Talk:Facundo Argüello (tennis)

Requested move

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: moved to Facundo Argüello (tennis). Favonian (talk) 11:45, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

---

Facundo Arguello (tennis) → Facundo Argüello (tennis) – (1) primary notability in home country: per article La Voz, Argentina "Facundo Argüello, esperanza del tenis nacional" 27 Nov 2010, (2) WP:CONSISTENCY with Facundo Argüello (soccer). (3) per examples in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies WP:OPENPARA César Chávez and Title WP:UE Søren Kierkegaard. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:57, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

• Comment. Should we vote, or just let UtherSRG, diacritic warrior, move it where he likes? Kauffner (talk) 10:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
• Move. I'm not interested in personal attacks against other editors (and I'm slightly surprised to see a prolific editor arriving at yet another move discussion involving diacritics and then accusing the other party of being a diacritic warrior). I am interested in accurate titles. Argüello is the more accurate surname. bobrayner (talk) 12:40, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - and I am for following the English sources as we are supposed to be doing here at wikipedia. We have the ITF and ATP sources on this article. The only diacritic source given is from a non-English source. Wiki tells us to "Follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language." We usually have full names in the article body but the title should be kept at the sourced English alphabetic spelling. In addition to the ITF and ATP we have ESPN, Tennis Magazine, Tennis Live UK, and Getty Images. There are lots of these type English sources for this English wikipedia as opposed to the foreign language that most English readers can't fathom. This submitter is doing a lot of these move requests as of late to try and remove anglicized names from wikipedia article titles and even from use as an alternate spelling in the main article body. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:08, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Comment - the above contains a misreading of WP:DIACRITICS, but also an adhominem. "This submitter" (myself) have precisely 2x RMs submitted, this one (which is evidently egregious) and Talk:Stephane Huet which contains 5x French BLPs that are egregious even in their own category. If 2 RMs is "a lot", I tempted to ask what is a few? As regards WP:DIACRITICS please read on beyond the sentence you have quoted and look at the examples it gives for Irish and Norse, cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:25, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

• Support. The correct spelling is the only proper spelling for this name in English (per authoritative sources). The current title deviates from established practice and fails WP:UE ("Facundo Arguello" is not an anglicized spelling like Florence; it is a common misspelling like "Soren Kierkegaard"), WP:BLP (we must write encyclopedically and "get the article right") and WP:V (sources whose house styles lead to constant spelling errors are not reliable on the relevant spelling issues). Prolog (talk) 11:47, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

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.

Re: nonsense "known professionally as" clause

User Fyunck has been constantly re-adding the nonsensical clause "known professionally as Sergio Facundo Aguello", although there is no proof whatsoever that Argüello competes under another name than his own. If he did, he would most certainly try to find a name that differed more from his own than one that is just missing a diacritic.

I have cn-ed it, and I suggest we eventually (pending this discussion) remove the rubbish. HandsomeFella (talk) 09:29, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

And I thought an administrator had kept the truce till you came in again with your content removal. I had not added any more to other articles because of several administrators wishes to keep things calm, as long as no one did the reverse. Not what I wanted, to have censoring like that, but if it kept things running smoothly...so be it. We still have an open RfC on this issue, plus multiple ANI's. I was willing to let things stay status quo for wiki's sake, but I'm gonna guess you'll call in your usual couple of bully-boys here. We'll see. As always we can try different wording but that hasn't satisfied you in the past. I'm always open for discussion for the proper placement and wording, but not censoring. Fyunck(click) (talk) 10:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

I note that you're not adressing the issue at hand. Do you have any sources that support your claim that he's "known professionally as Facundo Aguello"? And calling that phrase "content" – albeit unsourced – is stretching it a bit. You are aware that unsourced content can be removed immediately? It is not "censoring". HandsomeFella (talk) 12:09, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Fyunck, but none of the 5 sources you just added mention anything about what Argüello is being professionally known as. In fact, they are almost totally devoid of a narrative, and contains only short facts such as birth place, accumulated prize money, rankings, and so on. Thus, they do no support the claim. But I'll give you a few days more. HandsomeFella (talk) 21:12, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. Two are the professional organizations that oversee tennis and they use a particular spelling. They are the governing bodies of tennis and it's who he registered with and the spelling he and they decided on when registering. The other 3 sources are respected in tennis and they also use a particular spelling for the professional player Facundo Arguello. Just because you don't like it, isn't good enough and your extra days comment was useless. As I said, the wording can be tweaked as we've done in other articles. We also have the official tournament he entered to gain his tennis notability... the Copa Claro Open. Their pdf of entries also spells it Arguello. No matter which way you slice it, pro tennis spells his name Facundo Arguello. We can use "spelled in professional tennis, Facundo Arguello", or "per the governing bodies of tennis, and sports authorities, Facundo Arguello", etc... Certainly we should be flexible, just no censorship of facts. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:39, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not questioning the authority of the organizations that run those websites, so you don't need to bother going down that line. But the fact that they are professional organizations or governing bodies does not mean that they support any claim by some sort of default.

The question is whether there is any support for the particular claim in the article; that Argüello is "known professionally as Facundo Arguello" – as opposed to his real name, one has to assume. There is no such support. None of the sources indicate anything of the sort. Neither source has two name fields, one "professional name" and one "real name". There is only one name field. Yes, in that field, they are spelling his name without the diacritic. But so what? Do you mean that this implicitly supports the claim? I can't imagine implicit support is good enough as to count as verifiable. But if you really mean that, then English-language sources with the diacritic applied would support that he is "professionally known as Facundo Argüello", wouldn't they? Both statements obviously can't be true. So, likewise obviously, neither of them are.

"Pro tennis spells his name Facundo Arguello". Indeed? Look here. It's the Argentine Tennis Association's website. As you see, many players, including Argüello, have their names spelled with diacritics. Are you questioning that the website is about professional tennis? Or do you mean they don't view Argüello as a pro? Or that he's a pro only when playing abroad? Or possibly only in the English-speaking world? No, your generalization is obviously wrong. And if you insist on English-language websites spelling with diacritics, check this and this.

Your alternative suggestions have an entirely different meaning than the current unsupported claim. “Known professionally as” does not have the same meaning as “spelled in professional tennis” or “per the governing bodies … etc”. It's not the question of a rephrase or a different wording, it's not the same meaning at all. What is you really want with your addition? Does it only boil down to your hot desire to mention that some websites lose the diacritic? Why is that so all important to you? As you said yourself, WP:IDONTLIKEIT does not apply here – nor does WP:ILIKEIT.

And please, please, let go of that rediculous argument of "censorship". You can't go on and add every tiny little piece of unimportant and unnotable information, and then, if people remove it, cry "CENSORSHIP". HandsomeFella (talk) 15:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

When pretty much every English source spells something one way it is not unimportant and un-notable...and would be censorship not to include it. This is not his shoe size. I know very well that tweaking the wording can bring differences to the meaning, but I've tried them all with no positive input from you. If the only thing was how it's worded we'd be done in a second. In English language professional tennis it is spelled Arguello. The press does the same. Goodness he even registered with the ITF, spelling it without diacritics. "Known professionally as" was one of many tried wordings. Originally the style was (English: Facundo Arguello)... simple and quick. I had administrator input that liked that version. As I recall in the many conversations "spelled in English, Facundo Arguello" was also liked by some. I was open to suggestion as to the best wording but was always greeted by a certain group with no compromise at all. none. zero. That's not what consensus is... it's not a majority or super majority, it a compromise to try and make all parties satisfied. And if it was one source spelling his name this way, we could say it's trivial, but the average English reader checking up on this guy will only see it spelled "Facundo Arguello" no matter where he looks. It is a significant alternate version of his name. Though wiki says it should be in the first sentence I wasn't married to that either and suggested other placements in the paragraph. Response was the same within that same small group. zip. You have to remember where I started. The players were listed at their common name in English. So the wiki article would have been titled "Facundo Arguello". Many had no Argentine-type spelling at all. After talking with an administrator I made sure that those articles were of the form - Facundo Arguello (Spanish: Facundo Argüello). I thought is was censorship not to include his home country spelling even though no English sources used that spelling. All my created articles used this form. Some reverted me but most did not. Then things got strange when articles moved from common name to birth country specific name. I was sure not happy about that (and still not happy) but that's the way it goes sometimes at wikipedia. But then suddenly all references to a player's common spelling started to be erased as if it never existed. When you have the governing bodies of a players profession spelling his name a certain way it's not trivial. With these players Wimbledon, US Open, French Open and Australian Open also use his common name. Davis Cup and major English new outlets ditto. This is significant. Encyclopedia Britannica uses the common spelling first with Ilie Nastase but notes it is also spelled Ilie Năstase. This is where I and others are coming from on this. Usually "my way or the highway" is all we get from several editors, but you are actually engaging a conversion with questions. That's always a good thing.

(Back after a business trip.) If the difference is negligable (which it is), and even the least gifted reader of the article wouldn't need the "explanation" (he/she wouldn't), then it should be removed, regardless of wording, and regardless of how many sources spell it without the diacritic, because it's not mentionworthy, the triviality of it is an insult to readers. If it is so important as you claim, then why is it only implemented in a few tennis articles on barely notable players – articles which you seem to guard as a chicken mother – and not in for instance the article on Björn Borg? Many people won't notice the absence of the diacritic, and the rest don't care, so basically, the only function of the remark is "Hey, did you notice that it was spelled without the diacritic in some sources?".

You know, Fyunck, it's a little bit funny, how you pretend to be ever so flexible over the wording, but essentially, what you really say is "it must stay in the article". Yet, you are accusing me – and anyone who dares to remove the crap – of an attitude of "my way or the highway". I'm not sure that you have realized the irony in that. This issue is pretty digital: it's either there (in some form), or it isn't, so there's no point in accusing either side of being rigid. It can't be there ... sort of.

Also, there is no such thing as "Argentine-type spelling" or "home country spelling" of personal names. How do you think his name is spelled in Germany or Austria? The spelling of his name doesn't change just because he crosses the borders into an English-speaking country. The spelling remains the same, just as Fyunck isn't suddenly spelled "Fyünck" if you go to Germany or Austria – or Argentine.

HandsomeFella (talk) 22:27, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Well we have a difference of opinion on triviality. If it was so trivial than some others wouldn't insist on changing a name to the diacritic version. As far as what pages it's been added to, I've been following the agreement not to add more as long as none are removed. Borg's article should certainly have it as should Nastase (as it does in Britannica). As far as being flexible, you can't compare where we started at with article being titled in the English alphabet to where we are now. I have seen "zero" flexibility in some in each step of the process while I have been willing to change... but only to a certain point. The complete and total censorship of a well sourced name by respected organizations, and often used by the player's themselves, is a final step I can't take and still be fair to our readers. And the "no such thing" as spellings in different locals I know to be false by personal experience with my own family. The "chicken mother" and "crap" comments I leave for others to worry about. As I said, I have no problems with discussing the situation and listening to other points of view where some other compromise I hadn't considered might come about. I thought this is what we were discussing. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:46, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi HandsomeFella, what you say above is logical, sensible and conforms with en.wp's 4.0 million articles, minus the 100x tennis BLPs which have double-barreled "Zoë Baird known in diacritic-disabled sources as Zoe Baird" type ledes. But Fyunck already to Prokonsul Piotrus and elsewhere twice explained his conviction that when he visits Poland his British surname reverts to his father's name with a diacritic - Prokonsul Piotrus told him otherwise but that's by the by - so the argument "just as Fyunck isn't suddenly spelled "Fyünck" if you go to Germany or Austria – or Argentine" is going up against a brick wall. 6 months later it should be evident that no one by any amount of Talk discussion or edit reverting can convince User Fyunck to stop adding these WP:STAGENAME (sic) ledes to BLPs. For better or worse the only route available is to reopen WP:TENNISNAMES RfC, notify all the original participants and specify, does the result of WP:TENNISNAMES RfC cover Fyunck's "professionally known as" ledes or not? The amount of bytes involved on this talk page would already have been enough to reopen the RfC and notify participants. I do appreciate your argument, but it would be better cut-and-pasted into WP:TENNISNAMES RfC where the subject started. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:40, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello IIO, and thanks for the link to the RfC. I suspect that you have tried to bring my attention to it previously, but I haven't had the time to read it before. Very interesting. It was also somewhat humorous that it ended up exactly the opposite to the outcome hoped for by MakeSense64. By all means, go ahead and reopen the RfC (or start a new one), you're better than me at that, but in my view there's no doubt the existing one actually supports the removal of this rubbish. HandsomeFella (talk) 15:51, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey HF. If you don't mind I won't be the one to reopen the RfC, I evidently have a couple of hardcore opponents of foreigners having foreign names fuming and steaming after a series of RMs culminating in Talk:Dominik Halmosi. Time for someone else to step up, which I know you have before. Cheers. It's a slam dunk anyway, the original RfC was a snow result in favour of quality sources, and keeping it simple, "do we want these 100x ledes or not?" should be enough. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

• Why do we still have this nonsense in the article? It's a misspelling, not a stage name. bobrayner (talk) 19:23, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
• It seems that "known professionally as..." construction is causing some huge issues. I have known that this type of wording has been employed by those against adopting diacritics to imply that such use is incorrect. I would suggest alternative wording: "spelling sometimes rendered as" that would seem to be a lot more neutral and verifiable. -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 02:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)