Jump to content

Talk:Ilie Năstase

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

Not American

[edit]

why is nastase considered a Romanian-American by wiki? he stayed in the US for a while and played there... but he is a Romanian and lives in Romania. Could someone change this? query added by 86.104.216.79 (talk) 22:36, 15 June 2006

Canadian Open

[edit]

Because I was connected too long my corrections hadn't been identified under my pseudonym (but under 80.70.42.194 and 84.96.87.77). I have added all the tournaments not listed by the ATP and I've also corrected Montréal 1972 to Toronto 1972. The Canadian Open (Montréal/Toronto) in the ATP Web site is always wrongly sited at Montreal : in fact it permuted each year, held one year at Montréal and the following one at Toronto and so on ... In 1972 the Canadian Open won by Nastase took place at Toronto and not at Montréal as indicated by the ATP. Carlo Colussi 10:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sutter's books

[edit]

His first book list ended in autumn 1991 (I do not exactly remember) and not with the Masters 1991 : I think October for the main tournaments (probably Paris-Bercy) and September for the challenger tournaments. But Sutter had to end his book for the Masters 1991.

His second book list ended on April 27, 2003 (I suppose in order to be presented during the Roland Garros tournament) Carlo Colussi 07:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good book? To buy it I mean. (?)--Lucio Garcia (talk) 18:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I would say the 1991 edition is complete enough from the 50s but many results of the 40's are missing. The 2003 edition just lists the winners and their victories by year (and not date) and alphabetic order. In that last edition are missing many challenger tournaments of the late 90s-early 2000s. Of course they are some errors (for instance the 1951 World Pro at Lakewood won by Kovacs is listed twice, some cities are wrong, many dates aren't good and so on) as everywhere and in general, but not always, he dismissed the less than 8-man tournaments (one example : he picked up the South Australian Pro held at Perth in January 1964, a 4-man round robin tournament but he made an error because he wrote that Hoad was the 2nd instead of Rosewall, in fact Hoad played the last match against the winner, Laver). So Sutter's book isn't perfect but it's quite good. If you want more professional tours details look at "the History of Professional Tennis" by Joe McCauley. Here too there are errors : for instance the 1945 meeting between Kovacs and Van Horn wasn't a 4-man tournament final held in May but a championship match of a World Series (which didn't continue) with a preliminary match between Tilden and Lyttelton Rogers and was played on March 10. To have more details for the 1926-1945 period look at http://www.tennisserver.com/lines/lines-archive.html where there are several reports (the first link in the site is "FORGOTTEN VICTORIES: A History of Pro Tennis 1926-1945, CH XIII - THE HIGH WAR YEARS 1943-1945" http://www.tennisserver.com/lines/lines_07_10_27.html and the last one (but the first written) is "Suzanne Lenglen and the First Pro Tour" http://www.tennisserver.com/lines/lines_99_10_31.html in the "August 1998 - 2002" Archives. Carlo Colussi (talk) 12:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Carlo. Very welcoming. --Lucio Garcia (talk) 01:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tournaments listed by the ATP

[edit]

Hello Feardes. I'm just looking at the ATP Website (Wednesday, August, 29, 2007) and I don't find either the Avis Challenge Cup (WCT) in 1976 either the Las Vegas Challenge Cup WCT in 1977 or Montego Bay in 1978 in this site. Are those tournaments in the ATP Players' Guide ? Thank you for the answer. Carlo Colussi 06:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • All these tournaments are in "1982 WCT Yearbook". This book also includes overview about WCT history.

Mentioned tournaments are also listed as Nastase's titles in "2004 ATP Players Guide". The only issue is that they are assigned to a different years. Feardes 19:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC). Thank you I've added those sources in the article.Carlo Colussi 07:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC). By chance I've seen an old version you've written on September 3 that you've erased : in particular the source of the 1968 Bogota win : I will add the source in the article.Carlo Colussi 07:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion concerning this article

[edit]

A discussion that may affect the name or title of this article is ongoing here. Please voice any opinions or concerns on that page. After the discussion concludes, this article may be moved to a different title, in accordance with Wikipedia's Naming Conventions. Thank you. Tennis expert (talk) 18:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (2008)

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The discussion was merged into Wikipedia:Requested moves/Tennis. Result was do not move. Prolog (talk) 18:39, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The name of this article should be changed to "Ilie Nastase" because that is the name used on the English-language websites of the official governing bodies of tennis, which are the Association of Tennis Professionals and the International Tennis Federation. This is also the name used on the English-language website of Davis Cup. Finally, this is the name used on the English-language websites of the Grand Slam titles he won or was runner-up: French Open (Roland Garros), Wimbledon men's singles, Wimbledon men's doubles, Wimbledon mixed doubles, US Open men's singles, US Open men's doubles, US Open mixed doubles. Tennis expert (talk) 05:32, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Salisbury 70 soon added by ATP

[edit]

I believe that soon will be recognize in ATP player profile --Lucio Garcia (talk) 14:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV-sect

[edit]

Some issues with the prose include:

  • "...first final at an important tournament ..."
  • "The two following years saw Năstase's apogee."
  • "...one of the most spectacular of all time ." (which appears to be cited, but to a blog...)
  • "In terms of public popularity, Năstase was then at the peak of his career, famous both for his technical and physical genius and for his good humour on court."
  • "As usual from 1972 through 1982, very few of the best players visited the Australian continent."
  • "...he played perhaps the best match of his career ..."
  • "... was generally considered to be the..."

The Rambling Man (talk) 12:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Playing style

[edit]

this section seems like a sycophantic wet dream! but i know too little about tennis, so i wouldn't feel comfortable about changing it... Myself0101 (talk) 17:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't know much about tennis please go and learn a bit before "vommenting" here. Read the tennis hall of fame page: http://www.tennisfame.com/famer.aspx?pgID=867&hof_id=217 Nastase is one of the very very few real "geniuses" of tennis. He did not have a very fast serve, but during play could place a ball ANYWHERE HE WANTED on the opponent's court from almost any position. He could (can?) shoot huge spin-magic balls and I don't know of anyone else able to do that (especially in contemporary tennis, which is based mostly on serve shooting)... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.218.146.201 (talk) 12:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC) Nastase was one of the few players who could use "antics" to try and disrupt his opponent's concentration and it often drew laughter from crowds. He was an entertainer, sure, but the article has fancruft about it at the time of writing this. Phrases such as "Ilie Năstase was noted for his sorcery with the racket" are quoted as proof of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.74.237.91 (talk) 15:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Over five years later this section still reads like it was written by Nastase's publicist. A suggestion: I see there are sources cited. It shouldn't be too hard to look them up and attribute all that praise to said sources, rather than letting it appear to be in Wikipedia's own voice. As with the other writer, I'd prefer someone more knowledgeable than me do this. Daniel Case (talk) 19:16, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The section named Distinctions

[edit]

The word "distinctions" for several of these entries is just another word for "trivia", which is disencouraged by WP. I propose renaming it to something like "Firsts and records", and removing any trivia already mentioned elsewhere in the article. 173.168.177.217 (talk) 22:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)(UTC)[reply]

Winning a Grand Slam without dropping a set

[edit]

This sentence doesn't make sense: "He is the second male player to win a Grand Slam without dropping a set after Ilie Nastase and first one to achieve this feat at French Open (1973)."

Who was the first to win a Grand Slam without dropping a set? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.33.202.86 (talk) 16:44, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANSWER

In the open era Kenneth Robert Rosewall win the 1971 Australian Open without losing a set. However there were only 48 entrants in that tourney with 6 rounds so 16 players, among them Rosewall, as #2 seed, had byes in the first round. Therefore Kenny only played 5 matches to capture the Australian crown that year Carlo Colussi (talk) 12:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (2012)

[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved per WP:MOSPN#Diacritics, split usage in English sources, and both options given in Britannica -- JHunterJ (talk) 19:15, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ilie Năstase → Ilie Nastase – Per the ITF regulating body, the ATP, Davis Cup, and most English sources (this time even Encyclopedia Britannica), his English common name is "Ilie Nastase". Compare to Novak Djokovic. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:35, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
  • Oppose per MOS:PN (section 4: diacritics). The spelling Nastase appears to be a common casual orthographic convenience by English sources rather than a decision by the subject not to use the form Năstase. This and this 2012 article continue to use the spelling Năstase. Although Nastase is the dominant representation in most English sources (with some exceptions), that doesn't necessarily mean that it's the best encyclopedic style for the name. Doremo (talk) 19:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't that interpretation necessitate removing all diacritics from all WP article titles? Most English-language sources on any topic do not use diacritics. Doremo (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (1) per WP:Use English which gives the example of Søren Kierkegaard as the only Latin-alphabet personal name, (2) per higher requirement of accuracy for WP:BLP, (3) Per Chicago Manual of Style which is a better guideline than Britannia webpage which says "Nastase also spelled Năstase" - truly incompetent of Britannia in this instance. Although Other three sources given: ITF, ATP, Davis Cup, do not qualify as WP:RS, merely registration pages for a diacritic-disabled system (for use on Wimbledon scoredboards etc.), (3) per WP:CONSISTENCY with category:Romanian male tennis players, not to mention any other :Category:Romanian anyone on en.WP. (4) The rationale says "compare Novak Djokovic" but Новак Ђоковић is a Serb, not a Romanian, his name is written in Cyrillic normally, WP:UE transliterates cyrillic names like Tchaikovsky, but Ilie Năstase is already in Latin alphabet like Søren Kierkegaard in WP:UE. (5) This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Romania's importance scale, and yet there is no notification of a move to a Mid-importance article on the project's Talk page, not required but certainly a good faith and relevant courtesy. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:03, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Latin alphabet is not the English alphabet. I love how sometimes the EB is great and sometimes it's incompetent... you use it when it fits your needs and throw it away when it doesn't. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fyunck please Remember to base arguments on article title policy, and to keep discussion succinct and civil. The problem with the web edition of Britannica, as has been stated before is that it lacks the consistency of the Chicago Manual of Style, for example Björn Borg, in full Björn Rune Borg (born June 6, 1956, Södertälje, Swed.) but "Nastase also spelled Năstase" cited above. That means that even though Britannia is a WP:RS, which the ITF player stubs are not, Britannia alone is not a particularly weighty source on BLP diacritics.
As regards "The Latin alphabet is not the English alphabet" in response presumably to "..transliterates cyrillic names like Tchaikovsky, but Ilie Năstase is already in Latin alphabet like Søren Kierkegaard in WP:UE." I'm sorry but I cannot understand your point. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As an illustration of that I just did a check on how those new agencies treat Adrian Năstase (also pronounced [nəsˈtase] with 'ă' to be read [ə]), the ex prime minister, and almost none ever give an accent to a Romanian, whether he be a tennis player or ex primeminister. Though not all are diacritic-disabled, because some will give accents to French. The issue isn't just that Năstase is a sportsman (the jock sportswriter element), it's that he's East European.In ictu oculi (talk) 10:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kauffner - well exactly, that's the issue isn't it, "news sources." Can a proper WP:RS like The Encyclopedia of Tennis, or the Historical Dictionary of Tennis that Prolog has provided spell better than a news agency ticker tape. YES, it can. Wikipedia is not a blog, it's not a sports website or a ticker-tape, it's not a newspaper, it's an encyclopedia. That really should end this time-wasting disruption from those insisting that the rest of Wikipedia has to be pulled down to the level of tennis stubs duplicating rankings of non-notable junior doubles players from web index cards. We all know that non-encylopaedic sources don't behave like encyclopedias, so many more times do we have to listen to "I found a sports page that doesn't use accents." In ictu oculi (talk) 21:35, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was addressing Prolog's claim that dropping off diacritics is a "common inaccuracy". This implies that the Romanian English-language press can't spell Romanian names accurately, as if Wiki should out-Romanian the Romanians. In ictu oculi's argument is a style argument, and Wiki's style is WP:UE and WP:DIACRITICS. With little-known players, we have to go with what sources there are. But in this case there are plenty of quality sources, including Nastase's autobiography. Kauffner (talk) 02:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't read "inaccurate" in WP:COMMONNAME to require inaccuracy through carelessness, it may be a choice of style (I'm sure that Romania Online could get diacritics to display if they want to) but a choice of inaccurate style remains inaccurate. If we input "Ceauşescu" - which helps readers by indicating pronunciation: [tʃa.uˈʃesku] not "Chau-SESS-ku" (sic) - into Google Scholar, then we hit English language academic sources using the ş, not least Professor Dennis Deletant of SSEES, probably the most authoratitive writer on Romania outside Romania. Now Ceauşescu is certainly familiar in English newspapers without ş, but academic sources have a higher standard, reflecting "accuracy" in pronunciation, which is all this tennis names saga is about. Deletant is also one of the authors of Romania: in the shadow of the past - Central and Southeast European politics since, 1989 where Lavinia Stan writes "Social Democrat Adrian Năstase, a legal scholar with personal connections to the former communist nomenklatura, became the new prime minister. Under Năstase's leadership, Romania took additional steps to fulfill the EU... " It isn't an issue of "out-Romanianing the Romanians" it's an issue of a professor at SSEES and his peers being a better WP:RS for encyclopaedic use than an online newspaper. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This news site, like the two similar ones you mentioned above, doesn't seem to use any diacritics. Despite originating from Romania, they follow the general news style (WP:NOT#NEWS). Prolog (talk) 18:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So what's the bottom line? "Common inaccuracies" or style? Kauffner (talk) 12:21, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The book itself (in Kindle view) does have some diacritics: Sârat, Ÿi (sic), CeauŸescu (sic), but lacks others: Kodes (for Kodeš), Tiriac (for Țiriac). Either the book is inconsistent (and misprinted with Ÿ for ş), or the Kindle view isn't displaying it right. Doremo (talk) 16:47, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The book also has the wrong diacritic on Sârat (it should be Sărat). A scholarly source it is not. Doremo (talk) 17:02, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was aware you'd attack that part since anyone with an eye less than 2 dioptres could see the giant header of the book from miles away. But I didn't say the book is the main point. A book's title is defined by the publisher and not the author, which is certainly a business-related primary source. It isn't the title that counts. If they target English readers they deprive the diacritics... It is the author's name what decides. He chose to have diacritics in his name no matter what the book titles are. And as such no one can tell him what his writing alias should be. So stop attacking the "weak" points because they are not weak points, it's you who don't think two steps forward. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 08:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, stripping diacritics is nonsense... comments about the "English alphabet" are invalid, since the English language uses characters including those with diacritics outside of the "standard". In fact, the English alphabet article tells the reader of diacritics that "Words that are still perceived as foreign tend to retain them". I am absolutely sure that Turkish, Czech, Romanian, etc. surnames are perceived as foreign. Ideally all names for Wikipedia articles would be spelled in latin-based alphabets with relevant redirects in the case where people search for these terms without diacritics. As far as I know, these redirects already exist, and the time spent on petty squabbles such as this, which has clearly been ongoing for a number of years, would be better served by making real improvements to the quality of articles on Wikipedia such as fact checking and article development. The whole process of multiple controversial page moves without discussion is, in my opinion, highly objectionable and without valid consensus. Cloudz679 10:35, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, names of tennis players in official sources (ITF, ATP) is in English (non-diacritic). Also the large majority of english general and sports press sources (e.g. BBC, NY Times, ESPN, Sport Illustrated, Tennis.com) use players names name without diacritics, even his own biography. Per WP:UE we must therefore eliminate them in the article title. I believe the way it is handled in the Djokovic article is ideal. --Wolbo (talk) 13:28, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those sources, and others like them, would rarely use diacritics even for Søren Kierkegaard (an example at WP:UE), so I don't see how you can claim that the policy supports this move. Prolog (talk) 21:26, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- The best solution is to use the correct spelling with diacriticals in the article title, but to have a redirect available from the less accurate common form. If the change has been made for other tennis stars, that should be reverted. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:24, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
This discussion has been going the same way as recent RMs for obscure players. But the subject is extremely well-known and has appeared in thousands and thousands of reliable sources without a diacritic. Britannica, perhaps the most diacritic-friendly of all English-language RS, makes an exception here: "Ilie Nastase, Nastase also spelled Năstase". Kauffner (talk) 06:34, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Britannica is not consistent with tennis and ice hockey players, but the entry on Năstase does confirm that the diacritic can be retained. Prolog (talk) 18:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. A title should be in the most recognizable form so that readers can pick it out immediately on a search result list. It also gives information to the reader, tells him what the common name of this subject is in English. Neither of these purposes are served be adding diacritics to the title of someone whose name is extremely well-known without diacritics, as this subject is. I get 7,850 GNews hits without the diacritics. The hits with the diacritic are all non-English. Kauffner (talk) 00:53, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Titles should be both recognizable and consistent. The removal of the breve does not aid recognizability, but the retainment of it does make the article consistent with other biographies on Romanian people. Google News hits demonstrate the news style that conflicts with the encyclopedic style. Prolog (talk) 20:24, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Davis Cup (an ITF site) is against many rules in Wikipedia

[edit]

FYI The Davis Cup not only deprives the players' names of its diacritics but it does so with all names such as cities', stadiums' and so on. As far as I know cities names can not be changed and this goes for stadiums as well. These are all against WP policies. Why follow it when it comes to players names and not overrule it as we does when we edit e.g. 2012 Davis Cup World Group. We have the cities/stadiums diacritics on. Or let's suppose a stadium is notable because a Davis Cup tie was held there. Should we have its article without diacritics just because of that? Obviously not. So we agree that's an error when it appears in city/stadium names. Why repeat that error in other cases? Do you tell me that cities must register at IPIN too? And that they do it by their own will and choose their names?Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 08:47, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You lost me. Why should Davis Cup follow wikipedia rules? It's a source like any other and it's why we look at multiple English sources to see how something is commonly spelled in English. If we call up the Davis Cup office do you think they'll say they keep making errors and they'll correct it next week? I don't think so. They spell things with the English alphabet like the NY Times or Sydney Herald. I think all cities are notable in their own right... not just for tennis. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As I said above Ilie Năstase is notable for not only tennis but for books and politics. So you are against yourself here. But that's another contradiction in the non-diacritics theory.
What about stadiums? Will you support erasing the accents from their names if they became notable by hosting DC/Fed Cup/tour events? Name questions are all related here. Indeed we look through all English sources, and what we only find if we search for a Davis Cup report is that they USE what they find on daviscup.com. Despite this we fix the accents of cities here and that's the right thing to do I guess you agree with me on this ground. Why not fix all of them and acknowledge the fact that English sources follow an errorful primary source and repeat the errors (which you agree they are, if you say cities can have accents, despite all ITF computer-registration limits - the same system that handles player names). Of course they are secondary sources but with the same errors. So we are fixing cities, even stadiums that only host tennis events but not tennis players. Now that is inconsistency. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 10:53, 3 April 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Request to closing Admin

[edit]
  • Request to closing Admin if it happens that TITLE Ilie Năstase stays where it is (and we continue to prioritise accuracy in BLP names/titles over the diacritic-disabled ITF player registration software), then an advance note that a request be made in the Admin close heading to forestall User Fyunck from inserting the phrase the lede to " Ilie Năstase (born July 19, 1946), professionally known as Ilie Nastase ... " as he has been doing to other BLPs. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Boy you are really pushing against wiki policy these days IIO. If a person is known by multiple names or spellings it it required that somewhere in the lead that all are shown. It can say alternate name or common English name if you prefer (I'm flexible). But if a person is known throughout the English world and by tennis authorities as Nastase that should be shown somewhere so our readers know it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:12, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fyunck, please look at the non-tennis side of WP. Either 10,000s of BLPs are "against WP policy" or your understanding is incorrect. Unfortunately your edits to BLPs invite the involvement of non-tennis editors. I have watched these antics for a year, but you upped my interest in your RMs and edits by the claim that tennis players "choose" to use a WP:STAGENAME and edits such as this "professionally known as". You have been asked by at least eight editors to cease adding e.g. " Ilie Năstase .. professionally known as Ilie Nastase" etc. to BLPs, but you continue to edit-war across what you seem to consider your personal territory on Wikipedia. You were yesterday up to 104x inserts of this phrase "professionally known as [ITF scorecard]" and another x of "known professionally as [ITF scorecard]." This is not just WP:POINTY, it is also false - these Living People are all professionally known by their name in their clubs and Davis cup teams. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:12, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wow...you are really looking at this through warped glasses. My interest in adding the vital information of "professionally known as" only happened because of your vandalism to eliminate all traces of English. had they remained at their English names in this English wikipedia the professional statement wouldn't have happened. I tried common name and alternate name too if you recall but it's your megaphone to the world that invites the involvement of non-tennis editors. You have been going out of your way to make sure lots of foreign non-tennis editors get all worked up over minor tennis players who wouldn't be listed if not for tennis. Most of the time things were fine until you started editing at tennis. I'm not keeping obsessive tallys of your vandalism like a scorecard, but I hope you have fun doing it. If you want to change it to common English name or alternate name I'm fine with that, but the elimination of the name they use in professional tennis as if it doesn't exist is vandalism in my book. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:33, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above contains several personal attacks and some conflation of myself with other "non-tennis editors" which I won't be addressing.
The request to closing admin to comment, or not, on whether to preemptively caution against any editor adding " Ilie Năstase ... professionally known as Ilie Năstase" may well be inappropriate as the RM is about the WP:TITLE and the expected post-close addition of "Á ...professionally known as A" hasn't happened yet, and consequently has only been marginally discussed. However in view of the fact that it has been added to 104x BLPs already that seems to suggest that we can expect it here too. Perhaps when it is added the best course would be a RfC that lists all 104x BLPs to which the phrase has been added in the last couple of weeks. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's no such thing in wiki as a "non-tennis editor". Wikipedia:Equality and Wikipedia:Adminitis covers it well and should be applied here. Noone should classify himself/herself above the others based on his/her belief of bearing a superior knowledge on the very subject. Lajbi Holla @ me • CP 13:25, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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: not moved. Favonian (talk) 19:35, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ilie Năstase → Ilie Nastase – As per WP:ENGLISH and WP:NAME particularly when it says that article titles must be in the English name. The alternative/non English name should be in brackets in the first line. From WP Diacritics when deciding between versions of a word which differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language. So there we go that's the general usage covered as BBC, Guardian, Times, Telegraph, Mail et al. All English Language sources all RS and none of them use diacritics. GAtechnical (talk) 19:03, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

[edit]
Also Oppose change to lead proposed above by Fyunck(Click) to add "Ilie Năstase ... professionally known as Ilie Nastase". Such an addition is counter to WP:OPENPARA and counter WP:TENNISNAMES RfC conclusion which included that WP:STAGENAME does not apply to software limitations such as Wimbledon player registration system. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:26, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment The nomination it is not based on the misunderstanding of that definition, but your vote is based on a misunderstanding of WP Diacritics, which states that a English RSs should be used to determined whether accents are used or not. Since you haven't read the rules or understand them may I suggest you reconsider this vote. GAtechnical (talk) 20:54, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[Restoring own comment] Please do not delete the Talk page comments of other users, particularly during an RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:03, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: it is absurd to bring this proposal back so soon after a resounding defeat of the last proposal to go with an Anglicised name rather than Ilie Năstase's actual name. Any source that bastardises a name containing diacritics automatically defines itself as non-reliable in relation to that name (speaking as the possessor of three diacritics). Brocach (talk) 20:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So you're suggesting that the whole of the English speaking press are unreliable then? GAtechnical (talk) 20:56, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am only "suggesting" that sources that do not spell correctly names that carry diacritics are not reliable sources for spellings of that name. I do not understand your campaign to have a mis-spelling used as the title of a BLP article. Brocach (talk) 21:28, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather you didn't as it because take this to e.g. Gorges is translated to Georges in English from German. The name in question is written in German on here. Now are you suggesting that because the English translation is used in the press, which is correct I might add from studying German, is therefore unreliable as per your sweeping comment beforehand. So you must be careful before making sweeping statements. As well it is not a mis spelling if the diacritics are dropped by reliable sources, and therefore by consensus if everyone in the language follows suit. GAtechnical (talk) 22:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That last comment is so badly written and ungrammatical that I don't feel any need to respond directly to it. For others, I would add that for biographical articles, especially BLP articles, the title should be the person's actual name, not whatever the most common mangled version in the English-language press might be. Brocach (talk) 00:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here "spelling names correctly" seems to imply that native language spelling is correct and English language spelling is incorrect, which turns the "use English" principle on its head. I can only imagine what would happen if this idea was applied to Chinese or Japanese names. Recognizability is the number one WP:NAMINGCRITERIA, the main point of a title really. The native name would still be given in the opening, so no information would be lost if the article was moved. Kauffner (talk) 02:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here here about time people started following policy properly.GAtechnical (talk) 09:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
Any additional comments:

This is the English Wikiepdia. IF you want diacritics then take them to your own language. They are not used on English Language websites, newspapers or books and if they do certainly not consistently. They are not appropriate or part of the English Language, unless you're spelling Emily or Cafe. GAtechnical (talk) 12:22, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And that is a mistake. Diacritics are part of the English orthography which is part of the English language. They are used in English language websites, newspapers and books. -DJSasso (talk) 12:34, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No there not. I can name BBC, Guardian, Times, Telegraph, Mail et al. All English Language sources all RS and none of them use diacritics. Additionally it states when deciding between versions of a word which differ in the use or non-use of modified letters, follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language. So there we go that's the general usage covered. GAtechnical (talk) 12:37, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just to note this is an RM based on wiki guidelines. As far as I can see the previous one was based on no guidelines. Please refrain from supporting with as per previous RM. Totally different argument here and therefore oppose and support should focus on what I've written in the request. GAtechnical (talk) 17:57, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Of course the context above is hard to see but at the time that RfM was created the originator was arguing the exact same reasons as you across a number of locations. So basically it is just a repeat of the same request. It is no fault of yours for reopening it as you weren't around back then as far as I can see from your first edit date. But most people involved in the area of diacritics have gotten tired of the constant rehashing of the debate so it is reasonable for them to point to the discussion above as their reason so they don't have to type it all out again. -DJSasso (talk) 18:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks DJ.

@In ictu oculi What utter nonsense you spout. WP Diacritics states that it is English RS that determined whether accents are used not any old non English RS and that sunny is exactly what the policy you worship states. So vote should void. Not a valid reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GAtechnical (talk • contribs) 20:49, 12 March 2013

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.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ilie Năstase. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:23, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ilie Năstase. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:57, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nastase's playing career

[edit]

His career section looks like a mess. Can someone work on it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.15.229.145 (talk) 21:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ilie_Năstase&oldid=1212972214"