Talk:Nicholas Adam

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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.

Not moved. The target page exists with a different article. If this is likely to be the primary topic, then a new multipart nomination would be needed. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nicholas Adam → Nicolas Adam – "Nicholas" is always written "Nicolas" in French. See fr:. Skull33 (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the source (http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Nicholas_Adam) appears to contradict you. – ukexpat (talk) 17:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because they "anglicized" it. See Nicholas#Male variations, wiktionary:Nicolas#French, [1], [2], [3], [4], etc. Skull33 (talk) 15:24, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: "Nicholas" in French would be pronounced "Nishola". Skull33 (talk) 15:29, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- "'Nicholas' in French would be pronounced 'Nishola'." Luckily that's not a problem here because this is English Wikipedia not French. If English-language sources use a particular spelling, then Wikipedia should too. — AjaxSmack 22:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the links. I can read, indeed: "If there are too few English-language sources to constitute an established usage, follow the conventions of the language appropriate to the subject".
  - And here are English-language sources: [5], [6], [7]. Is that enough? Skull33 (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks. However, #6 is in French. Here are some English sources that use "Nicholas": [8][9]. Those, combined with the fact that this article's source is an article titled "Nicholas Adam", somewhat undermine the too few English sources claim. — AjaxSmack 01:25, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Seems to be an understandable spelling error of a Frenchman's name that we usually don't anglicise here on WP, per Nicolas Sarkozy. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 03:01, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Although I am strongly in favor of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English), especially in relation to books, plays, films and other works of art, names represent a separate topic of discussion. In 18th, 19th and first half of 20th century, foreign personalities' given names which lent themselves to easy anglicizing were commonly anglicized. "Oskar" became "Oscar", "Aleksandr" became "Alexander" and so on. Many sources still reference Tchaikovski as "Peter", rather than as "Pyotr". Now, hovever, other than for royalty (Peter the Great, Alexander I of Yugoslavia) and individuals who lived in the English-speaking world or preferred to be known by their anglicized name (George Frideric Handel rather than Georg Friedrich Händel), the practice has been to adhere to native spelling unless presented with overwhelming evidence to the contrary.—Roman Spinner (talk) 06:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Name

I guess Nicolas Adam (linguist) is the best option. Skull33 (talk) 11:25, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]