Talk:E. D. Berman

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Theatre Low‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 31 December 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from E.D. Berman to ED Berman. The result of the discussion was moved.

Bad ISBN

Because it is causing a Checkwiki error #72: "ISBN-10 with wrong checksum", I removed the ISBN from the entry:

Dogg, R. L., & E. Leyh (1974), Zoo’s Who: Poetry and Colouring Book Volume 1. London: Inter-Action In-Print. ISBN 0 904 571 07 1 Parameter error in {{ISBN}}: checksum

I have tried unsuccessfully to locate the correct ISBN on the Internet. I found references to volume 2 here and here. Knife-in-the-drawer (talk) 02:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 December 2023

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: moved. Consensus to move away from the current title, but no consensus on where to move the article to, between E. D. Berman and Ed Berman.

After two relists it seems unlikely that a consensus will emerge; editors appear to have no preference between the two.

As such, per WP:NOGOODOPTIONS I am moving this to E. D. Berman, being the closer of the two options to the current title. Any editor who disagrees with this choice should feel free to open a new move request proposing the article is moved to Ed Berman at any time. (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 02:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

E.D. Berman → ED Berman – It was originally created correctly as ED Berman Danstarr69 (talk) 18:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:32, 8 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisted. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 21:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the 26 May 2014 the article ED Berman was created.
On the 27 June 2019 the article was moved to E.D. Berman "without discussion."
On the 29 December 2023 the article was moved back to ED Berman as it should be.
On the 29 December 2023 the article was moved back to E.D. Berman because it "wasn't discussed" and was apparently moved by an apparent sockpuppet, although there's clearly no proof of that.

The American-born Brit ED Berman himself, uses the British (and worldwide) way of using initialisms, as shown below.

This is clearly just another case of Americans thinking all of Wikipedia should be in the American format. Danstarr69 (talk) 18:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~ - Comment excellent start to the discussion and I agree with the possible move to Ed Berman. The sockpuppet temporary block is listed in the talk page of the mover User talk:Gaybryant. The article has been moved to many times and at last a discussion should clarify the title of the article.

Edmund Patrick – confer 20:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per MOS:BIOEXCEPT. The usual MOS:INITS style "E. D. Berman" is overruled by the subject's own usage, and confirmed by reliable secondary sources. 162 etc. (talk) 21:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. His preferred first name is Ed. His name is stylised on social media to ED Berman so that the name matches his initials as well as his preferred first name. If you look at the academic sources, which are obviously higher quality and also written by him, it's "Ed Berman" or "E. D. Berman". It's nothing to do with English variant and the anti-American sentiment in this move request is misplaced and distasteful. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Has nothing to do with Wikipedia being "American". As Celia Homeford pointed out, the capitalization is a way to represent both his preferred first name (Ed) and his actual initials (E. D.). So, the article should be moved to either "Ed Berman" or "E. D. Berman" (we typically don't attach initials to each other, see J. R. R. Tolkien, B. F. Skinner, etc.) Keivan.f^Talk 16:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OP has cited many sources using "ED Berman". Can you cite sources that confirm the usage of "Ed Berman"? 162 etc. (talk) 17:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I searched the ISBNs for some of his books and all I got was "Ed Berman". Keivan.f^Talk 07:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Celia Homeford You're clearly American which is why you oppose it, and try to twist facts to suit your agenda.

Also, my anti-American sentiment is definitely needed, with; British organisations like the Oxford University Press letting Americans control the dictionary; Ukrainian organisations like Grammarly letting Americans control grammar; European organisations in general all using American English over English; American organisations like Wikipedia controlling information that most of the world uses; plus Americans controlling most of the worlds media and pushing their Americanisms into British companies.

There needs to be more people like me, or pretty soon the whole world will be writing like an American.

ED (i.e. Edward David) Berman Danstarr69 (talk) 06:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keivan.f Unlike Celia (who is clearly American, but will no doubt deny it, and use her royalty edits as proof, something most Brits couldn't care less about), you admit you're an American.

You also seem to have missed [1] and [2] Danstarr69 (talk) 06:06, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an American by birth. I was born in Iran and as is evident from my user page Persian is my mother tongue. I couldn't care less what each side (Americans or Brits) think about how a page should be titled; in fact I find the whole American vs Brit comments here rather unnecessary. If a name is WP:COMMONNAME then it has to be used. What inclined me towards opposing the move was the fact that when I searched the ISBN attached to some of his publications all I could see was "Ed Berman". That someone uses upper or lower case letters on their Facebook/Twitter profiles is not ground for moving their page (small ex. Billie Eilish writes her name as BILLIE EILISH; doesn't mean we should move her page). If he goes by the initials and the British way is to have initials attached to each other without any separation or punctuation then that's an entirely different matter (which I doubt is true because we have pages like J. K. Rowling). Keivan.f^Talk 07:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keivan.f as I said, Wikipedia is dominated by Americans and lefties, which is why countless British people are listed incorrectly like that.

What do you you think the BBC, ITV, STV, ITN, UKTV, BFI, IMDB, BAFTA, NTA, RTS, RADA, NFS, NFTS, NSMM, NME, BRIT, RAM, SPOTY, EPL EFL, FA, UEFA, FIFA, RFL, RFU, RAF, SAS, SIS, MBE, CBE, OBE etc are?

They're some examples of British initialisms.

British English does not use full stops (which you most likely call a period) in initialisms, and there are no gaps either.

The same goes for the names of people.

Here's how the BBC spell JK Rowling [3]

Here's how The Guardian spell JK Rowling [4]

Here's how The Telegraph spell JK Rowling [5]

Here's how The Independent spell JK Rowling [6]

Here's how The Daily Mail spell JK Rowling [7]

Etc etc, the left and right on the same page for a change. Danstarr69 (talk) 11:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Theatre has been notified of this discussion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 16:32, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not American by any stretch and if you knew me in real life you'd realise just how idiotic that statement is. The persistent absurd accusations and outrageous nationalistic nonsense shown here will damage your case not support it. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Celia Homeford I know you're obsessed with royalty, like Americans are.

I couldn't care less, as I have no interest in this guy.

I saw someone who has worked with ED Berman himself correct the article, 24 hours after it was changed to this Americanism.

Their correction was reversed and were then blocked as a "sockpuppet" with zero proof, and this Americanism has been allowed to remain, when the facts speak for themselves.

This is why I hate Wikipedia, and spend 99% of my time correcting IMDB instead, something which rarely gets changed once it has been corrected by a Top 100 Contributor like me.

IMDB (the site created by a Brit who doesn't like the truth either) also now allows British initialisms, and has done for roughly the last 12-18 months, so I now correct profiles with initials every chance I get. When or if I decide to add ED Berman's films, I will be adding him correctly as ED Berman. Danstarr69 (talk) 11:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I really wish editors would read the whole conversation / discussion within a subject. The sockpuppetry was investigated, found to and banned for a period of time. That editor did not for whatever reason appeal. If you wish to review, reopen or appeal the original review there may well exist a way to do so. Edmund Patrick – confer 03:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted note: at this point have yet to see consensus in this discussion, so please continue. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 21:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose, and instead move to E. D. Berman per our house style and WP:SPACEINITS. --wooden superman 15:23, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that this is not a British/American English issue as some editors are suggesting. See this extensive discussion from some years back. --wooden superman 16:33, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Woodensuperman It clearly is a British vs American issue.

Wikipedia relies on references.

All my references have categorically proven my case...

And as such the Wikipedia aka American style can be overruled.

[8]

"An initial is capitalized and is followed by a full point (period) and a space (e.g. J. R. R. Tolkien).

(For unusual exceptions, see below.)"

[9] "Exceptions to the above general rules are only made when:

the person has clearly declared and consistently used a preferred exceptional style for their own name; and

''an overwhelming majority of reliable sources use that particular exceptional style for that specific name." Danstarr69 (talk) 08:52, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Consistency is key here, this is why we have a house style. We do not generally use sources for styling. I see no reason to make an exception here. And it is not a British vs American English issue. There was a RFC on this. Different UK publications use different house styles and different American publications use different house styles. We use Wikipedia house style. --wooden superman 10:27, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, going through the ISBN numbers of his books, all I can find is "Ed Berman", as well as some of the sources. So perhaps that should be where this is moved to. --wooden superman 10:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose. Either move to E. D. Berman per our house style and WP:SPACEINITS or Ed Berman, which is what he seems to be called on most of the publications he is credited with. --wooden superman 10:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Should be E. D. Berman or Ed Berman. In fact, the British form would be E D Berman, with a space, but Wikipedia's house style is to use full stops. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.