I would imagine most Misplaced Pages users think in those terms more readily than having to discover the correct patronymic to find their article. In other words, I'm all for making access to desired information as straight-forward as possible, rather than placing yet another hurdle in the way of users less familiar with the conventions of Russian naming. ] (]) 22:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC) | ||
::::But of course it works just for Russian individuals; not many other nations have a concept of a ]! Russavia, by the way, was not correct in citing ] as the grounds for the move he made. That guideline only deals with the romanization issues. And you are also right to a degree—there is no spelled-out guideline in place regarding this practice. What ''is'' in place, however, is hundreds of articles named using this convention, which, I should mention, had been discussed quite a few times before. There is also no requirement that for disambiguation purposes editors ''must'' search for the person's patronymic when it is not known; the practice merely calls to utilize the patronymic when it is ''already'' in the article. We don't ask you to spend your time on trying to meet the guideline you were not even aware of; we simply ask to accept the change that's made to conform with the ''status quo''. | |||
::::Russian patronymics are very different from Western middle names in that they have a more official status and also enjoy a much wider use. Consider, for example, this. We do try to create articles about people (in general) using both their first and last names. Technically, with a disambiguation moniker, using just the last name should suffice, yet we are not doing so. One reason for it is the fact that using the first ''and'' last names allows to resolve many potentially ambiguous situations. Using a middle name or a patronymic allows to resolve even more such situations, but that returns me to my original observation—middle names are not used formally as often as patronymics are. Russians, you may say, have a "disambiguation advantage" here (pardon the wikinerd talk, but it's necessary :)). We are merely employing this advantage to our benefit. A full name is less ambiguous than an incomplete name with an occupational disambiguator by definition—with Anisimova, for example, should readers expect the article to be located at (dancer)? (ballet dancer)? (choreographer)? (ballet)? (theater/theatre)? (something else I haven't thought of but readers surely will; they always do)? Either one of them could be a target, which is exactly why none of them is perfect. Patronymics have no such problems. You can create redirects from all those occupational disambiguators to one title that is the most unambiguous and logical of them all. With non-Russians, no such benefit exists, so do has to be made with less perfect solutions ;) Have I convinced you at least one bit?—] • (]); March 26, 2010; 01:20 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:20, 26 March 2010
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
ПРЕВЕД! |
Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a message, alternatively you are welcome to email me. If you leave a message here for me and it requires a reply, I will reply here, so you may want to add my talk page to your watchlist. All users have my permission to remove any bot messages from my talk page at any time. |
---|
Archives |
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
notes to self - nothing to see here
DYKs
Ah, indeed. Thanks!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:09, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
Yemen
Any luck with that Yemen diss?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:22, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
The Misplaced Pages Signpost: 15 March 2010
- News and notes: A Wikiversity controversy, Wikimedian-in-Residence, image donation, editing contest, WMF jobs
- Dispatches: GA Sweeps end
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Ireland
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
One question
WTF?! :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 19, 2010; 00:59 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Aeroflot old logo.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Aeroflot old logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}
to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:43, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Aeroflot Russian International Airlines logo.svg
Thanks for uploading File:Aeroflot Russian International Airlines logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}
to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Dorofei
On March 23, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dorofei, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist (talk) 18:03, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
The Misplaced Pages Signpost: 22 March 2010
- Misplaced Pages-Books: Misplaced Pages-Books: Proposed deletion process extended, cleanup efforts
- News and notes: Explicit image featured on Misplaced Pages's main page
- WikiProject report: Percy Jackson Task Force
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Nina Valentinovna Anisimova
Hello. Just to let you know that unfortunately your moving N.V. Anisimova's article to simply her full name has already caused confusion - someone gave it a ballet tag, confusing her with Nina Aleksandrovna Anisimova. I have therefore moved the article on N.V. Anisimova to Nina Anisimova (sportswoman), the reason being I'm afraid most English speakers (i.e. those most likely to use the English language Misplaced Pages) are not used to identifying Russians by their patronyms, and it's much clearer to them to have two Nina Anisimovas distinguishable by their profession. Hope that makes sense. :-) Alfietucker (talk) 23:39, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- It is standard practice on English Misplaced Pages that Russian people be disambigged by their patrynomic name. It shouldn't matter that someone tagged an article incorrectly; we as editors are responsible for our edits, and the editor responsible for that should really have read what they were tagging. If you have any further comments, perhaps you wouldn't mind contacting User:Ezhiki, as he is full bottle on things like this. --Russavia 05:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Gee, thanks, way to pass the buck here :) However, Russavia is correct that disambiguation of Russian people by patronymic is our standard practice—occupational monikers should only be used when the patronymic is not known (or for people who share the exact same first and last name and the patronymic). There are great many reasons for this, not the least being that a person only has one patronymic, but disambiguation monikers can be many, varied, and not always intuitive to guess. Creating redirects with various monikers is by all means encouraged, but the target article's title should be as unambiguous as possible. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 25, 2010; 13:16 (UTC)
- It's a fairly late hour here, and I've just seen your replies, so forgive any lack of focus in the following. I can see your point to an extent, but it seems to me common sense to make an exception here to the 'standard practice' you mention (btw, I can find no ruling on this 'standard practice' at the link Russavia provided) when - as I say - the vast majority of English-speaking users, certainly those wanting to know more about the ballet dancer, will not be familiar with patronymics, and IMHO will find the Nina Anisimova they are interested in more quickly if the heading to her article includes her profession. I notice that Russavia seems to have tacitly accepted this on the disambiguation page, not having changed the link "Nina Anisimova (dancer)". Besides, adding a descriptive parenthesis not only works well enough for articles on non-Russian individuals (such as the various men named Michael Oliver, for instance) but is also so widely used on Misplaced Pages that I would imagine most Misplaced Pages users think in those terms more readily than having to discover the correct patronymic to find their article. In other words, I'm all for making access to desired information as straight-forward as possible, rather than placing yet another hurdle in the way of users less familiar with the conventions of Russian naming. Alfietucker (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- But of course it works just for Russian individuals; not many other nations have a concept of a patronymic! Russavia, by the way, was not correct in citing WP:RUS as the grounds for the move he made. That guideline only deals with the romanization issues. And you are also right to a degree—there is no spelled-out guideline in place regarding this practice. What is in place, however, is hundreds of articles named using this convention, which, I should mention, had been discussed quite a few times before. There is also no requirement that for disambiguation purposes editors must search for the person's patronymic when it is not known; the practice merely calls to utilize the patronymic when it is already in the article. We don't ask you to spend your time on trying to meet the guideline you were not even aware of; we simply ask to accept the change that's made to conform with the status quo.
- Russian patronymics are very different from Western middle names in that they have a more official status and also enjoy a much wider use. Consider, for example, this. We do try to create articles about people (in general) using both their first and last names. Technically, with a disambiguation moniker, using just the last name should suffice, yet we are not doing so. One reason for it is the fact that using the first and last names allows to resolve many potentially ambiguous situations. Using a middle name or a patronymic allows to resolve even more such situations, but that returns me to my original observation—middle names are not used formally as often as patronymics are. Russians, you may say, have a "disambiguation advantage" here (pardon the wikinerd talk, but it's necessary :)). We are merely employing this advantage to our benefit. A full name is less ambiguous than an incomplete name with an occupational disambiguator by definition—with Anisimova, for example, should readers expect the article to be located at (dancer)? (ballet dancer)? (choreographer)? (ballet)? (theater/theatre)? (something else I haven't thought of but readers surely will; they always do)? Either one of them could be a target, which is exactly why none of them is perfect. Patronymics have no such problems. You can create redirects from all those occupational disambiguators to one title that is the most unambiguous and logical of them all. With non-Russians, no such benefit exists, so do has to be made with less perfect solutions ;) Have I convinced you at least one bit?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 26, 2010; 01:20 (UTC)
- It's a fairly late hour here, and I've just seen your replies, so forgive any lack of focus in the following. I can see your point to an extent, but it seems to me common sense to make an exception here to the 'standard practice' you mention (btw, I can find no ruling on this 'standard practice' at the link Russavia provided) when - as I say - the vast majority of English-speaking users, certainly those wanting to know more about the ballet dancer, will not be familiar with patronymics, and IMHO will find the Nina Anisimova they are interested in more quickly if the heading to her article includes her profession. I notice that Russavia seems to have tacitly accepted this on the disambiguation page, not having changed the link "Nina Anisimova (dancer)". Besides, adding a descriptive parenthesis not only works well enough for articles on non-Russian individuals (such as the various men named Michael Oliver, for instance) but is also so widely used on Misplaced Pages that I would imagine most Misplaced Pages users think in those terms more readily than having to discover the correct patronymic to find their article. In other words, I'm all for making access to desired information as straight-forward as possible, rather than placing yet another hurdle in the way of users less familiar with the conventions of Russian naming. Alfietucker (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Gee, thanks, way to pass the buck here :) However, Russavia is correct that disambiguation of Russian people by patronymic is our standard practice—occupational monikers should only be used when the patronymic is not known (or for people who share the exact same first and last name and the patronymic). There are great many reasons for this, not the least being that a person only has one patronymic, but disambiguation monikers can be many, varied, and not always intuitive to guess. Creating redirects with various monikers is by all means encouraged, but the target article's title should be as unambiguous as possible. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 25, 2010; 13:16 (UTC)