Talk:Sthène

Grave error

WP:EN requires that article titles be rendered in "…English… as you would find it in …other…reference works". The reference supplied for the article doesn't have the grave accent and I suggest that our article should manage without it as well.--Old Moonraker (talk) 13:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

WP:EN is in flux. But even if it wasn't, see WP:IRS for the definition of "reliable" = "reliable for the statement being made" Which reliable source retains French accents for other 1919 French measures but drops it for this one? In ictu oculi (talk) 06:51, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

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 no consensus. Cúchullain ^t/c 18:53, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

---

Sthène → Sthene – To lose the grave accent: see WP:EN and article talk page.relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 18:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC) Old Moonraker (talk) 11:21, 7 July 2012 (UTC). Orig. time stamp 08:26, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Moved from WP:RM#Technical requests. No such thing as an uncontroversial request involving diacritics. Favonian (talk) 11:21, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Dictionary search heavily supports without the accent. Zarcadia (talk) 18:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose What dictionary? WP:EN indicates that this should be in French since this is a French word: millisthène, sthène and pièze are French terms used in France for French measures.cf. Revue générale de l'électricité: Volume 66 Société française des électriciens, Union technique des syndicats de l'électricité, Comité électrotechnique français - 1957 "En France, avait élé instauré en 1919 un système général de mesures industrielles et commerciales ayant encore pour unités ... bien peu nombreux sont encore aujourd'hui ceux qui connaissent les noms de « sthène » et de « pièze »." or Le génie civil: Volume 92 1928 Le système MTS, promulgué en France par la loi du 2 avril 1919 (') et le décret du 26 juillet 1919, n'est en réalité ... L'unité de force MTS est le sthène, force qui, en une seconde, communique à une masse d'une tonne un accroissement etc. The most reliable English dictionaries don't have the word, because it doesn't exist in English. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:54, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment: The article is referenced to a current dictionary from the OUP, a reliable authority in English usage. I have checked the entry again (thanks, Amazon); there is no accent. I see that one of the references quoted above specifically states that the word sthène is no longer remembered, let alone used, in France itself. --Old Moonraker (talk) 08:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

• Support, per Merriam-Webster, A Dictionary of Weights, Measures, and Units (2002), and WordNet 3.0. None of the article's references use the accent. The unit was approved for use, not only in France, but also in Russia.[1] Kauffner (talk) 07:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

No, follow the link to Amazon and look – you'll see that it it has the accent. Please stop presenting false evidence and relying on flaky web sources. Dicklyon (talk) 06:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose – there's no evidence for that anglicized form having been adopted. The dictionary linked above in support of dropping the accent in fact uses the accent. Dicklyon (talk) 06:46, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose We are not in the business of making up "English words", especially not with fabricated evidence. Agathoclea (talk) 07:17, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

• Comment: I take the allegations of "presenting false evidence" from User:Dicklyon and "fabricated evidence" from User:Agathoclea as personal attacks; this is editing in bad faith. Frankly, I don't see why this trivial change (which originally, but obviously mistakenly, I thought no more than a technical change) causes such ill-feeling and "do-or-die" editing antics. Baldly stating that that something is there, when it blatantly isn't, doesn't seem to advance their contention very far, when it can be disproved by a quick click. Here's the link: [2] — you need to type "sthene" in the box, because typing "sthène" doesn't work.

To reiterate: posters here are repeatedly claiming "no evidence" in the face of citations from strong, reputable, sources. Do I need to repeat again (that is not tautology) that the reference used in the article, Fenna (2002), and the references cited on this page, don't have the accent? In view of a previous commentator's instruction to "follow the link", I have done so, and now added a quote to the reference. I cannot explain why the grave's not there when I verified this using Amazon's extract (and that's four times now), but present when user Dicklyon looked. --Old Moonraker (talk) 08:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I have specifically referred to Kauffner's bullshit evidence here and in other RMs because he keeps doing it. In particular, here I was referring to this book he referenced at Amazon, which has the diacritic (on p. 281, the main definition entry for the term) when he claims it does not. On looking again, I see that Amazon shows a different random subset of pages on different visits, and it has it without diacritic on a few pages, too. Dicklyon (talk) 16:00, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

The page reference in the article is is to p.190, because that's the page where the Amazon preview works, thus giving users without the book an inkling of what we're talking about–the wording's virtually the same as p281. I don't want to send this discussion off in another direction at this late stage, but there's no grave accent on p281 either; there it's not a grave accent but an acute accent. The publisher, not surprisingly, uses Oxford English, which specifically rejects French etymology in favour of Greek etymology, thus they use the acute accent where sthéne is the headword, to follow the Greek σθένος.

I trust that you have arrived at your decision to oppose this page move solely from your appraisal of the merits of the case and not from past disagreements with other contributors here.

--Old Moonraker (talk) 16:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

You're right, that mixed up source is pretty irrelevant. A better one is this 1950 US gov doc or this magazine or this collection of papers or this 1975 book or this 2003 encyclopedia. The term is rare is English, but among the few uses, the grave accent is not rare. Dicklyon (talk) 18:57, 21 July 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.