Talk:Mărgărita Miller-Verghy

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.

The result of the proposal was Keep existing title (request withdrawn). Kaldari (talk) 22:09, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

---

Mărgărita Miller Verghy → Margarita Miller Verghy – Per WP:COMMONNAME, we should use the spelling of the title that is most common in English language sources. "Margarita Miller Verghy" appears to be far more common than "Mărgărita Miller Verghy". A Google search for ("Mărgărita Miller Verghy", -Margarita, -Wikipedia) gives 7900 results, while ("Margarita Miller Verghy", -Mărgărita, -Wikipedia) gives 191,000 results. Kaldari (talk) 03:37, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. First, her first name was, in fact, Mărgărita, and one of the qualities that distinguishes Wikipedia from older, less enlightened works is that we are, in spite of the persistent efforts of a determined and misguided minority, diacritic-friendly. We don't wilt when we see an ă or an ņ. To be sure, there may be narrow exceptions, such as when a subject has spent much of his professional life in an English-speaking country (e.g. Zbigniew Brzezinski), but that is not the case here. In any case, the bulk of sources discussing the subject are in Romanian and deserve commensurate consideration, and when they use the Mărgărita variant (as opposed to Margareta), they of course include diacritics, unless they omit them completely.
• Second, this is utterly meaningless as evidence in favor of "Margarita". I'll spare readers of this discussion all 191,000 results, but let's just amuse ourselves by looking at the first ten. An entry on a self-published quotation site; a sale page for a book; another sale page for the same book; an Amazon search; a Google Books information page; a facebook page; yet another sale page for the same book; a book review on the site of a Romanian magazine that uses no diacritics in its online edition; a blog post; another quote on a self-published quotation page. To make matters worse, while the move proposer spoke of "English language sources", over half of these are in Romanian, and subsequent hits are of equally little value in proving the "case" for "Margarita". It is, I must say, a little unsettling that someone who just marked seven years as an administrator here seems to have such a faint grasp of how to make a cogent case for moving a page.
• I hope this tendentious campaign will stop one day: or are we next to "discover" that the name "most common in English language sources" is actually Nicolae Ceausescu, or Timisoara, or Ilie Nastase, or Iasi, or Traian Basescu, or Constanta or Nadia Comaneci? Oops, let's not give them any ideas... - Biruitorul ^Talk 06:01, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose – the evidence presented is too bogus to even consider. Google search doesn't work that way. Dicklyon (talk) 07:16, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose The totality of printed works that do not refer to her as Margareta will refer to her with the diacritics on. I should perhaps clarify: Margareta, no diacritics, and pronounced as such, is the standard Romanian form of Margaret; the (admittedly quaint) form Mărgărita, used by the subject of this article, presumably had something to do with the Romanian word mărgărit, or mărgăritar, "gemstone" - written and pronounced differently. Margarita is simply not a name, not a word, in any language. The spread of internet illiteracy, including in those Romanian-language sources that do not use diacritics at all or will only use some randomly (as here) is no proof at all. And the quality of the sources used to state the point... well, Biruitorul and Dicklyon have said it best. Dahn (talk) 08:29, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
  • I personally am friends with someone named Margarita. I'll let her know that her name isn't a name next time I see her. Kaldari (talk) 21:01, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
• Request withdrawn - I find it interesting that everyone is critical of my weak evidence, but no one is willing to present any counter-evidence. I did a more thorough investigation and found a total of 2 printed English-language sources that discuss Miller-Verghy:

1. "The Visible Woman: Interwar Romanian Women's Writing, Modernity and the Gendered Public/Private Divide" uses "Margarita Miller-Verghy", even though they use diacritics when including Romanian text.
2. Women & Gender in Central and Eastern Europe, Russia, and Eurasia uses "Mărgărita Miller-Verghy"

There are 5 other English-language printed sources which mention Miller-Verghy, and they are also split in their usage of diacritics (2 with, 2 without, 1 unclear). It is important to note, however, that all of them use "Miller-Verghy" with a hyphen, which we do not. Kaldari (talk) 21:47, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

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.

Requested move 2

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: hyphen added. DrKiernan (talk) 13:03, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

---

Mărgărita Miller Verghy → Mărgărita Miller-Verghy – After doing a more thorough investigation, I found the use of diacritics in reliable English language sources to be evenly split (see my comments above). However, in the process I noticed that 100% of the sources used "Miller-Verghy" rather than "Miller Verghy". The Romanian Wikipedia article also uses the hyphenated form. Relisted. BDD (talk) 17:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Kaldari (talk) 22:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

• I for one don't have a real objection, as long as we change it throughout the article. Dahn (talk) 12:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
• I had the same thought: the hyphen doesn't seem crucial and might be a bit of a hassle adding, but I don't object to such a move either. - Biruitorul ^Talk 14:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose removal of the diacritics, support inclusion of the hyphen. --BDD (talk) 23:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

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.

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mărgărita Miller-Verghy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720163817/http://www.jurnalismsicomunicare.eu/rrjc/gratis/23_2006_petcu_jurnaliste_uitate.pdf to http://www.jurnalismsicomunicare.eu/rrjc/gratis/23_2006_petcu_jurnaliste_uitate.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720163851/http://www.jurnalismsicomunicare.eu/rrjc/ to http://www.jurnalismsicomunicare.eu/rrjc/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)