Talk:Siegbert Salomon Prawer

Requested move 18 May 2021

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 10:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Siegbert Salomon Prawer → S. S. Prawer – Per WP:COMMONNAME (see, e.g., ). 24.77.42.223 (talk) 00:25, 18 May 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. ~  (t, e &#124; c, l) 14:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:22, 18 May 2021 (UTC)


 * queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:23, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose, Known as Siegbert Prawer in Gbook biographical contexts, and that appears to be WP:COMMONNAME per normal bio practice. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:48, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The use of "Siegbert Prawer" seems rather uncommon. This n-gram suggests that "S. S. Prawer" (with or without the space between the initials) is seven times more common than "Siegbert Prawer". I fail to see how "S. S. Prawer" fails to meet WP:COMMONNAME but "Siegbert Prawer" does. Additionally, "Siegbert Prawer" is neither the current nor the proposed title. Do you have a preference between the current title and the proposed one? 24.77.42.223 (talk) 20:08, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article needs working references (and more of them)
Hello Wikipedians. I've tagged the article with templates to underscore two big issues. First, as I write this, the article is 100% unsourced due to WP:LINKROT. Neither of the two reference links are working, nor are there Internet Archive copies for them (I checked). I did find an archival copy for the (also dead) external link, at least. Secondly, even if those two ref links worked, the article needs more sources. I don't have any expertise in the subject matter at all, and I've got a lot on my plate at the moment, so I'm afraid others will have to work on improving things. Itsfullofstars (talk) 05:49, 5 June 2021 (UTC)