Template talk:Nee

The mouseover dots
I can see the purpose of the simplified spelling ,and the optional parameter for the &nbsp, but why not just link to née like [sic], rather than the somewhat unsettling mouseover popup? I had never come across this before, and I personally find the dots more than a little annoying: it looks as if my graphics card is failing, or my browser is attempting to do a spell-check. Furthermore, née is a perfectly good loanword like attaché and touché. Should I fear the arrival of or  to further clutter my interface? >MinorProphet (talk) 20:26, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

British English only?
@Mlpearc, with your are you saying that this template must not be used for articles written in Australian, Indian, Jamaican, South African, ... flavors of English? Really? I think a citation supporting that is needed.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:10, 21 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I mean not in American English articles, I'll try and re-word it but, not sure the proper way. Any ideas :) Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 18:12, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, but why should it not be used then in American English articles? My Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (1987 – yeah, I know, old) lists née as the preferred spelling; née doesn't discriminate; the redirect née does not discriminate.  So, why not in American English articles?
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Is it an American English term ? I've never came across it before Wikipedia.  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 18:32, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that I know that Jacqueline Kennedy's birth surname is Bouvier because I remember reading it in newspapers and magazines long before there was an internet. For some reason, her name was often written 'Jacqueline Kennedy née Bouvier' or in some similar variant.  So, anecdotal (for whatever that is worth) evidence that née does occur in American English.  And, of course, my American English dictionary supports the usage as of 1987 ...
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:17, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Link target
I have come across many instances of  Should the link target be added to the template ? Mlpearc ( open channel ) 13:58, 13 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I've gone ahead and changed it to link to née, which specifically discusses the term. The template used to link to your suggestion, but was removed and replaced with the hover text a while back. Per WP:NOSYMBOLS, this behaviour is specifically discouraged. — Huntster (t @ c) 17:55, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Shouldn't this redirect to the correct spelling, with the "é"?
If anything, the fact that the é is 'harder to type' should bolster the argument for redirecting. At the very least, this template should display as née. — Hugh 22:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Which redirects to which is pretty irrelevant. That's the point of having redirects...using either gets the same result. — Huntster (t @ c) 22:56, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Remove TfD template
I have closed the TfD discussion as it was based on false pretenses. Please remove the TfD template as soon as possible. 16:49, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Use for name changes other than due to marrige
According to the recent Rfc Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies, and the MOS is being or has been changed to say so. Users of this template should take note, and I have edited the documentation accordingly. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:07, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Template:Ne
Just a heads up: I've set up the equivalent template for the male form.  Schwede 66  22:47, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
 * , awesome, thanks! — Huntster (t @ c) 03:54, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * equivalent ... male form yet the documentation says "a shortcut for or birth names"?
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 07:33, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Trappist, are you asserting that the concept of maiden doesn't apply to men? Seriously though, there's a good case for abandoning the term's, and this template's, use, and to replace it universally with "born", especially in an age where there are apparently more genders than can be expressed wit né and née. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * We do live in an analog world ... If the definitions of and  are, as stated in the templates' documentation, identical except for spelling, then is there a need for both templates?  Does confusion not follow?  And maiden-for-men does have a rather nice ring to it.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 10:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit request
Please italicize "née"; that is how the term most often appears, including in the MOS entry on the use of the term. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 18:25, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Have you established a consensus for this change? I'm thinking that there is a conflict between MOS:MULTINAMES and MOS:FOREIGN.  I can find née in my  Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (c. 1987) so perhaps MOS:MULTINAMES is the thing that needs fixing?
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 18:35, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Everywhere I've seen it (newspapers, written manually on Wikipedia, etc.) has italicized it; it's common practice as far as I can tell. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 18:39, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Here are some simple insource: searches that give some sense of how née is used in en.wiki:
 * plain: née – 42600+ pages
 * wikilinked italicized: [[née] ] – 500+ pages
 * unlinked italicized: née – 6000+ pages
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 19:10, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Huh. I wonder if it's a regional variation thing, then. I was going to suggest adding an yes parameter to allow for optional italicizing, but I suppose it would take fewer keystrokes to just type . cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 21:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The template is used in 1425 articles. A similar search to those above finds:
 * template italicized:  – 21 pages
 * This brings me back to the question of the conflict between MOS:MULTINAMES and MOS:FOREIGN. Which of these is correct?  Finding the answer to that question seems the proper next step,
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:39, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * MOS:MULTINAMES has née italicized as well. I see no reason not to make this change. We need to make sure any manually italicized uses of this template are rendered properly after the change as well, but that's a purely technical matter. Kranix (talk &#124; contribs) 23:34, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Should certainly be italicized. Johnbod (talk) 00:57, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * If it's foreign enough that it should be italicized, then we shouldn't be using it at all; we should be using the corresponding English word "born" instead. On the other hand, if it's accepted enough as an English word to be used here, then as an English word it needs no italicization. I lean towards the "it's English, don't italicize it" camp but I can see the "it's French, don't use it" argument as being reasonable. I don't think it makes sense to advocate using it but italicizing it. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with David's thoughts, though I firmly believe it should remain in use as a common term. There's no need for italicization. — Huntster (t @ c) 08:15, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Widely used in English – no need to italicize per . Current WP usage ratio of ~7:1 above seems to agree and  template does not italicize. MOS:MULTINAMES should be changed. —[  Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 09:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Completely agree with the above. Common English usage. No need for italicisation. No need for the template either. Just write it; this template mania is annoying. Too common to need linking. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:40, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I was happy to see there is a template for people like me who don't type  often enough to remember the +0233 sequence, or use a keyboard without a numeric keypad, which makes it even harder. —[  Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 03:48, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Italics, though I agree with David Eppstein that "born" should be used in most cases as the simpler word. This should be advised in the template doc.  (My general feeling with common loanwords is that they should either be italicized with accents or non-italic without accents.  e.g.: cafe or café, facade or façade.) – Reidgreg (talk) 17:03, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * "Née" is an incredibly common word that has been used in English for a long, long time and is almost certainly commoner than "born" when referring to women's maiden names. The male version, "né", on the other hand, is not commonly used and "born" should be preferred. As someone who always writes "café" and "façade", I would completely disagree with you over italicisation. The accent doesn't make italicisation necessary. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I should also point out that "née" is used almost exclusively in English to refer to married women who have legally adopted their husband's surname (still the norm in English-speaking countries), whereas "born" is a more general term that may mean a person of either sex has changed their name for some other reason. "Née" is therefore a useful and widely understood shorthand for listing a married woman's "maiden name" without having to spell out in painful detail why she has or had a different name from her birth name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:41, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Needs "link=no" option for second and subsequent uses
This ought to have a  option that would suppress the link, to comply with MOS:DL. —Hugh (talk) 20:48, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Support – This proposal is consistent with then Project's linking guidance for articles. Senator2029 “Talk”  09:30, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The term ought not to be linked, or at best there should be defaulted to not linked with an option to link. --  Ohc  ¡digame! 10:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Entirely agree. Shouldn't be linked at all. Common English words don't need linking. WP:OVERLINKING. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:13, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Because née is harder to type than the template should be kept.  There is no need for the wikilink because commonly used in English; no need for the  if not wikilinked.  Because  is a typing aid, the template can and should be substed with auto-subst support ( on the ~/doc page). —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * And the same for ...
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 13:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support – Needed in case of new occurrence. Same with . 7szz (talk) 04:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Support. This really needs to be done. – Rhain  ☔ 01:49, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Italics?
The examples on WP:Née all have this italicized. Should the italicization be moved to the template to make it more convenient and more consistent? DemonDays64 (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. In this sentence fragment at MOS:NEE, WP:WORDSASWORDS applies:
 * The examples, I think, are misleading; the italic markup should not be used there:
 * Courtney Michelle Love (née Harrison;... not Courtney Michelle Love (née Harrison;...
 * Née is a a loanword so per MOS:FOREIGN is not italicized in normal use.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 16:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

template to redriect?
Why does this template target the redirect Née, and not the article Birth name? Is there any objection to changing it to redirect directly to the eventual target article? -- Mikeblas (talk) 06:30, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Non-breaking space
Could the non-breaking space following the word "née" please be removed? While it may occasionally be of minor benefit in some cases, on mobile, it can lead to really jarring line breaks before the word "née". (I've noticed it, for example, at the Nancy Pelosi article when viewed on my iPhone.) Thanks, Graham (talk) 23:38, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ – replaced nb space with a breaking space. That should be better. Let me know.  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'r there 09:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 * That seems to have helped – thanks! Graham (talk) 00:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * my pleasure!  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'r there 15:04, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Alas, I'm not convinced. This template takes zero or one parameter.  Before the most recent edit, when there was a parameter, the template rendered this:
 * without the parameter, the template rendered this:
 * This is mentioned in the template documentation. I think that this 'fix' should be reverted and if there is a problem with no-break-spacing at Nancy Pelosi, it should be fixed there.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:55, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * This is mentioned in the template documentation. I think that this 'fix' should be reverted and if there is a problem with no-break-spacing at Nancy Pelosi, it should be fixed there.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:55, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * This is mentioned in the template documentation. I think that this 'fix' should be reverted and if there is a problem with no-break-spacing at Nancy Pelosi, it should be fixed there.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:55, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Itsy bitsy
When viewed in Desktop view the template renders in 1-point type. See Raquel Welch. Cheers! 02:53, 16 February 2023 (UTC) Courtesy pings to and. Cheers! 09:03, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Normal size for me when logged in and when logged out.  does not have markup to change font size.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 14:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * – Micro text in Desktop view for Vector-2010 and Vector-2022 skins. The maiden name is micro too that's inside the template after the pipe. How can I show you? Please ping me back. Cheers!  02:47, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * See? Nothing that controls text size.  Did you try looking at Raquel Welch when you are logged out?  If  displays correctly when you are logged out, then that suggests that the problem is local to you.  You have a lot of stuff in User:WikiWikiWayne/common.css and User:WikiWikiWayne/common.js.  Perhaps something in one of those personal pages is corrupting the display of.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 03:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * See? Nothing that controls text size.  Did you try looking at Raquel Welch when you are logged out?  If  displays correctly when you are logged out, then that suggests that the problem is local to you.  You have a lot of stuff in User:WikiWikiWayne/common.css and User:WikiWikiWayne/common.js.  Perhaps something in one of those personal pages is corrupting the display of.
 * —Trappist the monk (talk) 03:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)