Talk:Martin Buß

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate 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 debate was no consensus. —Nightstallion (?) 08:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rename Martin Buß to Martin Buss[edit]

Votes[edit]

Move proposed by User:71.31.46.194
Heya. Look in the browser at the characters. Some body must have redirected it or moved it. The characters are not english in the url string. As far as I know everything on wikipedia has to be.--71.31.46.194 19:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm not sure I understand. If you check the URLs for the examples I've given above, they are not English characters. Budgiekiller 19:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, no reason not to use the correct spelling. URLs are allowed to contain any Unicode character, not just the smallest set of ASCII characters. Angr (tc) 19:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly support unless evidence can be found that this is how he is spelled in English commentary. As examples of the use of Buss:
    (These are chosen at random, as the first relevant results on googling Martin Edmonton high jump; of course, there are many sites which don't mention him at all. Septentrionalis 20:06, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess the fact that his name appears as Martin Buß in de.wikipedia.org [1] might count for something. Besides, the BBC certainly never use character modifiers such as in Petr Čech [2], so are we going to go back and change all other such names to the "English" (incorrect) commentary? Budgiekiller 20:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    That is evidence how his name is spelt in German. This encyclopedia is written in English. This is to be decided on a case-by-case basis; I oppose a purge of ß. That is a straw man argument; we are no more goiong to do that than we are going to go through and change Nuremberg to Nürnberg everywhere, or Rome to Roma. Please read WP:UE. Septentrionalis 22:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, WP:UE, fine, but as you say, a case by case basis. And this just looks like making a lot of work for someone, when both this page and the Martin Buss redirect already exist. I vote we all head off and do something more constructive...! Budgiekiller 22:27, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and agree with Angr. Olessi 17:13, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support non-7-bit-ASCII characters should be banned from titles. At the very least, non-English characters should be banned. 132.205.45.148 01:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe they should be banned, but they're not, so it's not really a valid reason. Budgiekiller 07:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with reservations. I generally agree that names should be kept as close to the original spelling as possible, including diacritics, but I would make an exception for names using ß. For one, it is dissimilar in shape to ss so that most English readers unfamiliar with it tend to read it as a B. For two, it is being phased out in German (although not necessarily for own names). And for three everybody who sues an ß is used to seeing it changed to ss even in German, for instance if the name is capitalized (there is no capital ß, it's simply BUSS). But I take it this discussion should really be held somewhere else? ~ trialsanderrors 09:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

  • Seems like a lenghtier debate has already happened here, although the results haven't been tabulated. ~ trialsanderrors 09:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since the redirection already exists from Martin Buss (in the same way it does for Petr Cech), isn't this discussion becoming somewhat nugatory? Budgiekiller 11:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so, but it should probably be held at another location. ~ trialsanderrors 21:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Let me just add: trialsanderrors, the ß is *not* in the process of being phased out at all. The rules for when it should be used have just been streamlined. After the reform, the distinction between ß and ss is absolutely clear: ß comes after long vowels, ss after short ones, period.
That the Swiss have decided to abolish the ß entirely a long time ago is another matter entirely. Just trying to clarify this. —Nightstallion (?) 08:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note I didn't use past tense. ~ trialsanderrors 08:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]