This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Lithuania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lithuania 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.LithuaniaWikipedia:WikiProject LithuaniaTemplate:WikiProject LithuaniaLithuania articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
0 English-language books/academic publications on either Google Books or Google Scholar give the name as Antoni Chodakowski.
Results of English-language publications using Antoni Chodakowski on Google Books [1]? 0. On Google Scholar there isn't any source at all using the name Antoni Chodakowski: [2]. In contrast, there is 4 sources on Google Scholar using Antanas Chodakauskas: [3], of which 3 are in English-language publications while one is an English-language abstract of a Lithuanian-language article. Cukrakalnis (talk) 14:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any results for Antanas Chodakauskas in Scholar. Can you link them? Marcelus (talk) 19:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These are the results I saw on Google Scholar: [4].
Links: a book (page 19), an English-language abstract. The third English-language source is behind a paywall at Brill.com, but it seems as though it is a chapter from Eidintas' book "Antanas Smetona and His Lithuania". Cukrakalnis (talk) 19:35, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, so only one mention not much; even article says Chodakowski was born to Polish-speaking family so I think Antoni Chodakowski form is proper Marcelus (talk) 20:17, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia policy is what is important, not personal preference. As @FOARP concisely said on Talk:Romualdas Giedraitison April 14: People seem to think that the name of the article is about what the subject's "real" name is, but this is wrong - if "Romualdas Giedraitis" was the common name of the subject in English, or if WP:CRITERIA pointed to it as the appropriate name, then it wouldn't matter really what was on the subject's gravestone or what their "real" name was.
Literally 0 sources use the Polish-language name, while there are at least some using the Lithuanian-language name in English-language sources, so the latter is preferable due to its recognizability. In addition to the facts that Chodakauskas' whole life revolved around Lithuania, he considered himself Lithuanian and was involved in the Lithuanian National Revival. Your arbitrary choices that go against Wikipedia policy are preposterous. Cukrakalnis (talk) 21:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cukrakalnis so far we have only one English source, so it's not enough to determine common name in English. Many Lithuanians had Polish names so your last point is irrelevant Marcelus (talk) 22:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, there's more than one, the abstract counts as well. If you deny their sufficiency to establish a common name in English, then even following WP:CRITERIA, the Lithuanian name should be used. Following Recognizability – The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize. The individual is notable due to being the father of Romanas Chodakauskas, Sofija Smetonienė (née Chodakauskaitė), Tadas Chodakauskas and Jadvyga Tūbelienė (née Chodakauskaitė), meaning the Lithuanian Chodakauskas should be preferred for recognizability and clarity of connection between them all. Many Lithuanians had Polish names Not a surprise considering Polonization, just as with Russification many Lithuanians also had Russian names, in both cases frequently due to outside forces, but following Consistency as laid out in WP:CRITERIA and also WP:UE's If there are too few reliable English-language sources to constitute an established usage, follow the conventions of the language appropriate to the subject (German for German politicians, Portuguese for Brazilian towns, and so on)., the Lithuanian-language name should be preferably used for Lithuanians.-- Cukrakalnis (talk) 22:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TBF I wonder if the person is notable enough to have article on Wikipedia, it seems that his only achievement was to be father of famous children. Chodakowski was born into Polish-language family so I think Polish form of his name is proper, but you can always make move request Marcelus (talk) 08:47, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: separate thread or deletion request? What's your opinion? Marcelus (talk) 09:07, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcelus Either would work, but since you asked, lemme look at current refs... Not good, no SIGCOV identified, sources are offline and in Lithuanian. No Lithuanian (or Polish) Wikipedia have articles about him. If your BEFORE doesn't show anything, AfD for this would be the way to go. I did a quick GBooks for "Antanas Chodakauskas" 1850 1925 and for Polish spelling and I am getting nothing. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Piotrus, some of the sources are online, except the article's author, 67writer, did not add them, for whatever reason (I've added some in today's edits). The article is mostly based on the academic book Portretas by Ingrida Jakubavičienė, published in 2020. Considering the other sources, which seem to be various articles in magazines, this article does fulfil WP:GNG, because it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. To further his claim to notability, Antanas Chodakauskas, being the parent of the notable Lithuanians Romanas Chodakauskas, Sofija Smetonienė, Tadas Chodakauskas and Jadvyga Tūbelienė, is rather important because his influence was not trivial.--Cukrakalnis (talk) 19:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These two sources detail his biography: [5] and [6] (latter is written by Genė Juodytė, the same author as the one who's book is the main source for this wiki article). In the former source, it is written about how he married his cousin with the permission of the contemporary Pope, how he transformed his family's manor into a productive property, and his clear connection and support for the Lithuanian National Revival, while in the latter one, there is a short biography, which mentions with who he was friends with, e.g. Jonas Jablonskis, and similar things. Finally, it is mentioned that he and his wife were burried next to Jurgis Bielinis. Cukrakalnis (talk) 13:58, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So it seems he doesn't have an entry in any biographical dictionary? Because it's accomplishments doesn't seem to be notable enough to justify separate article Marcelus (talk) 17:31, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nowhere in Wikipedia does it say that for a person to be notable, he must be mentioned in a biographical dictionary. Instead, the criteria of WP:NOTABILITY are followed, and Antanas Chodakauskas' article matches the WP:GNG, ergo this article's existence is justified. Cukrakalnis (talk) 18:21, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Read WP:ANYBIO, that's the easiest way to measure one's notability. Of course the lack of it isn't conclusive. Although I think that Antoni Chodakowski is a classic case of WP:BIOFAMILY. Chodakowski only claim for notability is basically that his children were famous and he knew couple famous guys, that's all Marcelus (talk) 19:04, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ANYBIO is clearly in the section of Additional criteria and it is clearly not intended as thethe easiest way to measure one's notability, nor does it claim to be such. If you look at WP:ANYBIO, it says: People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included. Notice the likely.
WP:BIOFAMILY is about Being related to a notable person in itself confers no degree of notability upon that person. The key words are the italicized in itself. This article matching certain criteria of WP:GNG saves it from deletion, regardless if one of the motives for its creation probably was the family relations to numerous notable individuals. Cukrakalnis (talk) 19:23, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that it doesn't match the criteria of WP:GNG, because in source it's only mentioned as father of famous person (in Portretas by Ingrida Jakubavičienė for example) or as a member of noble family; the person on its own isn't notable enough Marcelus (talk) 20:20, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It does match WP:GNG, namely significant coverage, sources, independent of the subject and reliable, so the article is notable. Cukrakalnis (talk) 20:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cukrakalnis even if we agree that article is meeting WP:GNG criteria it doesn't mean it deserves its own article, it's only *presumed* ("creates an assumption, not a guarantee, that a subject merits its own article"). The subject of the article must be significant and relevant enough to deserve its own article. Being father of someone notable isn't sadly enough Marcelus (talk) 21:03, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the articles Alois Hitler and Besarion Jughashvili, it seems as though being a parent of clearly notable individuals and thus frequent mention of them in sources primarily about their children seems to be good enough reason for inclusion in their own, standalone articles.
Finally, Chodauskas' article has no issues with notability according to WP:N:
It meets either the general notability guideline (GNG) below, or the criteria outlined in a subject-specific notability guideline (SNG) listed in the box on the right; and
and after looking through WP:NOT, Antanas Chodakauskas is not excluded by any of the policy points, so considering that the article fulfills 1. and 2. and, generally, how things are done in Wikipedia, I don't see any reason to consider him unworthy of his own article according to Wikipedia guidelines. Cukrakalnis (talk) 21:51, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, if article meets the general GNG criteris it's only presumed to deserve a separate article.Marcelus (talk) 09:10, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"while in the latter one, there is a short biography". How short? Note that GNG requires 2+ sources that meet WP:SIGCOV. This may be on, assuming we have more than 2-3 sentences. A paragrraph or two would meet my subjective rule. Still need one more source like this, however (this assuming this one is not 2-3 sentences...). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
