- 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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Not Moved. (non-admin closure) --Mdann52talk to me! 13:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC) --Mdann52talk to me! 13:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)Reply
Dominic Noonan →
Domenyk Lattlay-Fottfoy – Please forgive any poor exposition: I'm not frequently involved in RMs.
Noonan legally changed his name to Lattlay-Fottfoy some time ago. This is reflected in the sources that are presently used in the article and in others such as this. He chose to make that change, it is one that has been recognised by the courts - eg: this - and it is one that has increasingly become the preferred usage by the media, eg: here. It seems that he has been using the new name for many years, eg: this from 2003 (I'm not saying that this is a good source, but it does show the usage). I can't prove it but suspect that the increasing usage of the new name in news sources reflects that he is now being treated "in his own right" rather than as a constituent of the Noonan family gang that was given public prominence in the Donal McIntyre documentary referred to in the article. Overall, I think usage is probably evenly split at the moment, with a tendency to show both old and new.
WP:COMMONNAME suggests that "If the name of a person, group, object, or other article topic changes, then more weight should be given to the name used in reliable sources published after the name change than in those before the change". WP:BLP says that "material requires a high degree of sensitivity" but doesn't seem to deal with preferred/legally changed names, while WP:MOS has a possibly relevant section here. I'd presume that titling with a subject's preferred name is the "sensitive" treatment although, yes, that can give rise to issues of common identification. I don't think that such issues arise in this instance because (a) the redirect would exist and (b) sources have for some time now been referring to his name change. He is entitled to be known by his preferred name (which allegedly is an acronym of "Look after those that look after you, fuck off those that fuck off you") when recent sources always mention it. Sitush (talk) 16:49, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
- Oppose - as I said at BLPN, "we have Jimi Hendrix not James Marshall Hendrix; Malcolm X not Malik El-Shabazz; Peter Sutcliffe not Peter Coonan." We go by what they are commonly name, not their proper, legal name - and I see no evidence that 'Domenyk Lattlay-Fottfoy' is used more than 'Dominic Noonan', the name he was born with, became famous with, appeared on TV with. There is also a third, rarer name used by some sources - 'Domenyk Noonan'. GiantSnowman 16:53, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
- Didn't Hendrix, Malcolm X and Sutcliffe prefer to be known by those names during the period of their fame/notoriety? Of course, two of those are dead anyway and thus BLP does not apply, but Sutcliffe's case is markedly different from Noonan/L-F, who is still active and was calling himself L-F during his activities (Sutcliffe's name-change came after he had committed his crimes). L-F seems to be used at least as much as Noonan in sources that have been published since his legal change (links above, more in the article), so COMMONNAME favours neither one choice nor the other, making BLP the primary policy. One documentary does not a summer make: the story has moved on since then. - Sitush (talk) 17:11, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
- BTW, I think that this kind of shows the problems. It is the Noonan family (the gang) but Lattlay-Fottfoy (the person). I acknowledge that his first name is spelled as Dominic and that the last name is not hyphenated but that is an old problem here and I think the solution is to rely on news stories rather than rehashes/reviews of the TV documentaries which, to the best of my knowledge, didn't put their names in writing (well, they did in the subtitles but anyone who knows anything about UK TV subtitling will realise that those are not reliable). News stories of his legal travails should be given preference for spellings since it is likely that they had access to court listings, press statements etc. That the most recent one (the BBC today) prefers his new name to his old one is perhaps telling. - Sitush (talk) 17:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
- Oppose Never heard of him, but the current name appears much more common: 12,900 to 5380 in a general Google search, 399 to nil in Books, and 5 to nil in Scholar (although only two results appear relevant in the latter). We don't always use a subject's preferred name as a title. Besides Lily Allen, there's also Cat Stevens (not Yusuf Islam) and Snoop Dogg (not Snoop Lion). --BDD (talk) 22:59, 29 October 2013 (UTC)Reply
- Comment. Is there any evidence of a trend to use the current name in the sources? If so, we should take that into consideration. However, if more references continue to use Dominic Noonan then that's the one we should go with.--Cúchullain t/c 23:37, 30 October 2013 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
.svg){kind=small}
