This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saints, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christianliturgical calendars 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.
Per the conventions of the Catholic Church. Saints use the name of the language being spoken or written. Philly jawn (talk) 02:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose. Maybe you 're thinking that because of the old Catholic Encyclopedia, so your suggestion is understandable, but a cursory glance at the current literature about him (Ó Riain, etc.) should be enough to show that "Óengus" is the norm. What is perhaps more debatable is whether you use his patronymic ("Óengus mac Óengaba(nn) ua Oíbléin" in Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages), his monastic assocation ("Óengus of Tallaght", Ó Riain, ODNB) or the more controversial appellation used since the 17th century "Céile Dé", which is the one adopted by Celtic Culture. A Historical Encyclopedia, ed. Koch, and likewise used here. Hope that clears up a few things. Regards, Cavila (talk) 07:16, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Prefer to keep it at Óengus. Wouldn't mind it moved to "Óengus the Culdee" though, or Óengus of Tallaght (ODNB name). The current title is a tad obscure. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 13:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
"of Tallaght" would certainly be the more 'correct' version, while "the Culdee" has a more familiar ring to it. If any change is necessary, I could settle for either of them. Cavila (talk) 19:24, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
The Catholic convention is to use Aengus. Philly jawn (talk) 20:19, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
First of all, the Catholic Encyclopaedia, now more than a century old, does not equal any such thing as "Catholic convention". I don't know how alive and kicking he is in current Catholic tradition, but if you will just have a look at the stuff that's written about him in the last five decades or so - by Roman Catholics among others -, "Óengus" rules the roost. Second, even if you were right, I don't see how "Catholic" should have any overriding authority over common usage. Cavila (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
Generally, Óengus is preferred in modern writings because Aengus is a later spelling (it's also a tad archaic these days, most common in older books). This is a convention of Irish scholarship writing in modern English, and one that most writers writing about this era and people with this name have adopted. Both of course are "English" names because both are used widely in English. I'll notify Angusmclellan of this discussion, he may be able to help. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:20, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
WP:NAME is the applicable policy name, but I'm less than certain how to apply it. I suppose a lot of it depends on how well known this subject is, particularly outside of England, and by what spelling of his name is most easily identified. I do tend to think that if neither is particularly well known, that "Angus" is the easiest to spell, but don't know enough about the breadth of this subject's identification at this point to be able to say much else. John Carter (talk) 15:29, 26 March 2009 (UTC)