Talk:Daniel Hicks

Proposed merge of Dan Hicks into Daniel Hicks
I don't think these should be merged, firstly because Wikipedia is supposed to have articles titled by the most common form of the name. People known as Dan Hicks should be listed under that name, even if their given name is Daniel. This is especially obvious for performers, like the singer and the actor going by Dan Hicks, since that name is advertised. In fact, it can be a stage name, and may not have a real name "Daniel" behind it. The fact that the four Dan Hicks listed have articles, and the four Daniel Hicks do not, suggests that Dan is an important form of name.

Secondly, such a merge implies that all Dan Hicks are in fact Daniel Hicks, but that may not be true and it may be important in distinguishing people. One of the Dan Hicks listed is shown in his article to be actually named John Daniel Hicks, not Daniel Hicks. Also, Dan may not be short for Daniel - e.g. former VP Dan Quayle is actually named James Danforth Quayle. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 02:20, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your well-thought out comments,. I think this would come under WP:DPAGE, although its intro would need to say Daniel or Dan. The issue of Danforth is the only concern for me. The main reason I suggested it was because Daniel Hicks is a list of entries with no articles at the moment, entires which are valid as they meet MOS:DABRL or MOS:DABMENTION. Boleyn (talk) 11:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)