Jump to content

Talk:Émile Pessard

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Emile Pessard)

Requested move

[edit]
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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 12:55, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


– Following Talk:Hégésippe Légitimus, Talk:Monique Orphé, Talk:Édouard Deldevez etc. RMs: French composer, Mauritian 1977 Prix Guillaume Apollinaire poetry winner, French engraver, Belgian mayor, politician, French general (no René in memorial), Dominican monk, Belgian diplomat, bishop of French Pacific, pre-war Marathon runner, chief minister of Pondichéry, Gabonese footballer, Speaker of the Assembly of French Polynesia, French anarchist. Per (1) WP:UE, (2) WP:EN, (3) WP:FRMOS, (4) WP:MOSPN, (5) WP:IRS, (6) sources, (7) consistent en.wp practice. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:32, 14 November 2012 (UTC) In ictu oculi (talk) 05:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:IRS, en.wp does not depend solely on "English sources," and in fact contrary to "no evidence" (?) several of these bios do in fact have English sources which accurately spell the French names. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:51, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dohn joe, as is invariably with the very small number (a few dozen among 100,000s? try find one) of inadvertently incorrectly spelled bios on en.wp these bios are all of primary notability in non-English-speaking countries, and sources in English are going to be peripheral, secondary and of low quality.
As regards the metal type legacy for missing "É" (which is reiterated at length in Talk:Édouard Deldevez) the Le Petit Futé tourist guide may come up first on Google Books, but it may not be the "best source" for Tahitian politicians names. See Liste de Parlement. Assemblée nationale 1986, L'Année politique, économique et sociale annual 1986, 1987, 2004, Le Revue du droit public et de la science politique en France 1989, Polynésie, les copains d'abord: l'autre système Chirac? 2005, L'état des régions françaises 2002, Le pouvoir confisqué en Polynésie française 2005, Hermès N° 32-33 : La France et les outre-mers. L'enjeu multiculturel 2002 which all manage to give the WP:FRMOS correct É as used in en.wp for "Édouard Fritch, du Tahoeraa Huiraatira," . In ictu oculi (talk) 00:20, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That seems reasonable for Fritch, but what about the others? Are you just assuming that because "Edouard" is generally "Édouard" in French, that the others contain the accent as well, or have you looked them up? Sorry to be a pain, but I prefer to inform myself on the evidence available, which is lacking so far in this RM. Dohn joe (talk) 17:36, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Eh? Are you suggesting that there are 2 French spellings of "Édouard"? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:51, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just suggesting that an RM should present evidence so that all editors can make an informed decision. Dohn joe (talk) 05:43, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dohn joe, I'm at a loss to see what you are talking about. The evidence is as nomination says "(6) sources" i.e. the articles have sources giving the correct French spelling. What evidence exactly do you need that that French people have French names before you will support those names being spelled correctly? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:51, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"(6) sources" is much too vague. If you mean "sources in the article", then say so. Of course, as you realize, the sources in the Edouard Fritch article when you nominated it exclusively used "Edouard" without the accent, so you wouldn't have meant that. Same goes for the other articles. I realize you've made hundreds of these RM nominations over the last several months - and I appreciate you going that route as opposed to just making the changes yourself - but each RM deserves the same level of attention and evidence as any other. Otherwise, why bother? Dohn joe (talk) 19:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dohn, are you going to support the correct spelling as sources or not? In ictu oculi (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to. And I'll be happy to support next time as well, provided appropriate and compelling evidence is presented. Dohn joe (talk) 17:06, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:56, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.