Talk:William Q. De Funiak

William Quinby De Funiak → William Q De Funiak

(from Wikipedia:Requested moves)

I created this article with the title William Q De Funiak. This is because this writer is named William Q De Funiak. This is the name the man himself calls or called himself. (Please see all his books or citations of the man.) I am not allowed to edit any articles I created, or do barely anything on the wiki, without being banned. So will someone please rename the page to William Q De Funiak?WikiUser 20:06, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This move does not require admin action. One can always move a page back over a redirect pointing at it, so long as there aren't any extra edits in the redirect's history. -- Netoholic @ 20:18, 2005 Feb 9 (UTC)

I've moved the page back to William Quinby De Funiak with a redirect at William Q De Funiak. The former is the man's birth name and how he is listed in library catalogues (see e.g. the Library of Congress catalogue), while the latter is, as WikiUser says, what he called himself (effectively a pen name). On the whole, I think it's more likely that he will be searched for under the former name rather than the latter. -- ChrisO 20:59, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

TO NET (chriso'e edit conflict beat mine as usual);Thanks, someone seems to have done it; perhaps you? I don't understand about how redirect pages work. Whoever did the page name change will have trouble making it stay that way though. As I (partly) mentioned; I am NOT allowed to make edits as other users can, because of a group of users clearly headed by User:ChrisO who do not like me to use the wiki. He (chriso, appears to have already changed it [back]. (AS I was typing this)! [?]. He probably thinks I did the page move, you see. (Everywhere I go almost he follows and posts abuse and automatically reverts all I do.)

He's now changed it from "William Quinby De Funiak (1901–?), was a ..." to "William Quinby De Funiak (1901–?), who wrote under the name of William Q De Funiak,". He DIDN'T "write under" the name, it wasn't an alias. He is entitled to have his own name. Can you expect now every biography or mention of every person on wikipedia to have their names changed to include their full middle-names, or whatever chriso and his friends want? No, don't worry, he not going to do it to anyone else. Just ME. He's obsessed with me that lad. I've never been able to find out why?! (Such is his obsession he's put POV claims in too. He does this with everything I do. It's INSANE!WikiUser 21:10, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"(effectively a pen name). On the whole, I think it's more likely that he will be searched for under the former name rather than the latter. User:ChrisO" Bizzare nonsense. He calls himself as HE wishes to. Authors are searched for under their name, not under "the name user chriso says you must look under cos he's gotta appear (in seconds) after wikiuser and revert all his edits and trash his articles with POV and other mis-use." AS I ALREADY SAID: (Please see all his books or citations of the man.)WikiUser 21:15, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

WikiUser, please remain calm. Even if you are right about the article title, this is not anywhere near as vital a problem as your mood suggests. As it stands, anyone looking at either title will find the article. I suggest you and Chris discuss this move on the article's talk page (and that others talk there also) until a consensus is reached. If that consensus is to return to your title, you can request again. Jwrosenzweig 21:23, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to add an opinion - I can't find anything conclusive in my admittedly short search to say that either option is dominant. In this case, though, I would defer to the name the author refers to themselves as. See the debate around e. e. cummings for another example of this. In either case, there is an appropriate redirect for whichever version is not chosen, in the end. -- Netoholic @ 21:37, 2005 Feb 9 (UTC)

I don't really care about the title either just as long as in the article his full name is used at least once. When I was trying to add more information to the article a while back I basically gave up as there was so little information on him. I mean I couldn't even find the year he died if he has in fact died. Evil Monkey∴Hello 21:42, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

I'm inclined to put this back the way WikiUser had it to start with. I don't think that it was worth changing it in the first place and it's barely worth changing it back. After all the information about the subject's name should be in the article, not in the title of the article. As long as the title allows users to find the article and doesn't have any POV issues it should be acceptable. Abbreviating de Funiak's middle name is not going to stop people finding him. We don't use the author's full name for Edward Estlin Cummings or for Iain Menzies Banks so there's no reason why we have to do it here. -- Derek Ross | Talk 23:44, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll move it back; as long as there are redirects, it shouldn't make much difference in practice.