Talk:Mikkel Bødker

Redirects

I added the redirects from Mikkel Boedker and Mikkel Bodker. Gene Nygaard (talk) 09:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Bødker is the correct Danish spelling. If the letter 'ø' is not used as is the case in English, the correct translitteration would be 'Boedker'. This is to the best of my knowledge the official recommendation from the Danish Language Board, which I doubt the Rangers or the OHL have consulted. :-) AEJ (talk) 09:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't know why, but in the categories he is showing up both as 'Bødker' and 'Boedker'. AEJ (talk) 10:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I did that by categorizing the redirect; they might appear in different places. The general rules as they are (or at least used to be) stated at Wikipedia:Categorization say to so sort ø with o. I categorized the redirect to sort under the spelling he is using in Canada.

But after you changed the sort key here, they ended up adjacent to each other in every category. In the Category:Living people, there were about 40 other names in between the listing under the redirect sorted as Boedker and the listing under this article sorted as Bodker, certainly enough so that many people might overlook it if it only appeared in one place.

In this case, I hadn't stopped to think much about the actual letters involved (starting with Bodk... and Boed... with only a few names starting with those letters); there isn't going to be much difference in most categories so it probably isn't as helpful here as it would be in cases such as "Møller" and the like. There are about 560 names (nearly three category pages) in between Christian Moeller and the different Christian Möller (whose article tells us is also spelled Moeller) in the living people category. There are other examples, especially those involving the initial letters, where the difference would be thousands of category pages.

I'm changing the sorting here back again, with a note about the redirect being sorted as well. Gene Nygaard (talk) 15:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

BTW, the Bodker redirect should be there whether or not we have any sources spelling it that way. It is the English alphabet spelling that anybody who sees a printed "Bødker" can enter in the "Go" box, without having to know how to make the unusual letter ø rarely used in English, and without having to know that ø sometimes becomes oe. Furthermore, there are certainly a large number of Danish-derived names in which a Danish ø is spelled o rather than oe in English, perhaps a majority of them. Gene Nygaard (talk) 16:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm all for the redirects - the more the merrier - it was just the fact that he showed up twice in the categories that struck me as odd. In the smaller categories, such as the Category:Hockey prospects he shows up twice in succession. AEJ (talk) 00:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of this discussion, but I removed the alternate spelling. Having a redirect is significant enough. --Krm500 (talk) 01:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

No, it isn't enough. Not when Boedker (and not Bodker, as that name is often spelled in English) is the spelling he uses in Canada. That needs to be in the article. Gene Nygaard (talk) 06:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

We have had this discussion plenty of times, this is an encyclopedia and the correct native spelling shall be used. If this article is renamed to Boedker then Nicklas Lidström should be renamed to Lidtroem and Markus Näslund to Naeslund. I can accept the alternate spelling in the lead but that article name stays. --Krm500 (talk) 10:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The "correct" spelling for this person as a member of the Kitchener Rangers is "Boedker". It needs to be there so that people know they have found the right person. It needs to be there to know that he doesn't spell it "Bodker" in English. Canadian/USA spellings of that name are pretty well evidenced by the U.S. Social Security Death Index, which has 46 BODKER entries and only 21 BOEDKER entries; in general, the Bodker spelling is probably more likely in English than Boedker, but for this person it is likely usually Boedker.

Furthermore, "correct native spelling" is most certainly not the standard under Wikipedia naming conventions. The correct spelling for the name of the article depends on how the person is best known in English. A great many people have had their name spelled in various different ways, especially in cases of living in different countries, in cases of publishing books in different languages, and in cases of spelling reforms in various languages at various times. Furthermore, spellings of personal names sometimes follow quickly on such spelling reforms, sometimes more slowly.

Yes, there may well be other articles that should be moved as well--as thousandss of them have been after in the past, including thousands of them after discussion under Wikipedia:Requested moves.

• However, a move of Nicklas Lidström to Nicklas Lidstroem would be flat-out wrong according to our naming conventions. He should be under the Nicklas Lidstrom name that he has been known by for the last 20 years or so. Note specifically that nobody has (at the time this is posted) even bothered to make a redirect from that redlinked Lidstroem spelling, though one would be quite appropriate. Although, in general, the -ström or -strøm names are so rarely spelled -stroem in English that the missing redirect isn't likely to cause much of a problem.
• I haven't looked into the situation with Markus Naeslund, but once again the redlink is a clue that it probably is not the correct name. No guarantees of course, there is a lot of inconsistency in the existence of the redirects that should be there. Markus Naslund is there, but you aren't the only person who might mistakenly type Markus Naeslund so that redirect should exist as well. Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, doesn't the existence of a redirects at both Niklas Lidström and Niklas Lidstrom, and a number of web pages related to that specific hockey player who is the subject of our Wikipedia article using the Niklas spelling, also put the lie to your "correct native spelling" argument? In fact, that is pretty good evidence that he has indeed Americanized his name, and the article should be moved to the full version used by the Detroit Red Wings now (maybe 20 years ago as well, but don't know that for sure), Nicklas Lidstrom, and not some crazy half-assed mixture of spellings. Gene Nygaard (talk) 14:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Re my point about -ström and -strøm in English, the SSDI is particularly illustrative:

SSDI entries

LIDSTROM	122
LIDSTROEM	0
LINDSTROM	3,887
LINDSTROEM	0
BERGSTROM	3,436
BERGSTROEM	2

Gene Nygaard (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

The examples you are referring to are Swedish. They may prefer Lidstrom over Lidstroem, I don't know. There's a differnce here in that Sweden uses ä and ö where the similar Danish letters are æ and ø. For Danish names the official recommendation wold be Boedker, not Bodker. That would be trumped of course if Bødker said he preferred Bodker over Boedker or even Bødker, but until then I think we should stick to Bødker with Boedker as the recommended English spelling.AEJ (talk) 14:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

You chose the example, not me.

"Official recommendations" don't matter in the least when we know actual usage. When people have lived and worked in English-speaking countries, what they are actually known by is what matters. Mikkel is "Boedker" because that is what is in fact used in reference to him on his current team. Most or all of the more-common "Bodker" names in the U.S. SSDI are also most likely of Danish origin (some might be akin to Boedeker, not sure if that is Danish or German or Dutch or something else—for that matter, maybe Mikkel's name itself has roots outside Denmark and has already been transliterated from something else to get that spelling? Or it it an occupational surname, perhaps similar to English "Cooper", if the Danish word is the cognate of the Norwegian bokmål bødtker or bøkker). For them, that would be the proper spelling to use here. We seem to be in agreement on that specific point.

Furthermore, I could give you dozens of Danish examples, with similar results. Try Søndergaard, for example, identified as a Danish surname there, with SSDI listing 133 Sondergaard vs. zero Soendergaard (also 108 Sondergard, 0 Soendergard, or overall 241 to nothing), and with these Google search results:

• Soendergaard -Søndergaard -Søndergård [2,970 hits]
• Sondergaard -Søndergaard -Søndergård [339,000 hits]

The Danish/Norwegian ø and the Swedish ö are all much less often spelled "oe" in English than the German version of the ö is. Gene Nygaard (talk) 17:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

What is 'strong youth'

Is this the title of the program, or is the program considered excellent? I'm sure it does not mean for youth with big muscles. :-) I've put a fact tpl on that. Alaney2k (talk) 15:49, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Is that an 'elite youth' program? Alaney2k (talk) 16:07, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I changed the wording to highly regarded as the programme should be considered the best in the country, where probably only the youth programme of Herning Blue Fox even comes close. One way to demonstrate this is by looking at the number of NHL drafted players. Of the 8 Danish players drafted since 2002, 4 have been a product of the Rødovre team, including the only 2 players drafted in the first round (Bødker and Eller). AEJ (talk) 00:53, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I know it's true, but to be neutral it would be better to skip any description of the quality of their youth program. If you find a good and reliable source (can't be too hard) add it to Rødovre article. And btw, Mieritz and Svendsen will make it six for Rødovre ;) —Krm500 ^{(Communicate!)} 03:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)