Talk:Henri de Baillet-Latour

Requested move
Henri de Baillet-Latour → Count Henri de Baillet-Latour – The article's name is missing its title, Wikipedia convention on naming nobles clearly allows this, see Michael Morris, 3rd Baron Killanin for reference. Gryffindor 08:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

to keep the existing title. Flowerparty ☀ 02:44, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Survey
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~
 * Keep, I think, per WP:MoS; if rationale for move were correct, Michael Morris, 3rd Baron Killanin would be Baron Michael Morris...? Apologies in advance if my understanding of titling conventions faulty, David Kernow (talk) 09:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well in that case, it should be "Henri, Count de Baillet-Latour", right? But that sounds strange, that's why I proposed the title in the beginning. See Count Camillo Benso di Cavour. Gryffindor  09:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe not so strange; cf. Category:French nobility. But if there is a surname, I too prefer it to be included, i.e. in this case as "Henri Surname, comte de Baillet-Latour". (Hence I've now moved Count Camillo Benso di Cavour to Camillo Benso, conte di Cavour; cf Category:Italian nobility and the Italian Wikipedia.) Otherwise I guess it's "Henri, comte de Baillet-Latour".
 * I realise the article titles in both Category:French nobility and Category:Italian nobility are not consistent; unfortunately I don't believe there's a consensus over what format to use.
 * Regards, David (talk) 16:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * ...See below. David (talk) 18:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. That's my understanding, too, that we don't stick titles such as "Count" in there, unless it is Count of someplace after the name.  This is like having Sir Isaac Newton as the article name, which it is not.  Furthermore, as Recury discusses below, since he's known for real work and not just being a holder of a title, keep the title stuff in the intro.  Gene Nygaard 18:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep since he is apparently well-known as "Henri de Baillet-Latour" through his work with the Olympics. I don't pretend to know much about him though, so if someone could show otherwise, I would reconsider. Recury 18:57, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
Add any additional comments:
 * To be honest, I'm not sure where it should go, but I just wanted to say that looking at one or two other articles for some kind of precedent is generally not a good idea since there is a very real chance that those aren't correct either. Naming conventions (names and titles) says it should be something like "Henri, Xth Count de Baillet-Latour", but it also says to use whatever is most common in English. Correct me if I'm wrong, but since he is most known for his work with the Olympics and not as a nobleman wouldn't his most common name simply be "Henri de Baillet-Latour"? Recury 16:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, "Henri de Baillet-Latour" beginning "Henri de Baillet-Latour (more formally, Henri [Surname], comte de Baillet-Latour; March 1, 1876 – January 6, 1942) was a..." seems fine to me. Regards, David Kernow (talk) 18:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Additional info
I found this translation of an article that's probably in Flemish or Dutch on a blog. If anyone's interested in hunting down the original, it contains a lot of information on the subject of this article. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 03:10, 20 November 2012 (UTC)