From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Film (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Documentary films task force.

Name change revert[edit]

I am reverting the title to Žižek!. There is no justification for the change in "transliteration," as Slovenian is written using the Roman alphabet and is thus not "transliterated." There certainly should be a redirect from Zizek! since many keyboards do not make use of the ž letter, but the name is Žižek!. This name change was unnecessary and unjustified. I mean, just take a look at the movie poster displayed in the article itself, in which the carons are clearly visible. --N-k, 20:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with N-k's perspective. Skomorokh 20:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
The reason for my move from Žižek! to Zizek! has to do mainly with WP:UE (which advises to "use the most commonly used English version of the name of the subject as the title of the article") and WP:NCF (which advises to "use the title more commonly recognized by English readers").
I initially had the intention of completing the film's infobox and expanding the ELs using Žižek! but I noticed the lack of use of that term and the prevalence of Zizek! when referring to the film. You are correct when you say that the Slovenian language recognizes the carons on "Ž" and "ž" but this film is not a Slovenian film, it is an American and Canadian production about a subject who is a Slovenian national and the entire film is in the English language. We should not automatically assume, if the subject's name is Slavoj Žižek, that the English language film would include the carons. Alexander the Great's name is known as "Alexander" only in the English language; the more common Greek name is "Aléxandros" but the 2004 English language film is titled Alexander (film). Even if the film was Slovenian and did include the carons in the original title, I believe that UE and NCF should still apply.
As far as the commonly recognized name of the film is concerned, here are the major reliable sources that refer to the film as Zizek! rather than Žižek!:
In the end, I was able to find only two possible justifications for naming the film Žižek!: the thetrical release poster and the subject's proper name. The poster does not count for much since it's not a reliable source and it is not uncommon for film-makers and distributors to misrepresent the name of the film on the poster for humorous or other reasons; see the film Borat and it's corresponding poster File:Borat ver2.jpg which substitutes some letters from the actual name of the film in favour of Cyrillic alphabet letters that look alike but represent different letters when translated to the Roman alphabet. Even though the poster says "BOЯДT", the name of the film is still Borat. As far as the subject's actual name is concerned, I refer you to the above example of Alexander the Great and his Macedonian name compared to the film's actual title.
To me, all significant indications are that the most common English language name used to refer to this film is Zizek! and that was the reason for my move. In an English language encyclopedia, the articles should be named so that they are most easily recognized by English language speakers regardless of the native language, ie Germany instead of Deutschland. I still believe that it should be moved to Zizek! but I will not initiate any action in that respect until I hear your opinion on this.
Thanks! Big Bird (talkcontribs) 17:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I understand your point. However, this is an extremely minor matter of orthography, not of an entirely different word. True, many English publications may leave out the carons simply out of laziness, but they do not consider "Zizek" as radically different from "Žižek." The film itself is entitled "Žižek" and is an English-language film. The anglophone filmmakers spell it "Žižek," and this should be enough to keep the carons. --n-k, 11:33, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I disagree that this is "extremely minor matter of orthography" because I've not been able to find a single reliable English language source that actually refers to the film as Žižek!. I think outside opinions on this matter may be in order. Big Bird (talkcontribs) 12:34, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Zizek means "a tit" or "a little tit" in Slovenian :) LOL Anyway, English practice of distorting names for which English alphabet doesn't have characters is disrespectful and ignorant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:55, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
"Disrespectful and ignorant" couldn't be further from the truth. A poor encyclopedia indeed Wikipedia would be if we expected people to learn the speak a foreign language if they want to learn about Հայաստան because we're unwilling or unable to give them an English translation which would, naturally, contain only English characters and Anglicized names. Big Bird (talkcontribs) 14:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for Comment - the article's title[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus is that Zizek! is the most commonly used spelling variance in English language sources, therefore the article should be so titled. Move completed by LiteraryMaven.

Should this article be titled Žižek! or Zizek!? Please see relevant arguments in preceding section.

Thank you! Big Bird (talkcontribs) 12:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

The naming guidelines at WP:NCF clearly state that film articles on the English Wikipedia should "use the title more commonly recognized by English readers... and give the native and alternate English title(s) afterward." Given that the vast majority of sources use the common English spelling Zizek!, that is what I would expect to read throughout the text. Especially because the film's own official websites use that spelling throughout their text here and here. I find the overall article title to be less important, Žižek! is fine, so long as there are redirects from the English spellings. The introductory sentence should give both spellings and then the common Zizek! variation used in the rest of the article. By the way, of greater concern here is the copyright violation of the synopsis which is copied directly from the official website -- and, oddly enough, the only changes are that Zizek has been changed to Žižek for WP. That needs to be rewritten or deleted immediately. CactusWriter | needles 14:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I think Big Bird has compiled an impressive list of reliable sources that supports his belief that Zizek! is the most commonly used English version of the title and the title more commonly recognized by English readers. I hope your passion re: this issue inspires you to expand this article beyond the stub it is at the present time. LiteraryMaven (talk) 14:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
I deleted the synopsis due to copyvio and added critical reception and categories. I don't know or care enough about the film to expand the article beyond those contributions. LiteraryMaven (talk) 14:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
"[U]se the title more commonly recognized by English readers." No English reader could possibly be confused by the carons. --n-k, 17:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Nothing to do with possible confusion, Zizek is more commonly used than Žižek. Big Bird (talkcontribs) 17:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Unless there are a comparable amount of significant English-language reliable sources that refer to the film's title with the carons, then the Wikipedia policy is clear, for English speakers the title is "Zizek!". This is an encyclopedia for English speakers, and so we use the names that English speakers use, which sometimes don't respect the spelling of other cultures. While that is much less true now than before, it is still true and Wikipedia policy. In a comparable old argument about using a modern Turkish spelling ("Mehmet") or the traditional English spelling ("Mehmed") for a particular great ruler, I wrote this. The same principles/argument apply here and are applied generally throughout Wikipedia. Studerby (talk) 22:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Given four out of six editors favored the more common Zizek!, I decided to be bold and made the change. LiteraryMaven (talk) 14:56, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.