User talk:Rovingrobert/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Rovingrobert, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Nicknames

Hello Rovingrobert. It's really not encyclopedic to keep adding nicknames to the lead of tennis biographies. It's even worse to then use the nicknames in the main text. I suggest if you want to add the nicknames, you include a sentence in the Personal life section, or somewhere similar. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:20, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

September 2015

Hello, I'm McGeddon. I wanted to let you know that some of your recent contributions to Time Cube have been reverted or removed because they could be seen to be defamatory or libellous. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Forum posts and personal websites are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia, particularly for alleging that a named individual was mentally ill, and possibly driven to suicide by another named individual. McGeddon (talk) 07:55, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

User:McGeddon, I'm sure you have noble intentions, but in fact, all of my contributions were removed, not just some of them (which is pretty gutting for your run-of-the-mill Wikipedian). I can understand what you are saying. "But alleging that a named individual was mentally ill" based on the word of this individual's schoolteacher, who had worked closely with the individual, is as good a word as anyone's going to get. It's also pretty obvious something wasn't right, if Janczarski could convert from atheism to cubicism to fundamentalist Christianity in such a short time. So little is known about Janczarski, but he deserves a legacy and a name for himself. If some of that is hard to verify, at least it can be somewhat verified. "Forum posts and personal websites" started by the very person in question, with his own sentiments recorded there, does not to me cry libel. "Alleging that a named individual was possibly driven to suicide by a named individual". Well I didn't actually say that was the case - I claimed that many who had come into contact with Janczarski believed that, and I provided citation of their opinions. Most of Janczarski's life was online, to be honest. "Minor" forums included. Should I fail to convince you, can I please somehow reword this and be allowed to keep the section of the article?

Thanks for the response. Really this just comes down to the fact that Wikipedia doesn't regard forums and self-published YouTube videos as reliable sources, which is why I felt I had to cut the whole section. Unless I misread them, all of the sources provided were self-published websites, videos and forum posts. I just flagged the forum-sourced libel against Gene Ray as the most obvious problem with repeating forum chat as statements of fact in Wikipedia's voice.

The article could possibly quote Janczarski writing about himself under WP:BLPSELFPUB (the same way that it can quote Ray directly even though he was just writing on his own website), but it couldn't make any "claims about third parties", and I think we'd need a reliable secondary source to link Janczarski to Time Cube in the first place. Did he ever give any press interviews? --McGeddon (talk) 10:08, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

No worries at all User:McGeddon. Once again it must suck for you to have to enforce such strict rules. Obviously Gene Ray has always been the headline act, but I believe Richard was interviewed by Charles Berman for The Bronze Age of Radio on WHRW Binghamton a few months before he died. I'm trying to get in contact with Charles and WHRW to see if I can get a podcast or simply some more information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rovingrobert (talk • contribs) 07:20, 27 September 2015‎

Yes, it's a shame when something seems obviously significant but can't be included for one policy reason or another. There are plenty of other websites out there that will host that content, though. --McGeddon (talk) 08:44, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I think this is the only site someone would notice the content on User:McGeddon. I'm content it would do no good elsewhere. I'm still waiting on finding that interview. Another interesting thing: a quote from the Time Cube site at some point credits an image to a certain "R. Janczarski" (http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=128200). Time Cube appears to be down, so I'm going to search for the quote using archive.org.

Aha. I've found that Ray's site has a number of images which link to Janczarski's Cubicao site (http://www.tc.com/www_timecube_com.html).

Look at this. Ray addresses his personal misgivings about Janczarski. "Cubicao.tk Trashes My Site, using My Data and His Erroneous Prophecy Crap. I Denounce Cubicao.tk as Harmful To "Time Cube",and C/R Infringement." (http://web.archive.org/web/20080222052250/http://tc.com/?)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rovingrobert (talk • contribs) 12:24, 27 September 2015‎

Not sure there's much we can really conclude from that: if he's calling out Janczarski then we can't use it under WP:BLPSELFPUB. --McGeddon (talk) 11:35, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Why McGeddon, because of the third-party claims do you mean?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rovingrobert (talk • contribs) 12:37, 27 September 2015‎

Yes: we couldn't write anything like "Ray once described Janczarski as 'harmful' for 'Erroneous Prophecy Crap'" if he only made this claim on his personal website. The yardstick for whether a spat or a collaboration makes it into someone's Wikipedia biography is whether a reliable source covered it. --McGeddon (talk) 11:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

But then how come we could make other assumptions based on what was on Ray's site? McGeddon— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rovingrobert (talk • contribs) 12:44, 27 September 2015‎

WP:SELFPUB: "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities"... so long as we don't overdo it, don't flatter the source, don't report improbable claims as fact, and don't repeat any claims about third parties. --McGeddon (talk) 11:51, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Alright McGeddon, but if you know a bit about Time Cube you'll know Janczarski did a lot in popularizing it to the general public. Maybe a section about him could be included, so long as the feud is not mentioned?

And by the same token, can't we use Janczarski's blog to repeat his sentiments about himself? This article must, at least in part, talk about Time Cube proponents themselves, as there are no separate articles for either Ray or Janczarski.

Secondary information: A 40-minute interview with Richard by Charles Berman for the Bronze Age of Radio on WHRH Binghamton (https://yadi.sk/d/t8cdVYIpjMEPn). Rovingrobert (talk) 07:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

McGeddon, please reply. Rovingrobert (talk) 22:56, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

@McGeddon: Rovingrobert (talk) 04:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello again. If you think you can write a paragraph about Janczarski that fits within the criteria of WP:SELFPUB, by all means have a go at it - either put it straight into the article or post a draft at Talk:Time Cube to see what other interested editors think. --McGeddon (talk) 09:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

@McGeddon:, thanks for the reply. What do you think about whether or not Gene Ray is still alive? According to this link (https://homemetry.com/Cumming+GA/HIGHLAND+POINTE+DR/2580), a circa 88-year old Ray lived or has lived there. According to what I think is Ray's Twitter account, he was 82 and had cancer in 2010. Assuming his birthday is in July from another website, he would likely be 88 years of age was he still alive. The paradox is why his site would be down if he was still alive.

Sorry, no idea. --McGeddon (talk) 13:10, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Signing comments

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you.--McGeddon (talk) 11:51, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Guillermo García-López

added a link pointing to Roland Garros

Santiago Giraldo

added a link pointing to Wimbledon

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:31, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Teymuraz Gabashvili, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Russian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Alexandros Jakupović

A tag has been placed on Alexandros Jakupović requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

An editor moved an article to this page and moved it back again to its original page, as the naming of the page is currently subject to discussion.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. st170e^talk 00:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi

The above tag seems ridiculous. Anyway. As regards the one European bio which is anglicized, it's Ana Ivanovic - removing the ć was the first shot in the anti-diacritic campaign from a couple of tennis editors a few years back. Something which is long over, but if you don't know means you're blessedly new to this subject :). It is only one lone bio however, and stands as a monument to Serbo-diacritic-phobia or something, not quite sure what. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Never mind then, we'll let some other dogmatic editor sort it out. Might as well stop checking on the Jakupovic page too, while we're at it. Ah. I'm glad I wasn't around for that, considering I'm Slavic :-) The funny thing is that the Simple English Wikipedia still retains the diacritics for Ivanovic's name. Oh, and Jelena Dokic's article seems a bit strange. It says that as a high schooler living in Australia, her name was "Dokić (later Dokic)". Fair enough if you don't put diacritics in, considering she lives in Australia, but what is that sentence trying to say? I don't know - all of this name stuff is messing with my head. Rovingrobert (talk) 10:33, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I believe the Australian played for Serbia at some point, hence the mumble in the article lead. And yes Simple English didn't suffer the whole "tennis names" stuff as en.wp In ictu oculi (talk) 12:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm trying to contact the ATP and ITF to get some official statement from them on the topic. Chances are both organizations will ignore me, but it's worth a shot. Rovingrobert (talk) 12:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

So how come Fyunck won't have any dealings with you? Rovingrobert (talk) 04:13, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Re your question on Jakupovic RM: what we usually do is to "err on the side of diacritics", i.e. include them if at least one RS uses them, i.e. the "canonical spelling". Exceptions are made when a person gets naturalized in the new country (Jelena Dokic, Monica Seles) or when there is a solid proof that they prefer another spelling in English themselves (Novak Djokovic is an odd case, particularly regarding that his brother is used to be at Marko Đoković). Granted, Jakupović is a borderline case, and might have gone along with Zlatan Ibrahimović. Wikipedia is not always consistent. No such user (talk) 15:11, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

@No such user: Yeah, I'd agree. But it seems as though this surname translates to a soft 'ts' sound in Greek. What convinced me of this was a Greek commentator pronouncing the surname that way at the Status Athens Open: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdrK9V6iqzQ&t=1m25s Rovingrobert (talk) 02:14, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Only Ana Ivanovic, that's the only one in the whole en.wp In ictu oculi (talk) 08:07, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Hopefully we can launch a decent attack on that one day. I saw that you tried it in November, but there was no clear consensus. Rovingrobert (talk) 09:49, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@In ictu oculi: How about Andrea Petkovic or Belinda Bencic? Rovingrobert (talk) 13:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Spelling vs. styling

In this edit you said you changed the "spelling". This is not quite right; none of the letters changed. Dropping the comma is a change in "styling", which is why it's discussed in the WP:MOS. Dicklyon (talk) 03:36, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks User:Dicklyon. Will keep that in mind for next time. Rovingrobert (talk) 03:44, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I took out your technical request, too, as this is clearly the most controversial of all possible comma removals. Let's let it rest a while. Dicklyon (talk) 17:36, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: Thanks for that. I assumed that tensions had simmered down, given the recent move of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. Unfortunately, as you mentioned, that may not be the case. Hopefully, with time, the message sinks in. Rovingrobert (talk) 01:57, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Randy won't give it up until the end. Patience. Dicklyon (talk) 02:03, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: Randy is a user here, right? Rovingrobert (talk) 02:10, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Right, User:Randy Kryn. Dicklyon (talk) 02:22, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: Is a move proposer allowed to list his/her opinion under Support/Oppose? Rovingrobert (talk) 05:56, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I usually give a brief proposal for listing at WP:RM, then often a longer statement with a bulletted Support; I have been told on occasion that I shouldn't, since support is implicit in the nominatins, but I do, saying "Support as nom" to make it clear that this is nominator's support reasons; others do that, too, sometimes. Dicklyon (talk) 06:48, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: Any specific way(s) I can improve the rationale for that move request? I have recently posted the link on applicable Wikiprojects and it may be important that others read a better statement. Rovingrobert (talk) 07:32, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dmitry Popkó, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Seefeld and Artem Smirnov. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:59, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Dmitry Popkó

The article Dmitry Popkó has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable per Tennis Guidelines. Only minor, minor league wins, no Challenger wins, to main draws on the ATP tour, No Davis Cup.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): I fully understand the reasoning behind proposing this article for deletion. To my mind, it is one of many articles dealing with a not particularly notable tennis player. Perhaps if this was officially nominated for deletion we could get some input from other editors. Their opinions will probably not differ, but at least this article can then serve as some kind of precedent. Rovingrobert (talk) 10:59, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

We've already had many precedent's on this player-type. I probably propose deletions on these things once per week and it's why we put it into our guidelines for everyone to read. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:21, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): To be fair, I didn't know that existed. Whatever, it doesn't matter. It wasn't a favourite article of mine. Rovingrobert (talk) 05:11, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

No problemo. Our guidelines often get missed by even long-time editors... that's why it gets pointed out from time to time. I should probably do a better job of making sure newer tennis editors are aware of it. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:22, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): Thanks for letting me know. Apologies if I came across as rude. I do appreciate your advice. Rovingrobert (talk) 06:25, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

No worries but there is another more serious matter I just brought to your attention in another post. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:35, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Canvassing forbidden at wikipedia

I didn't report this since I'm sure you were unaware of wikipedia rules. Canvassing for votes is absolutely forbidden at wikipedia Wikipedia:Canvassing#Votestacking per WP:Votestacking. You have now made the whole discussion at Talk:Bojan Djordjic suspect with your canvassing here and here People have to find it on their own or you have to notify an entire project, where there could be just as many for or against your point of view. But otherwise you cannot canvass for !votes. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:33, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry. I believe I did what I did in good faith. I was definitely unaware of such a rule, plus I felt that voting was quite lopsided. (Although, I guess that is what happens when a discussion doesn't rack up much attention.) I have now removed my canvassing from those users' pages (and at least one other you did not mention) and I trust they did not notice my messages - or else they would have replied - or otherwise would not agree with canvassing anyway. If any of those users post at the move discussion, I will remove their votes. If worse comes to worse, I'll abolish the discussion. Rovingrobert (talk) 06:43, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

No problem, I notified the discussion of the situation and I'm sure those editors realize the situation. Pretty much if you notify someone, you just canceled out their chance to find it on its own and now they can never voice an opinion. Usually over the course of a week people come by and give an opinion. I saw it, and thought about commenting as an "against" vote (I still could), but it was a minor issue and I tend to pick my battles. An example of not canvassing would be if you decided to do a move discussion request on a subject that has had move requests in the past, but none in quite awhile. It would be considered common courtesy to notify ALL the people in the last discussion to join in the new discussion. But it has to be ALL the last contributors, not just ones that agree with your viewpoint. I do that often in a neutrally worded notice such as "since you were involved in the last move request at blahdy blah, please feel free to join in a new discussion." I hope that helps. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:58, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Please never remove anyone's comments. You can append a note apologizing for canvassing them, instead. Dicklyon (talk) 06:49, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: Alright. And to think I could have gotten myself banned over one insignificant move discussion. Anywhere else I can post to attract more attention? (Neutral, I mean.) Rovingrobert (talk) 06:54, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't quite that cold and disheartening. Instant blocks are of the massive profanity and personal threat type of thing. If someone complained about this to an administrator, you'd have simply been warned not to do it again. You'd have probably been warned a second time if you then did it again. Then you would have been blocked from editing for something like 24 hours. And then it would just get longer and longer. Fyunck(click) (talk) 13:47, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, in the interests of Wikipedian 'fairness', it probably would make more sense to share the discussion with a larger group of potentially supporting and opposing individuals. But where? Or can this be merged with another, larger, move discussion on a similar topic? Rovingrobert (talk) 06:48, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

What can be done is to check the talk page to see what wikiprojects are interested in the topic. You could post on those wikiproject talk pages something like:

"Since tennis player Bojan Djordjic is tagged as being of interest to this wikiproject, please join in the move discussion at Talk:Bojan_Djordjic#Requested_move_19_May_2016 Bojan_Djordjic."

But don't just hunt and peck certain projects... you should notify all or none. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:08, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Rovingrobert (talk) 07:19, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): What sort of title should I give that section on the talk pages? Rovingrobert (talk) 07:25, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Maybe something like "Bojan Djordjic move request" Fyunck(click) (talk) 13:36, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Give it a rest instead. Your proposal is poorly thought out and generally opposed. Any solicitation by you at this point would be seen as an attempt to canvass support. Dicklyon (talk) 16:51, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

@Dicklyon: I initially thought so, but no one would accuse me of doing so from a 1–4 support to oppose deficit, would they? Rovingrobert (talk) 00:08, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Just wondering

You seem to be on some new diacritics crusade throughout wikipedia. Everything was pretty calm (from what I can tell)... I don't think anyone was really messing with any articles on a regular basis. There are so many articles that need help with sourcing, sentence structure, photos, poor writing, lack of info, etc, yet it seems like most of your time all of a sudden is spent in some sort of new diacritic escapade. I'm wondering if this is what is to be expected of you in the coming months or is this just some temporary thing on one or two more articles? I know you came to my talk page and asked me many questions on the issue about a month ago, but I had no idea it was going to lead to multiple RM's and a large focus on the topic. I'm wondering if you're doing the same thing in reverse on the other wikipedias, where they change many English spelled names into their own native tongues, or is this simply an English wikipedia thing? Anyway my talk page is always open for most discourse, but this happens to be a subject that I like to leave alone these days if at all possible. I didn't really know how to ask without sounding rude, sorry if it comes across that way, I just wanted to know how much more of this I can expect in the tennis sections so I can mentally prepare for any coming anguish among multiple editors. Cheers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): It's a valid question, so I don't begrudge you asking it. I'm not sure how I would identify articles that need help with wording... is there a specific tag I can look for? I also don't know if I will have the time to continue editing Wikipedia on a long-term basis, so that is something I will weigh up over the coming weeks. Unfortunately, if I do stay, I foresee my participation in a lot of 'minor' issues – Jr., Sr. diacritics, etc. I haven't done any editing on other language Wikipedias as I don't see the need. Words and names translate quite well into and between European languages. Into English, not so much. Pronunciation is not preserved. Translating by simply removing diacritics is not great; the letters used to replace the diacritics have different pronunciations, which is probably where the argument for Latin transliteration with diacritics has its roots. Plus, stating that a subject prefers a certain spelling of their name without concrete evidence is WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH. In my belief, how the subject pronounces their name may be an indication of their preference. Differences in opinion are never going to result in both sides' happiness, so I apologize if I cause you or fellow editors anguish by my stance on the issue. I can assure you that there are editors anguished by the opposite stance, but not all of them are vocal so I don't know what the figures are. Rovingrobert (talk) 08:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

But obviously English doesn't translate well into European languages either. Take Serena Williams. That's the only way she spells her name in English. Yet that is not retained in other language wikipedia's. They change it to fit their own languages and no one seems to complain about it. Nor should anyone complain in my opinion. If the Czech Republic wants to spell it their own way in Czech that's cool. If Croatia wants to spell it with a "V", hey that's their language. But if English tries to do the same all hell breaks loose. In English, spelling and pronunciation do not go hand in hand. We tend to use only 26 letters except in newer loan words... but usually those loan word letters fade and disappear with time. Diacritics are not taught in schools.

Those are some reasons I am against their main usage at this English wikipedia. Of course I always felt all versions of the person's spelling should be mentioned in an article. That only makes sense to me, in fact I was making sure that all foreign spellings were placed in the articles. But the community has spoken and unless you can show that a person has personally used an English spelling in their name, then all references to the English spelling by any other source are censored at wikipedia. It's as if the English spelling does not exist no matter how many sources... it's totally banned here. It's why I mostly stopped caring about diacritics here on wikipedia, except in a few cases where we can show multiple personal choice sources. But in the real world no child I have taught is going to have to learn to spell Marin Čilić any way except Marin Cilic. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:26, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

To be fair, the Czech Republic do have their own feminine naming conventions, and Croatia might translate the name differently to help with pronunciation. But one of the problems I have with dropping diacritics in English (where appropriate) is that we translate 'đ' as 'dj' but 'ć' as 'c', rather than 'ch'. Then you've got the issue of personal identity, but that is rarely demonstrable. Diacritics are legal in Western countries, or at least in the one in which I live, but I guess they can be dropped by filling out a few forms.

So, can I take it you are a teacher then? Rovingrobert (talk) 10:30, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I have taught. Legality also depends on context. No one is going to arrest you in the US or Canada for using diacritics, but you can't use them in certain legal documents like birth and death records. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:49, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): Hmm, okay. I think in Australia diacritics can be used on birth and death records. Rovingrobert (talk) 00:30, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I think you are correct with Australia. My family has the Polish letter Ł in our name. When relatives are in Poland they use it, and when they are in the USA it is never used since it's not one of our 26 letters. Just an L is used in its place and if asked we tell folks to pronounce it like a W. My neighbor is a bit weird... her name is spelled Drianna but she pronounces it with a silent D. Her choice I guess, but since English is so flexible it's no big deal. No one makes her spell it phonetically. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:20, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Interesting. Sometimes it's hard to tell whether a person pronounces their name uniquely, so to speak. Rovingrobert (talk) 01:57, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, In English I guess the only way to know is to ask. Fyunck(click) (talk) 02:51, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Thoroughly interesting conversation. As a matter of fact, my family has a Polish surname too, but there are no diacritics in it. Rovingrobert (talk) 04:52, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

My grandma's side doesn't have any diacritics either but it's such a mouthful of letters (Krzysyztowczyk) that every family member shortened it so people could spell it. And every family member shortened it with a different spelling, so it's hard to keep track of them all. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:20, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Ah, that must be confusing. Did they shorten their names legally or just informally? Rovingrobert (talk) 05:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Not sure what each did in different states in a legal sense. In California it's a legal change just by usage, as long as it's used on every document (house papers, insurance, drivers license, etc..) it becomes your legal and binding name. Other states are different. But some had private businesses, and they didn't want it to be Krzysyztowczyk Driveway Construction Company. But all my different Polish, Austrian, Hungarian, family members that had accent or other diacritical marks removed them instantly upon entering the US and Canada. I'm not saying they were forced to, but they needed to to assimilate in jobs, military, and school. Anyway I know "a majority" at wikipedia feel differently with the English language. It won't change my mind by any stretch of the imagination, but I do follow what consensus has decided here regardless of my own preferences. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:04, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I see the rm request of Albert Ramos which has been confirmed by several sources. Are you searching only for those players who have sources in the affirmative for diacritics? Are you also looking at players such as Jelena Jankovic whose accounts go the other way and who signs her own name in English without diacritics? Just gauging if there's any bias or if you're being 100% neutral in what you find. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:50, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Only players who have sources in the affirmative for diacritics interest me. Rovingrobert (talk) 08:21, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lleyton Hewitt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jordan Thompson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

In reply to your message on my talk page

Hi Rovingrobert, thanks for your message. All I meant was that it doesn't seem to be standard to indicate walkovers in a tennis player's grand slam record timeline. I haven't seen this on any page except Wawrinka's which is why I removed it. Also, while it might be notable to indicate if they won in the final by walkover, for example, it doesn't seem to be notable otherwise. If it was done on most pages and there was a convention for it, then I would agree with it. What do you think? Cheers, 123.2.211.37 (talk) 08:24, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi @123.2.211.37:, that makes sense. I agree with your verdict. I mistakenly thought that that description referred to why my "snapping a three match and seven set winning streak against Murray which dated back to 2013" spiel was removed. I guess it is just fluff in the broader scheme of things. Rovingrobert (talk) 11:55, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Rovingrobert. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

January 2017

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to User talk:ApprenticeFan while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting. Note that the abusive use of multiple accounts or evasion of a blockage may result to you to have been blocked from editing Wikipedia. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. This is in regards to you changing your signature from an IP to your registered account, per this edit. Alex|The|Whovian^? 10:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

@AlexTheWhovian: So, let me get this clear: one has to use one identity or the other? Rovingrobert (talk) 10:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Please note: "Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting." Please proceed by reading the linked policy. Thank you. Alex|The|Whovian^? 10:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

@AlexTheWhovian: Same setting meaning... what? Rovingrobert (talk) 10:28, 26 January 2017 (UTC)