Talk:Fausto Veranzio

article name (Fausto Veranzio vs. Faust Vrančić)

This is getting a bit silly...

• 03:07, 19 February 2004 67.39.207.225 (talk · contribs) (created article as 'Faust Vrancic')
• 12:19, 28 June 2005 Joy (talk · contribs) m (Faust Vrancic moved to Faust Vrančić)
• 01:29, 1 July 2009 Gun Powder Ma (talk · contribs) m (moved Faust Vrančić to Fausto Veranzio over redirect: common name in scholarly works)
• 20:36, 15 August 2009 Kamarad Walter (talk · contribs) m (moved Fausto Veranzio to Faust Vrančić over redirect)
• 07:49, 16 August 2009 Dicklyon (talk · contribs) m (moved Faust Vrančić to Fausto Veranzio over redirect: stick with the name commonly used in English writings)

A quick Google check doesn't seem to support this change unequivocally (it tells me current 390 hits vs. old 3460 hits) so can we get a proper explanation for this? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:51, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Lacking any explanation, I'm changing it back. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 17:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Your comparison is flawed in that you did not exclude Wikipedia itself and mirror pages. Google books may well reflect better actual English usage:

• "Fausto Veranzio" 325
• "Faust Vrancic" 234

We can settle on his neutral Latin name as a compromise, but I fail to see why we should call the man with a name which hardly was used in his life-time if I am not mistaken. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 00:20, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Venetian or Croatian

Just curious but what's wrong with calling him a Venetian? Wasn't he born in the Republic of Venetia and a Venetian citizen? And if he was, why shouldn't he be called Veranzio then? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 03:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME

• "Faust Vrančić"
  • Google - 19,000 hits
    • Google Books - 669 hits
    • Google Scholar - 191 hits
• "Fausto Veranzio"
  • Google - 1,630 hits
    • Google Books - 650 hits
    • Google Scholar - 75 hits

Whoever renamed the article was not acting in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 19:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

More and more invalid arguments. The form Faust Vrančić is used esclusively in slavic literature. --Theirrulez (talk) 20:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

This is starting to get silly. Its 19,000 vs 1,630... even with the Wikipedia title swinging your way. And, as you say, "that creates bias" in the Google test. There's nothing really to discuss. You're starting to contradict yourself. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 21:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

Faust Vrančić → Fausto Veranzio —

• A quick Google check doesn't seem to support the slavic or slavicized form of the title. Above all Fausto Veranzio is widely the name commonly used in English writings, and globally recognized as his original name.
• Fausto Veranzio is the only name recurrent in modern ecclesiastical actual documents
• Despite the recent quick "move-and-change" by an unique user, Fausto Venanzio is the name which seems to have consensus developed among editors on the related talk page.
• Last but not least he had a clear romance origin, he was Venetian mother-tongue (and for that reason he chose to receive education in Venice and in Padua) he was born in the Republic of Venice, Venetian citizen, with a Venetian name and family name: Fausto Venanzio.
  

Theirrulez (talk) 21:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. No matter how you swing it, no matter which parameters you enter on whatever search engine you choose (Google, Google Books, Google Scholar), the current title is simply more common. User:Theirrulez' personal estimates of notability are not very noteworthy, nor is he exactly "known" for his unbiased approach in these sensitive ethnic issues. Not to mention that this move proposal seems to be part of a much larger agenda to "italianize" names of ethnic Croatian persons on enWiki. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 21:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

• Support. Fausto Veranzio is the historic name.--172.130.27.185 (talk) 22:07, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. The more common name in use is Faust Vrančić. Note - WP:COMMONNAME says the following: "Search engine testing sometimes helps decide which of alternative names is more common. When searching, restrict the results to pages written in English, and exclude the word "Wikipedia". It may also be useful to observe the usage of major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies and scientific journals. For detailed advice, see Wikipedia:Search engine test". Therefore, that the nominator used "a quick Google check" is profoundly out of process. Furthermore, the conclusion drawn from the "quick Google check" is plainly incorrect mathematically. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 07:14, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
• Support or Use the latin name I have followed the guidelines but I have excluded all blogs and personal web sites which can change the result in a "non scientific point of view" (the blogs are "personal point of view"). In any case I would ask to the same scientist which is his name, I would ask: "Mr.Veranzio or Vrančić what is your name?" probably he can say me: "Read my books and see how I sign my books". In any case in my opinion I prefer the latin name because the old scientists were used to write with the latin language which has been perceived like the "language of the science and the philosophy". My support would be for Faustus Verantius without any connection with a nationality because there is no English version of the name. The latin version seems to me more neutral and more NPOV. --Ilario (talk) 10:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• • Even if we were to assume he called himself by his Latin name, Wikipedia does not use the name biography articles after the name people called themselves by, but by notability, which in turn is usually determined by Google test on various engines. This I'm sure you already know, and is obvious from even a cursory glance at similar articles (Alexander the Great, i.e. Mégas Aléxandros, comes to mind). --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• Support: The biography makes clear that the italian name is preferable. Giuseppe Phoenix (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• • Always nice to see a WP:CANVASSED single-purpose-vote-account. :) Setting aside the fact that the vote states no reason for the rename, this account is also a buddy of User:Theirrulez from itWiki and has a grand total of eight (8) edits on this project, including this one [1]. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:41, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

User:DIREKTOR Do you mean your vote has a different weight? Do you mean every users aren't equal and hasn't same rights? Thanks to offer your apologize to Mr.Giuseppe Phoenix who is a respectable member of wikipedia, altough you can be reported for this single-purpose, ad hominem and discriminating comment. --Theirrulez (talk) 04:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

• Support. This article was moved, without even trying to discuss the change, only to make a point. Salvio ( ^{Let's talk 'bout it!}) 11:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Not at all, the above is completely incorrect and furthermore makes no sense. This article's original name was "Faust Vrančić". It was moved (without a discussion) to place it in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME. This however, has been shown to be incorrect, therefore it was reverted back to its original, most common name. (It only came to my attention via the edit summary on that article.)
    Since you seem to support the previous WP:COMMONNAME renaming, Salvio, I wonder why it is that you are supporting this one when it clearly contradicts that policy. Or are you supporting this "only to make a point"? :) --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:41, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• Comment. Exactly, what point would I be trying to make? You moved a page, without discussing it, without seeking consensus; this violates WP policies. Since you might easily have imagined that this change would be controversial, you should have gone through WP:RM, per WP:Moving a page#Before moving a page. By the way, may I direct your attention to WP:Process is important? Salvio ( ^{Let's talk 'bout it!}) 12:59, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• Comment. Wikipedia is not a democracy. None of the above posts display any real reasons why Wiki naming policy should be ignored. The votes should probably be disregarded accordingly. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 11:39, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose use Croatian or Latin name. He used Italian in some of his writings, but he was not Italian, neither ethnically nor regionally or culturally. It would be wrong to insinuate otherwise. I don't know what exactly are the Wikipedia guidelines for humanists who wrote most (if not all) of their works in Latin and used Latinized pen-name, but if one exists it should apply here :P --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 12:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment. Why User:DIREKTOR begun with WP:CANVASSED inviting users Ivan Štambuk, Kebeta and Kubura [2] ?--172.130.227.64 (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment I was wondering the same.. This is at least strange, considering his accuses to other users here above...--Theirrulez (talk) 13:09, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
    • That is not WP:CANVASSING. Read up on that. The users are involved on the page and I informed them of new developments in perfectly neutral wording. Now this, this is WP:CANVASSING and WP:MEAT: [3] [4] [5] [6]. Remind me why you weren't blocked for that? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• Comment. As far as the message on my page goes, it was neither WP:CANVASSING nor WP:MEAT; it was merely a request for help, for he had been welcomed with accusations of being a WP:SOCK right from the get go; and I was glad to help him — just as I'd be glad to help any Italian experiencing problems here, due to his being a newbie —. You can find my name listed here, after all. Salvio ( ^{Let's talk 'bout it!}) 14:50, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• • Comment (confl.)I feel confused and worry since I saw this other call by User:DIREKTOR on User talk:Ivan Štambuk followed immediately by this edit by User:Ivan Štambuk (which is the one above). This is not the way Wikipedia should work. --Theirrulez (talk) 13:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
    • "Confused and worried"? Again. If you think WP:CANVASS was breached feel free to report me. Or were you hoping your buddies would swing the vote before other involved users notice the move proposal. User:Theirrulez, you have a history of CANVASSING [7] [8] [9] [10]. What are you doing? --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:30, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
• Again... guys you have to create shared rules to solve these fights. Every voice of historical Dalmatia can be read with a Slavic or Romance point of view. These skirmishes are a waste of time.--Grifter72 (talk) 13:18, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Not so, Grifter. The article's title cannot be moved contrary to notability. Have a look at the Google tests, what in the world is there to discuss:

• Google tests:
  • "Faust Vrančić"
    • Google - 19,000 hits
      • Google Books - 669 hits
      • Google Scholar - 191 hits
  • "Fausto Veranzio"
    • Google - 1,630 hits
      • Google Books - 650 hits
      • Google Scholar - 75 hits --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 13:56, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Whoever renamed the article was not acting in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME.----186.105.72.158 (talk) 14:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• • • The message directly above was posted by User:Ragusino, who is indeffed for, among other things, "continued block evasion via IPs". Old habits die hard. And your numbers are extraordinary, Ragusino. I clicked on your first Google search (which is not even about the individual Faust Vrančić, by the way) and 825, not 17,000 came up. Oh dear. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 14:29, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Fausto Veranzio should be on italian wiki, and Verancsics Faustus or Faust Verantius on latin wiki. For usage of italian name on english wiki (for a person who is not an etnic italian, and is not from a territory of modern Italy) is a POV (if nothing else). Kebeta (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Sir, I have to underline that your vote is moved by this invitation by User:DIREKTOR on your talk page. It doesn't seem to be the right way, isn't it?--Theirrulez (talk) 14:37, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Not quite truth! Look at this. I reverted your edit (07:21, 10 May 2010) on Faust Vrančić article before DIREKTOR (11:56, 10 May 2010) wrote anything abouth it on my talk page. Moreover, I was well aware of this move proposal which I didn't even consider seriously. Furthermore, had anything influenced me to vote on this amazing "Move proposal", than it would be your comment on Direktor's post on my talk page. Regards, Kebeta (talk) 15:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME as well. I think this quote from Kebeta says it best: "For usage of italian name on english wiki (for a person who is not an etnic italian, and is not from a territory of modern Italy) is a POV (if nothing else)." This seems to be a very POV-initiated move. --Jesuislafete (talk) 19:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• Again Woops!! the gang are return! Danger! :P --186.105.72.158 (talk) 20:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Ragusino, you are indeffed, you have abused your privileges across Wikipedia, and we don't welcome your contributions anymore. The reason you were indeffed is that you exhausted our patience. Please leave respected editors to debate this. If you try to edit this page again, I will delete your posts. See you at AN/I. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:08, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

• support If other people such as Rod Blagojevich spell their names unlike the standard serbocroatian way of Blagojević - then who really cares? Same for people like George Voinovich - why "serbianize" or "croatianize" their names? One more example - Dennis Kucinich - it's not written in traditional croatian, but has changed a bit. We have to take the ethnic nationalism out of our biase. Cheers. (LAz17 (talk) 23:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)).

• comment Canvasing is taking place, no? Direktor is luring in his brethren Croats, almost all of whom 100%ly oppose this. Nice way to "build up support", eh? - we see the "calling" taking place - getting his bro's like Kubura, Ivan Štambuk, Kebeta, to come here in an attempt to "tally up votes". This is not a vote, and that is what should be understood. [11] (LAz17 (talk) 23:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)).

Man, my unblemished block record on Wikipedia got tarnished (three days in the cooler) when I called a 12-year-old and his/her sycophants rude names. It turned out that the 12-year-old in question was seeking to add "things/stuff/words" to the article on Tito directly from a Fascist website. And to relieve the Wiki stress of working on Tito, he/she spent ages on Honey the cat. FFS. So knock yourself out. Nobody gives a flying fuck what Wikipedia calls 17th century academics/nobles etc.AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 00:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

(Out of crono) Sir, please note this is not a forum. Thanks to use an appropriate language and not to add stalking comments after any vote. --Theirrulez (talk) 04:11, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

This is a response to me or a general comment? I agree that it is not too important, but I figured to vote anyways. Honey the cat... lol. I didn't know wikipedia went into such stuff. (LAz17 (talk) 02:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)).

Lol, you could suggest this to 'em, The Cat in the Hat. (LAz17 (talk) 02:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)).

I Strongly Suppport Theirrulez and Ilario. Moreover Fausto Veranzio is by far the most used in English Literature and English academic publications. It is not an Italian name, it is Venetian, and it was the original family name, as reported in primary and secondary sources. At least I want to underline that I'm not a meat of anyone, I'm a free and respectable wikipedian, so every accuse or manipulation will be immediately reported.Giuseppe Phoenix (talk) 07:53, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

• comment This is ridiculous. You (Giuseppe Phoenix) already voted for support above. Maybe another vote like Week Support will satisfy our expectations from a person who is not a meat of anyone. Kebeta (talk) 08:44, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
• User:Giuseppe Phoenix has indeed voted twice in this survey [12] [13]. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 09:13, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

(out of crono)User:DIREKTOR, (User:Kebeta), sirs please note once again this is not a forum. Thanks to use an appropriate language and not to add stalking comments after any vote. It's obvious that Giuseppe Bruno's intention was to explain and motivate his first edit, which can be considered as a comment. Is so also evident that he don't voted twice, but their two edits will be considered as only one. So please do not keep to push your comments after every edit you disagree. Thanks --Theirrulez (talk) 12:04, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

User:Theirrulez, if you find any infraction of Wikipedia policy you dislike, please feel free to report either of us immediately. If not, I think we'd both appreciate it if you do not approach us with any more of your thoughts and feelings that unrelated to specific changes in the article. Furthermore, permit me to add that I do not think you are the person to instruct others in matters concerning Wikipedia policy, with all due respect. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 12:12, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. This is the common English name. This is the English Wikepedia. 124.185.6.208 (talk) 10:12, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
• Support Romance form is a historic name.--Kanalesi (talk) 11:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Um, no. No its not. How convenient it must be to use the term "Romance". "Fausto Veranzio" is in Italian. He signed his name in Latin. But then so did the scribes of Carolus Magnus, i.e. Charlemagne, and pretty much every other person of import at the time. "Fausto Veranzio" is neither historic, nor the most common name, far from it. But again that is not the issue: "articles are normally titled using the most common English-language name of the subject of the article."
    It may however be useful to note that this is User:Kanalesi's second edit on enWiki [14]. This account is another single-purpose vote-bot from itWiki. Just making a note of it. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 12:05, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
• comment DIREKTOR, you only want change the name for politcal reason... behind this wiki guidelines WP:COMMONNAME, not for the common name or others, not import if the name is italian, romance or slav. regards--Kanalesi (talk) 21:04, 11 May 2010 (UTC)