Talk:Jerald terHorst

Name
This man has a rather unusual name; can information on its history be found and briefly incorporated into the article? -Fsotrain09


 * The lower-case in his last name does seem unusual. Perhaps it should be "ter Horst" or "Ter Horst" - akin to Ter Poorten?  gnomelock 23:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)


 * For Pete's sake, just look at the way he types it himself in his resignation letter. So a) it shouldn't be changed, and b) since when does one person's ethnocentristic ignorance dictate what irrelevant info should be incorporated into an article—nothing on his name's origins has any place in this article.  Sheesh. Unschool 18:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I disagree 100% and think you're being emotional here. Respect other contributors, please. The name is indeed special and if we could devote a small passage on it, it would be much appreciated. Peter S. 21:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm fairly certain that you're just kidding, because I simply can't believe that somebody dumb enough to think this could actually figure out how to write anything on Wikipedia. (Note:  I'm not being disrespectful, because I'm indicating that I don't think you're dumb—I just think you're kidding.)  Anyway, I'll delete anything so stupid. Unschool 22:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry I think I don't understand you. Do you realize that that name is outside the norm of normal english capitalization rules? And do you realize that this is a very rare occurrence, probably a one-in-a-million special case? I think something that rare should be commented on. Peter S. 00:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Then comment on it over at Capitalization; create a section on "notable exceptions" or "unexplained exceptions" or whatever. Unless this dude pulled a Gary Hart, his name is not an appropriate subject for discussion in this article.  (However, the edits made earlier today, capitalizing his name at the beginning of sentences, do make sense, and I endorse the changes.)


 * I do not agree. You have not answered my questions. Peter S. 01:50, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sigh. I can't believe I'm responding to this gibberish.  Okay:
 * Yes, I realize that this is outside of the norm for English capitalization. Duh.  By the way, do you realize that English is capitalized in English?
 * A one-in-a-million special case? From whose butt did you pull that statistic?  It's not worth responding to, since you've invented the statistic yourself.
 * Okay, now I've answered your questions. And I really don't mind; I once taught junior high school for a brief period of time, and I know how silly you kids can act.  And I know that you'll grow up, eventually. Unschool 06:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


 * terHorst is a very common Low German name. However, in Germany it is spelt ter Horst (the original spelling) or Terhorst (probably changed by clerks who didn't know Low German and couldn't decipher the meaning). ter (High German zur) means at and describes the place where the person lived, at a "Horst" (whatever that is in English) that is. So the lowercase ter is by no means unusual, what is unusual is the missing space. --91.17.76.113 16:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The role of ignorance in an encyclopedia
Concerning your opinion: "since when does one person's ethnocentristic ignorance dictate what irrelevant info should be incorporated into an article" - it would seem to me that, because an encyclopedia is supposed to be comprehensive, and specifically because Wikipedia is an international project, any and all common misconceptions based on a person's ethnic or linguistic background could be considered important to an article. Admittedly, in some cases it would be difficult to properly give the information in a neutral point of view - for instance, depending on your background, you might consider it more appropriate to call "football" "soccer," or "American Football." From a neutral point of view, neither is "correct" - but one form might have broader international usage than the other, and it would be something to address within the article. Since the primary purpose of an encyclopia is to inform, it would seem negligent for a wikipedian to intentionally leave something unusual out simply because you considered it irritating. And, judging by the tone of your responses, I suspect that wikipedia would be more a dictionary with selected highlights, than an encyclopedia, if everyone left out things that you consider irrelevant. gnomelock 16:25, 23 September 2006 (UTC) (Not a sock-puppet - I apologize for forgetting my signature earlier.)
 * I didn't say to leave it out. I said to make a note where it is relevant, such as an article on capitalization.  As I said, unless this man has done something to intentionally change his name (a la Gary Hart), or, I might add, if somehow his name can be shown to have affected the course of his life, it is simply irrelevant.  You might as well make a note in the article on Gerald Ford that "President Ford, by a remarkable coincidence, has the same last name as the founder of the state's largest employer, Ford Motor Company, despite the fact that he is not related."  Is that true?  Yeah, but so what?  It doesn't belong here, in Wikipedia.  If you disagree, go get a bunch of real people to agree with you (not sock puppets).  Or, better yet, go out and start your own Wiki.  May I suggest calling it Wikidiot?  Oh, and please sign whatever name you are using today.  Makes it easier for others to follow the flow of the discussion. (I can't believe I've been drawn into this completely idiotic discussion.  I do hope you're getting a lot of amusement out of me.) Unschool 04:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Unschool, it shames me to agree with you. You're right, but you're a real asshole about it. Your first mistake was not ending this whole charade of intellect with your first comment, under the name thread. You could have easily ended this whole debacle with a post along the lines of "ter stems from a German/Dutch article placed before the Clan name, and is not capitalized. *cite Wiki page* Likewise, it is not a special case, but rather, the fact that this notable person has a name like this will make people wonder." You didn't. Shame on you. I guess that was your only mistake....maybe continuing this argument. But I'm not done. Gnome, you ARE an idiot, despite how Un did handle this. Little "fun facts" about someone's name are irrelevant in an encyclopedia because they don't have ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE MAN HIMSELF. No one questions his name being "terHorst" as a historical fact. The roots of his use of "ter" uncapitalized have nothing relevant to do with the man. This website isn't meant to show you the nation of which every single name you find on the site stems from. That's inefficient and unencyclopedic. Every "weird" exception isn't informative. It's trivial. If you see a name of such, and you don't know it's roots, infer an idea of what it COULD be. Wikipedia is not meant to answer the trivial. Here's why: Let's look at Truman. Harry S. Truman. The man with "S" as his middle name. THIS is weird, in any country. It is considered an outlier. Hundreds of thousands of people (and even many popular people) have the form "terSomething" in their name.


 * You're right, I was an asshole. That was 15 months and thousands of edits ago.  I've matured greatly as a Wikipedian and have much more respect for other editors, be they gifted or fools, because even the fools, if treated with respect, can rise to a higher level.   Unschool (talk)  —Preceding comment was added at 03:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

How many famous people have a single letter as their middle name? Even moreso, how common a practice is it, as seen throughout history, wherein someone has a single character as their middle name?

Not many. See why something like "terHorst" is completely irrelevant to mark as an outlier? 74.12.4.128 (talk) 18:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC) Joe Caron


 * I think if Gerald Ford spelled his last name "F ord," it would be something to mention within the biographical article (e.g. " 'Ford' is the most common spelling of this last name, but 'F ord' is the way he prefers it spelled."), not on some otherwise unrelated page regarding the use of white-space. "Ter Horst" and "Ford" are the common spellings, and it doesn't at all seem irrelevant to mention odd spellings of names within the biographical article on people who actually use that unusual spelling. I didn't mean to inflame you on this issue.  You certainly have a flair for words when discussing issues you are passionate about.  :-) gnomelock 16:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * If anyone's really that overwrought about his name, check out Family name affixes; "ter" is a Dutch prefix meaning "at the". (And it's lowercase in that article, too.) --Heath 66.32.37.220 06:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The final decision
This is important, guys and girls. Alright, so, we've decided that the article name and subsequent description of terHorst should utilize the Dutch/German grammar of a lowercase letter, dictating the origin of the name (As, in this global world, is commonly accepted. A name is meant to reflect the country of origin of said person, the clan they stem from, and their common given name. Ironically, many articles on Wikipedia still slaughter Clan placement and Given name placement for oriental roots, but that's not what we're talking about here, so I'll stop before I even begin.) If terHorst is how it's being presented in the title, make sure the rest of the article follows suit: IE. Starting paragraphs with his name, and unconsciously capitalizing the first letter. This fails for two reasons - One, you're breaking a rule by following another rule. One is "English Grammar", while the other is "Proper German/Dutch grade naming." So, instead of writing "TerHorst", as the beginning of the sentence, use his full name. Or throw in an adverb. Try to keep it in in a context that will allow for both rules to apply, without having the encyclopedia fucked up too too much. I'll edit what I mean out, but watch for it in the future. 74.12.4.128 (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC) Joe Caron


 * This idea of avoiding the problem at the beginning of sentences by making sure to utilize both his given and surnames is inspired. It is simple, elegant, and—I assume—acceptable to all parties.  Well done.  Unschool (talk) 03:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Further Gripes
Okay I'm totally new to actually contributing anything to wikipedia, but this very topic was really frustrating me. Like probably >90% of typical USERS who encounter Jerald terHorst's page, I wondered what was going on with his weird name, and I was disappointed that I had to search so much to get that explanation that could have been delivered in a single sentence without damaging the integrity of the article. If you are already familiar with this name or know of others like it, congratulations. But most english speakers aren't. Yes, this is a tiny issue, but wikipedia is ever so marginally worse for purposefully omitting this one trivial fact. If you applied this reasoning to every "trivial" fact on this website which the large majority of readers would presumably desire, you'd lose a lot of what makes wikipedia so satisfyingly informative and fun. (Along similar lines, I actually would appreciate the Gerald Ford article including some mention of the fact that he's not related to Henry Ford. It would resolve the ambiguity anyone would encounter upon realizing that two of the most prominent Michiganders just so happen to both be named Ford. In fact, I think there's an ever stronger case for including the Ford fact because it would clear up a common misunderstanding.) Idk, I'm kinda bummed after reading this. Can I just go ahead and edit it in and hope the naysayers don't notice because this is 12 years later?... Willabeasty (talk) 07:34, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

UPDATE 11/20/2019 - I think the best solution would just be to hyperlink the prefix ("ter") of his name to the article on name affixes. No need to add a sentence to the article. The blue link will offer a quick resolution to people's curiosity without needing to add any content to the article itself. So I'm gonna try and do that now, but I have to learn how since I've never made an actual edit.

Section headings
It's probably the result of how the article has evolved, but the current incarnation of this article possesses some of the worst headings I've ever come across. I'm not sure that I'll do much better, so I invite others to review my choices and make changes as they see fit. Unschool (talk) 20:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)