Talk:Ernesto Amantegui Phumipha

Requested move 4 February 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved to Ernesto Amantegui Phumipha. Roman Spinner and Andrewa have both made a good case for using both the patronymic and matronymic names, and their arguments have not been refuted. Jenks24 (talk) 06:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Ernesto Amantegui → Ernesto Phumipha – Amantegui is his middle name. No one call him as Ernesto Amantegui but Ernesto Phumipha. You can see also in his club website KungDekZa (talk) 18:06, 4 February 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Andrewa (talk) 21:38, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination. The two external links appended to the article confirm the indicated facts. &mdash;Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 01:15, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment. Due to the variable use of the name within various sources, withdraw earlier support, above, for form as presented in the nomination, but would support use of the full name Ernesto Amantegui Phumipha, rather than Ernesto Amantegui or Ernesto Phumipha. &mdash;Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 05:54, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose per nomination. Amantegui is not his middle name. It's his father's paternal family name. Phumipha is his mother's.--MonFrontieres (talk) 03:47, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Alternate proposal

 * Move to Ernesto Amantegui Phumipha. This is an unusual but not unique case, not well covered by Naming conventions (people). The more common names are Ernesto Amantegui and Ernesto Phumipha, but it is not obvious which of these to prefer, and either will be confusing to some. There seems no downside to Wikipedia using the full name, according to Spanish naming customs, so I beg WP:IAR. Relisting to seek consensus on this, and if we achieve it I will then propose a tweak to the guideline to better cope with such cases. Andrewa (talk) 21:38, 12 February 2017 (UTC)


 * 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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.