Talk:Jean-Baptiste Robert Lindet



Untitled

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

move. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) Seen this already? 07:32, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Requested move
Robert Lindet → Jean-Baptiste Robert Lindet : To include first name in article's title. David Kernow 20:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Voting and discussion
Please add * Support  or  * Oppose  followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using " ~ "
 * Support as proposer. David Kernow 20:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Suppose. I really don't know how to vote.  The move would contradict policy of using the 'common' name for the person, but then I oppose that policy anyway, and would use the person's full given name normally.  I have in fact wrestled with this problem on the page for Sir William Siemens, where he is currently listed as Carl Wilhelm Siemens.  I'll observe this vote, and see if there are any arguments that sway me one way or another.  Noisy | Talk 21:05, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd say an encyclopedia – espcially an online one such as Wikipedia with a redirection system – ought in general to use fuller rather than shorter proper names, not least for the purposes of possible disambiguation; hence my proposal. Thanks for your thoughts, David Kernow 21:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I'd support if use with or without "Jean-Baptiste" were split in references by his contemporaries, or even if helpful in disambiguation; not as a general rule. This differs from all the entertainers and soccer players and cricketeers with last names omitted.  Keep fuller version in opening paragraph, of course.  Gene Nygaard 00:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course, my primary opposition is to David Kernow opinion that his ideas are better than Naming conventions (people) ("start from easy principles: the name of an article should be 'the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things'.")and that he doesn't have to give any better reason for the move than "include first name". Going overboard in the direction of inclusion is no more sensible than going overboard in the direction of exclusion; some reasoning is in order. Gene Nygaard 00:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.