Talk:Joaquín

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the study of people's names on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Dance: Ballet

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DanceWikipedia:WikiProject DanceTemplate:WikiProject DanceDance

This article is supported by WikiProject Ballet.

WikiProject Ballet To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : See the Image requests page. Articles: Choo Chiat Goh, Vladimir Bourmeister, Columbia City Ballet, Michael Cook (ballet), Peter Schaufuss, Cyril Atanassoff, Post-structuralist ballet
Cleanup : Ballet Fantastique, NYCB/cast lists, re-write the whole Russian ballet article
Copyedit : Rasta Thomas, Ballet (marked as in need of immediate attention)
Disambiguation : Moscow Ballet
Expand : French ballet, Balanchine method, Cecchetti method, Original Ballet Russe, Royal Swedish Ballet, Bloch (dancewear), Turnout (ballet), Opera ballet, English ballet, Italian ballet
NPOV : Capezio
Stubs : Pas de deux, ballet tutu, Nicolai Legat, John Neumeier, Miami City Ballet, more
Unreferenced : Miami City Ballet, Oklahoma City Ballet
Wikify : Moscow Ballet (United States), Oklahoma City Ballet (in need of sections and references)
Other : Review recent changes to ballet articles.

Untitled

I have removed the citation needed annotation from "Joaquin ... is a derivation of the name of Saint Joachim." No citation is needed. This statement is not particular to Saint Joaquin. The names, 'Joaquin', 'Joachim', and 'Joaquim' are all forms of the same name in different languages.

'Joachim', of course, is not the name of Saint Joachim; that name was written with a different script and was pronounced differently. 'Joachim' is simply one of the several transliterations of the name into the Roman script, as are also 'Joaquin' and 'Joaquim'. The same name is also found in (at least) Arabic, Greek, and Russian (pronounced differently in each case, of course, and spelled with a different script in each case). -- Joaquin—Preceding unsigned comment added by JoaquinMiller (talk • contribs) 03:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 December 2024

It has been proposed in this section that Joaquín be renamed and moved to Joaquin.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Joaquín → Joaquin – If all 42 bulleted entries listed on the Joaquín page were accented, then the main title header should likewise retain the accent mark. However, since 12 of those entries do not use an accent and, since on English Wikipedia, it is necessary to type "Joaquin" to access this page, Joaquín should redirect to Joaquin, rather than the other way around. It may be also noted that a similar page, listing bulleted points under the header, San Joaquin, does not use the accent mark. — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Some names doesn’t use the accent. Theparties (talk) 07:50, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just like in the case of Talk:Nikola Kalinić, I don't understand this logic. It's clearly a foreign name, that has a 'complex' foreign spelling and a 'simple' foreign spelling, but they're all still clearly foreign. In this case it's used by less than a third of them, so technically it's even worse than the other case. I would have thought the failure of that discussion would have deterred further attempts to introduce this sort of weird one-drop rule against diacritics. (Oppose) --Joy (talk) 09:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]