Talk:Ruhana Kuddus

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Indonesia Low‑importance

	Indonesia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women's History

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Journalism

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 4 May 2016

Latest comment: 8 years ago9 comments5 people in discussion

The following is a closed 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) KSFT ^C 19:25, 24 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Rohana Kudus → Roehana Koeddoes – request to move this article to correct the proper spelling of the name of this person, from the commonly misspelled name 'Rohana Kudus' to the correct one 'Roehana Koeddoes' Newcron (talk) 17:52, 4 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Oppose per WP:UCN. "Rohana Kudus" gets 866 Google Books results vs. 45 hits for "Roehana Koeddoes". — AjaxSmack 23:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Comment - For most of her life, she would have used the Van Ophuijsen Spelling System, and thus the "oe" spelling would be most accurate. Curious as to where the double "d" comes from, though. There aren't many Indonesians who use it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
- "For most of her life, she would have used the Van Ophuijsen Spelling System..." So did Soekarno but that article uses Sukarno because it is what reliable English sources use (even though the Indonesian article is at Soekarno). — AjaxSmack 03:39, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Comment - Google search results are such because the misspelling has been for decades, and is part of why her family/descendants have recently been pushing hard to correct it whenever/wherever they can, on the web and in any newly published articles if the family is involved/interviewed, thus this request. The double "d" isn't such a big deal, as the pronunciation of the last name will be identical with or without, but the missing "e" in the first name is a huge deal as it made the pronunciation completely different in Indonesian language ("o" is pronounced "o", but "oe" is pronounced "u"). — Newcron (talk) 11:27, 6 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
- It is not Wikipedia's job to correct historical wrongs. Reliable sources need to do that first. — AjaxSmack 03:39, 10 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
  - I concede the point of Wikipedia correcting historical wrongs. The only other thing I have is that the effort to correct the spelling is observable, at least from my point of view. The wrong (current) spelling is used on many of the older publications (say, from middle towards late 20th century), while more recent publications from the late 1990s until now are mostly corrected with the proper spelling (an easy example is the Google Books search results that you posted above). Hopefully in time the correct spelling will catch up. Thank you for the discussion. — Newcron (talk) 21:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Oppose. English reliable sources appear to use the current spelling predominantly. — Amakuru (talk) 13:05, 12 May 2016 (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.

Add topic