Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Czech)

Common sense?
I don't know whether this needs to be institutionalized. Number of policies is high enough and this is more-less common sense. Pavel Vozenilek 14:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * ...but you agree to the ground of the matter: the wording of the policy is yours
 * Whether it should be "institutionalized" is a futile discussion, you were the first to write that wording of the policy on a policy page (i.e. Village pump (policy))
 * Too many policies is a bad thing: adding to that number unwritten policies is even worse.
 * All policies should be common sense, otherwise don't bother to write them down. --Francis Schonken 10:06, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Are hockey players different?
I do not understand, why there is the hockey exception in the rule. What is the reason for different treating of hockey players and other people? Jan.Kamenicek 00:21, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * See my reply at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (hockey). Basicly: start to do the work to flesh up this Czech naming conventions policy with evidence ("rationale") that might convince your fellow-wikipedians:
 * the only rationale presently in the Czech naming conventions policy is: "that's the way we Czechs do it", which is not much of an encyclopedic rationale.
 * compared to that I found the evidence presented by (among others) ccwaters at village pump (policy)/Using diacritics (or national alphabet) in the name of the article much more convincing: ccwater's comments however only applied to hockey players. --Francis Schonken 10:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, that is exactly, what I do not understand. ccwater has written that s/he failed to find a hockey publication using the diacritics. Therefore it should not be used in hockey articles. That's quite a strange attitude. Either the diacritics is acceptable, or it is not. Refusing it for hockey players and accepting it for writers, actors, scientists and others, or refusing it for Czech and Slovak names and accepting it for Swedish, seems quite schizophrenic to me.
 * In the ccwater's way we could soon have hundreds of exceptions. Yes for footballers, no for hockey players, yes for classical music composers, no for rock singers ... Jan.Kamenicek 17:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The hockey players are different because non-Czechs had created these articles and they are quite passionate about them. I do not expect this to happen for any other occupation and I didn't saw it elsewhere. IMHO the hockey players are not significant enough to go into a long and complicated fight. After new players will get famous the current names will get corrected naturally. Pavel Vozenilek 21:14, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, --Francis Schonken 07:43, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) I copied the mentioned village pump discussion above
 * 2) I think Wikipedia:Naming policy (Czech) is ready to be moved up from proposal to policy
 * I would think guideline}} more appropriate; it's a recognition of two de facto forces, not consensus on what we ought to do. It's not a bad solution, but we may have to, for example, recognize a third force any time now, and should not hesitate "because it's not policy."[[User:Pmanderson|Septentrionalis


 * &moving to "naming conventions" (instead of policy) according to the same logic. --Francis Schonken 17:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Strongly oppose. Standard naming conventions policy should apply:  "Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature."  Gene Nygaard 04:56, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Move up to Naming Convention
This proposed guideline cuts across a lot of project areas and other guidelines. I strongly object to it becoming a guideline without consensus to do so. I see no indication there that there is a widespread community consensus on this issue. I think you need to advertise this widely and run a strawpoll before you change it into a guideline --Philip Baird Shearer 10:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Before this can be put up as a guideline it would surely be a good idea it there was shown to be some sort of a consensus for it. That's more or less what the text of the guideline template says. The style of the text is also not very good, and it seems odd that hockey players alone are left out. Of course from looking around on Wikipedia it seems clear that it describes the current situation, more or less, but this may not have received a lot of discussion. Perhaps a way forward would be to design a header template which somehow expressed this. Stefán Ingi 14:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose the proposal is badly phrased in the first place. Gene Nygaard 04:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)