User talk:Rovingrobert/Archive 2

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Player bios

@In ictu oculi: What about Marko and Djordje Djokovic? Bios aren't tied to that of relatives, as illustrated in the Bojan Djordjic vs. Ranko Đorđić case. Rovingrobert (talk) 01:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Well the WikiProject Serbia probably needs to tighten up MOS instructions regarding Đ and Dj. But that a Swede would have Dj is not surprising. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:05, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps not, but I find it somewhat hypocritical to remove other languages' diacritics, and then expect your own language's to be recognised. Rovingrobert (talk) 04:56, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Moving tennis players

Just a question for you, what is with moving all of the Spanish tennis players and removing the hyphen. It has been that way for a while and the ATP and ITF use their names with a hyphen. Why were the pages moved? Adamtt9 (talk) 13:21, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

I was wondering the same. When checked for sources other than ATP or ITF, what is used with the players? When the ITF asks a player how they want their name spelled I assumed they wanted it with the hyphen. It's usually the players choice as long as they use the English alphabet. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:28, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Someone else started the movement, and I jumped on the bandwagon. I did the same with the removal of commas in "Jr." or "Sr." articles. I can't see any reason why either style would be inherently wrong, but one seemed to no longer be the Wikipedian vogue. Rovingrobert (talk) 12:51, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

But it isn't a movement. You need to source that a player's name should be separated without a hyphen before you go and move all of the pages. If you want to say that Guillermo García López should be separated but Adrián Menéndez-Maceiras remains hyphenated, where are the sources that prove that? Adamtt9 (talk) 12:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

The Jr. and Sr. comma thing was a huge discussion. But Adamtt9 is correct... we use sourcing. We have sourcing for the hyphens... the player's bios in professional tennis. You need to show they prefer it unhyphenated. If they do, source it and move it. If they don't then leave it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:04, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, Spanish names, as a general rule do not use hyphens. What's the point in using them, when the paternal name could be hyphenated, leaving a combination like Lopez-Gomez-Fernandez? And I consider it a movement regardless, simply because two of the top Spanish players had their article names moved through due process. Rovingrobert (talk) 22:53, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

But since they have all been hyphenated previously, can it really be a general rule? Unless it has been sourced in the media or the player doesn't use a hyphen, the page isn't moved. As far as I know, the ATP and ITF seem to use hyphens to separate the names. Can you tell me if you have seen otherwise? Adamtt9 (talk) 22:55, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I feel like the majority of articles didn't have hyphens though, if you consider all of the articles on male tennis players from Spanish-speaking countries. Rovingrobert (talk) 22:57, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

That's not what I am saying. I am saying that if the ATP uses hyphens and the players seem to have accepted a hyphenated name, you can't just move all of the other articles because two of them have been moved. You have to look at each case individually. Adamtt9 (talk) 22:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

If I may, what is so different about each case? Rovingrobert (talk) 23:00, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, in the case of Albert Ramos Viñolas, it was agreed that the name is not hyphenated. In the case of David Pérez Sanz, the ATP has always separated the names. But in the case of Hans Podlipnik-Castillo or Adrián Menéndez-Maceiras, the hyphen has always been present. Adamtt9 (talk) 23:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Okay, I see what you mean. It becomes a problem of whether to use local naming customs, or how players are registered on the ATP. That's not the easiest issue to sort out. But someone with permissions to move pages moved Guillermo García López as an 'uncontroversial technical request.' What made them decide in the way they did? Rovingrobert (talk) 23:07, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't know, but my guess is since no one said anything, he/she just moved it. I never saw anything, and the only reason I noticed yours was because you moved multiple. However, looking back at García López's case, I have found a significant amount of sources which don't use a hyphen, and his social media account doesn't even mention the López part. Adamtt9 (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, we don't use local naming conventions, we use what they prefer in English. We look at what they told the ITF, we look at how they spell it on their social media sites and personal websites, we look at their signatures, whatever we can find as to how they prefer to spell it. We don't go by how unrelated people spell it. As long as it can be sourced as to how they prefer it, all is well. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:40, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

So what do you recommend we do. From the pages moved, I can't really find any sources in relation to José Hernández Fernández, but the ITF use a hyphen. Carlos Gómez Herrera uses a hyphen, you can see it on his social media. Enrique López Pérez also uses a hyphen on his social media. Should the pages be moved back or should we open up a discussion? Adamtt9 (talk) 00:53, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

If the player uses a hyphen, and we can source it, we should to. I would move them back. Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

I went ahead and moved two of the players, but we are going to have to request a move for José Hernández Fernández as it wouldn't let me move the page. Adamtt9 (talk) 01:19, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

I also requested that José Hernández Fernández be moved to José Hernández-Fernández according to the ATP and ITF. I will also look to see if any other pages need moving. Adamtt9 (talk) 01:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Rovingrobert, as I'm sure you know, but not sure everyone else visiting your talk page knows; the primary responsibility of any editor working on BLPs is faithfulness to accuracy to the Living Person. That should be reflected in WP:FULLNAME in the lead and unless exceptional reasons otherwise in title too. We already know from years of lagging behind quality sources that ATP was constricted by the limits of scoreboards at Wimbledon and so on, likewise sports tabloids are not a reliable source for living persons compared to a quality book or newspaper from the BLP's home country. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:32, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Rovingrobert. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Re: "I won't stop doing shit, bitch"

We'll see about that, mate. We'll see about that very soon. I'm writing the report as we speak.

I don't know what the hell happened to you. Mr KEBAB (talk) 12:26, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

And here it is: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive_and_uncivil_behavior_by_User:Rovingrobert. Mr KEBAB (talk) 13:01, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! power~enwiki (π, ν) 07:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Rovingrobert. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

July 2020

Hello, I'm Nathan2055. I noticed that you recently removed content from Tammy Duckworth without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 20:38, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Tammy Duckworth does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 20:38, 31 July 2020 (UTC)