Talk:Lady Macduff

Shakespeare Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakespeare, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of William Shakespeare 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.ShakespeareWikipedia:WikiProject ShakespeareTemplate:WikiProject ShakespeareShakespeare articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

comments[edit]

At the risk of being pedantic, I would point out that the First Folio, the original source, does not refer to her as "Lady Macduff", but as "Macduff's wife", and I have seen one modern version which uses this name. PatGallacher (talk) 20:52, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

requested move[edit]

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: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 03:50, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Macduff → Macduff's Wife – The First Folio, the original source, refers to her by this name, and I have seen one modern version which uses this name. PatGallacher (talk) 23:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose: The question is not how the character was "officially" called in Shakespeare's original version of the play, but what is the most common way to refer to her. Your nominating note does not address that question. One way to deal with the issue would be to create a "redirect" page, so that people using either name will find the article. If you think that would an adequate solution, it could be easily accomplished. –BarrelProof (talk) 00:54, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose WP:COMMONNAME over WP:ON Let's play the hits game:

Source	"lady macduff"	"macduff's wife"
Google	91,700	19,000
Google Scholar	1,050	117
JSTOR	235	22
WorldCat (kw: prefix)	29	0

I admire your attention to detail, but there's really no case here. I agree redirects are a good idea, though, so I'll make them for both capitalizations. --BDD (talk) 16:28, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose; unless I did something wrong here, "Macduff's Wife" doesn't even register on Google Ngrams. "Macduff's wife" does, but predominant usage there is not as her name but simply as the wife of Macduff (as in "the scene in which Macduff's wife and children are murdered..." Powers ^T 19:49, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.