Talk:Toni Kirén

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Favonian in topic Requested move

Requested move

edit
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 14:19, 21 July 2011 (UTC)Reply


Toni KirénToni Kiren

  • You've been shown over and over again that this argument isn't applicable to this situation yet you keep repeating it over and over wasting everyone's time. Each time one of your methods is debunked you try another and another. Surely you have something better to spend your time on. -DJSasso (talk) 13:56, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
WP:COMMONNAME is very applicable to deciding the article's title. Dolovis (talk) 14:53, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
It is applicable to determining the articles title. It isn't applicable to determining its use of diacritics. -DJSasso (talk) 15:04, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
I agree, and that is the point of this RM, to determine the article's title – but within the text of the article, pursuant to WP:MOSBIO, the person's legal name should usually appear first in the article.Dolovis (talk) 11:17, 15 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Support as this is the English Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 19:23, 14 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose for several reasons: Accuracy (as the proposed title is arguably a grammatical error or misspelling), consistency (as per standard practice with personal names in this language), the recommendations of style guides, the practice in other English-language encyclopedias such as Britannica, harmlessness (as the diacriticless spelling is deducible from the proper name, but not vice versa), pronunciation guidance, informativeness (as our primary purpose as an encyclopedia is to educate the readers by providing accurate, complete and trustworthy information) and respect (as people usually want their name spelled right and knowingly misspelling a living person's name is both unencyclopedic and unethical). Prolog (talk) 20:52, 16 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose - Subject has no notability in English countries and no authoritative English sources. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 18:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose European only player. No English language sources.
    — V = IR (Talk • Contribs) 21:38, 19 July 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.