Talk:Ondřej Látal

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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. 

The result of the move request was: moved to Ondřej Látal. Favonian (talk) 11:56, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Ondrej Latal → Ondřej Látal – In ictu oculi moved this page, it was reverted under "moved without discussion..." and put up for a contested requested move by PBS (talk) 08:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

From the history of the article:
 * 02:43, 1 May 2012‎ In ictu oculi m . . (In ictu oculi moved page Ondrej Latal to Ondřej Látal: [no complex history], per BLP accuracy, sources in article, MOS consistency with other Ondřejs and other Látals)
 * Oppose, as this is the English language Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 19:11, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Amusingly, the RM posted just minutes before this one was for the Chloë Moretz article to be renamed to "Chloë Grace Moretz". Even 100% "English" names sometimes have diacritics, but I don't recall seeing any requested moves to remove diacritics from such names, only for names of "foreign" persons. Would you propose a diacritic-less rename for Chloë (Moretz or Sevigny)? (I'm asking in all seriousness) -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 00:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not know what GoodDay would propose but I would suggest that the AT policy and naming conventions were followed and that article titles are based on usage in reliable English language sources, rather than editorial likes and dislikes. -- PBS (talk) 09:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per accuracy. There can be a redirect in place for those who don't know diacritics. -DJSasso (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Support, diacritics provide important pronunciation information for those familiar with a language and do not hinder reading or understanding for those who choose to ignore them. Although some English sources have omitted diacritics due to typographical or display constraints, scholarly and encyclopedic sources (which is what Wikipedia aspires to be) are far more likely to include them.  Modern computers universally support display of European-language diacritics, eg, at least the ones in WGL-4 or similar subsets.  Wikipedia should render names with diacritics accurately. -- P.T. Aufrette (talk) 00:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Support per P.T. Aufrette -- Ohconfucius  ¡digame! 04:22, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Support for the sake of accuracy, and keep the non-diacriticized name as redirect. - Darwinek (talk) 05:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Support move to more accurate name. bobrayner (talk) 14:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment What does more accurate name mean and is that then name returned in a survey of reliable English language sourcces? -- PBS (talk) 15:36, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Removing diacritics is a mistake and not how you properly translate a name to English. As such the diacritics are more accurate than removing them incorrectly would be. Per commonname inaccurate names are not used even if they are more commonly used in reliable sources. - DJSasso (talk) 19:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Removing diacritics doesn't make a name english, it makes it misspelt. PBS, which bit of "more accurate name" is causing you problems? It's three unambiguous words. bobrayner (talk) 23:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Support (and the other Ondřejs, but don't want to paste this 4x) - the moves were in accord with guidance of WP:RM prior to PBS's unilateral edit, which however was less serious than this edit removing MOSPN diacritics guidance which had been in MOSPN since 2009.
 * Perhaps we should look at this website http://www.eliteprospects.com/team.php?team=164&year0=2011&status=stats which is being held up as a "reliable source" for spelling of BLP names. Note that it is actually a Swedish website and as such allows full Scandinavian names, (see Martin Møller among "contributors" r/h panel) but does not allow full Czech names (Jiří Svašek "contributors" becomes Jiri Svasek). Yet when we go to http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/256525/Dominik-Hasek we find Dominik Hašek Dominik Hašek, (born Jan. 29, 1965, Pardubice, Czech....
 * The link PBS gives say clearly "Because this is the English Wikipedia, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones, assuming English sources of equal quality and relevance are available." In the case of Dominik Hašek there is a reliable English source. In the case of given name Ondřejs and surname Látals there are reliable English sources. In the case of search-string Ondřej+Látal there are no reliable English sources on this search string. (given that www.eliteprospects.com the source in the article favours Swedish diacritics but doesn't allow Czech ones). In which case we follow "German names for German politicians" and the prime guideline of WP:BLP to "get the article right." Leaving a living person's name mispelled because the Swedish owners of a sports (betting?) website don't extend the same courtesy to Czechs as Scandinavians may or may not be verging into WP:Wikilawyering, I don't know, but it doesn't help acheive wikt:accuracy by the normal meaning of the word. In answer to PBS' 2006 question "Is this an English Wikipedia or an international one?", the answer is the same now as then: "It's an encyclopedic one." so 99% of en.wp BLPs (and 211x non-hockey "Ondřej" BLPs), are on a par with the MOS of http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/256525/Dominik-Hasek and not the MOS of www.eliteprospects.com. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ...as an example of how counterproductive the "hockey names" argument is, I just de-redlinked the Czech filmmaker Stanislav Látal from the Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, a Sailor from York article. Although English language sources couldn't provide his date of death (I had to use a Czech one as anyone doing bios/BLPs of non-Anglo-Saxons will encounter frequently) the name "Stanislav Látal" was correctly spelled in English-language books on Eastern-European animation. Here exactly is the nub of the WP MOS "consistent with the titles of related articles" or WP Article Titles "Consistency – Titles follow the same pattern as those of similar articles" issue shown in a real life example. And yet if Stanislav Látal of Olomouc is related to Jiří Látal of Olomouc (which he may well be, it isn't that common a surname) we have to spell his nephew incorrectly because a Swedish website allows Swedish diacritics but not Czech ones? See No climbing the Reichstag dressed as Spider-Man. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Iio, it has been explained to you several times, that dragging up arguments from prior to June 2008 when what is now called the article titles polisy, does not help elucidate the issues as prior to June 2008 the article titles policy was based on usage in all sources not just reliable ones. Your usage of selective quotes from polices and guidelines to push for a style of name you prefer instead of following the general advise as given, is less than helpful: for example your quoting of a very selective part of WP:CRITERIA (part of WP:AT) and totally ignoring WP:UE another part of the same policy. One of the major problems with you selective use of consistency, is that if an article such as this is spelt "Latal" that is no reason in another article about another person called "Stanislav Látal" to be moved to "Stanislav Latal" simply because it is consistent with "Ondrej Latal". Each title should be decided by looking at the reliable English language sources for that subject, not on a flawed concept of consistency for consistency sake or worse a use of consistency to push an editorial point of view against usage in reliable English language sources.
 * So what your argument boils down to here is that there are no reliable English language sources for this man, therefore foreign reliable sources should be used. That is a perfectly respectable argument that follows guidance. All you needed to do to complete that argument is to present a reliable foreign source that gives usage as you propose, cite it in the article with a translation of the relevant sentence or two from the source, on this talk page, as a courtesy to those editors who can not read the foreign language. -- PBS (talk) 09:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Philip,
 * Yes, I know that is a perfectly respectable argument that follows guidance, that's why I made the moves. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:50, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Support verifiablity is no excuse for untruth. Agathoclea (talk) 13:16, 4 May 2012 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.