Talk:Lü Zushan

Requested move 08 September 2014

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Procedurally closed. As noted by several participants, it's unhelpful to do an RM when changes to a relevant naming convention are being discussed. When the discussion is finalised, keep this here or move it in accordance with the convention. Nyttend (talk) 17:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Lü Zushan → Lu Zushan – Sources available all use the spelling "Lu Zushan". I was unable to find a single source which uses the current spelling with the diaresis. see WP:COMMONNAME if you are unsure how the above relates to the naming of this article. This change doesn't create ambiguity. Just do a simple web search to find out for yourself. He's not a popular topic in the English-language media, so you gotta take what you can get. Regardless of which spelling is more correct, it's not up to us to try to change the common spelling. see also WP:UE and WP:NOR. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 18:11, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Procedural close: the proposer should be chided for starting yet another move request when the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Lu vs. Lü in titles is still in progress. Lü is the pinyin and ISO standard, and the long-standing Wikipedia convention for romanizing the Chinese surname 吕 (see Lü (surname) vs. Lu (surname). Plenty of sources follow the Lü standard, for example [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. There are several alternative, nonstandard spellings for people unable to type Lü on the keyboard, Lu being just one of them, Lv and Lyu being others (try googling Lv Zhushan and Lyu Zushan). Deliberately introducing the confusion to Wikipedia serves no useful purpose. -Zanhe (talk) 22:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

There is indeed such a discussion ongoing. It doesn't appear that it will result in a consensus which will directly relate to the outcome of this move discussion. It doesn't even appear to have a clear goal. In addition there are several other discussions taking place on other articles which are also related to the name Lu, as you well know. Why should only this discussion be taboo. I have proposed this move discussion based on long-standing existing concensus, policy, and guidelines. I have shown you many many examples that no such ironclad standard exists as you propose above, so other articles with the name Lu are not binding to this decision. I fail to see why I should be chided. This move can be evaluated on its own merit. If you look at the sources and the policies I think you will see this is a relatively simple matter. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 22:44, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

• Procedural close: indeed, the behavior of the the proposer is becoming increasingly disruptive. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Accusations of disruptive behavior should be specific. Otherwise it's just a personal attack. Note that this discussion is not about me, but you have used my unspecified "disruptive" behavior as your sole argument against a move request made in good faith and back up by, well, you can read above. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 00:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

If taking a one off example like a Governor of Zhejiang province with no other source than "赵洪祝当选浙江人大主任 吕祖善当选浙江省省长" as a RM fork from an ongoing MOS discussion which shows clear consensus to continue the status quo of WP:PINYIN and the status quo of the entire China article corpus, is in my view disruptive. At least the adjectives "helpful" "beneficial" "consensus building" don't pop into mind. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:58, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Just trying to put the page where it belongs. I noticed that the title was wrong while engaged in the discussion you alude to and I am trying to fix it. That sounds helpful to me. The consensus which says we must always use the marker above the u in article with Chinese names doesn't exist, so please look again, and either makes some contribution to the discussion about the merits of the move, or, well, you can do as you like, but there is no "procedural close" here and making the discussion about me is less than helpful. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 01:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

If you want to change Wikipedia:Manual of Style/China-related articles the place to do that is the ongoing discussion. This additional RM is disruptive, pure and simple. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:26, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to change the MOS which doesn't mention the tense u and it's transliteration and subsequent spelling in English. Perhaps we should talk about the title of this article instead. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 01:31, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

En.wp uses all six Chinese vowels, including Results 1–500 of 9,720 for Lü Chinese

MOS:CHINESE The tone mark is added to the vowel in the syllable that comes first in this sequence: a o e i u ü.

WP NC-CHINA: The titles of Chinese entries should follow current academic conventions, which generally means Hanyu Pinyin without tone marks.

as all 496 articles with Lü in title. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:42, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I am aware of the above. For some topics, such as this one, there is no such clear academic convention to include the mark above the u, just look at the sources, so no, I'm not proposing changes to the MOS, nor am I proposing a move that goes against it. I am however proposing a move which is consistent with WP:AT and pretty-much every other naming guideline as well as WP:UE and both the guidelines you cite above. Sometimes a common name in English is not perfectly consistent with Hanyu Pinyin. WP:NC-CHINA and MOS:CHINESE discuss this at great length. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 01:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

"For some topics, such as this one, there is no such clear academic convention to include the mark above the u" - what topic, governors of Zhejiang? Are you seriously suggesting we use a different MOS for governors of Zhejiang rather than every other Chinese bio on en.wp. This is exactly why we have WP:NC-CHINA and MOS:CHINESE in the first place, so we don't have a different MOS for governors of Zhejiang. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:56, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Of course, no one is proposing that, read the above to see what I am proposing. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 01:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Then by "For some topics, such as this one," you mean just this one governor of Zhejiang? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:07, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I am indeed proposing to move this one article to this one governor's common English name. I'm not sure what's confusing about this. There is also no broader consistency for other people named 呂 if that's what you are refering to. I have already given ample evidence for that on one of the myriad talk page we are having this discussion. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 02:38, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Comment this article contains no English-language sources. WP:RSUE please someone add some English language sources -- 70.51.201.202 (talk) 07:13, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Done, thanks for point this out. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 16:50, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. WP:NC-CHINA says to use Pinyin without the tone marks, so that would include umlauts. Judging from this and that, I take it that Britannica has the same policy. "Common name" is for names that are, you know, reasonably common. La crème de la crème (talk) 08:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

User:La crème de la crème thank you, yes WP:NC-CHINA says to use Pinyin which includes the umlaut without the tone marks. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:05, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

It doesn't say anything at all about the "umlaut". - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 19:50, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

The guideline says to use Pinyin, and the umlaut is part of Pinyin. It doesn't mention "A", "B", and "C" either, but I don't we can conclude that those letters are optional. Yes, this mark is an umlaut, not a diaeresis. See here. La crème de la crème (talk) 08:29, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying umlaut v diaresis. Umlaut just seemed very specific to German. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 17:43, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

• Procedural close as stated above. This is very unhelpful at best. --Cold Season (talk) 19:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Do you have anything to contribute to the discussion about the move? - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 19:46, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I think I just did. --Cold Season (talk) 19:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

We are discussing a move request for this article. There is no "procedural close", so please comment on the merits of the proposal if you want to participate in this discussion. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 19:52, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Let me be specific, move requests are open for discussion until the discussion has come to a consensus and at least seven days have passed to allow editors enough time to notice the discussion and participate. Demanding that the discussion be prematurely closed after only a day is disruptive to the move discussion. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 19:57, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm perfectly aware of what we are discussing and I will not withdraw my "procedural close" like those above. The merit of this move proposal... It is unhelpful as I said above, since there's an ongoing discussion at the Chinese naming convention guideline about "Lu vesus Lü". This is effectively sidestepping it. Oppose, since the guidelines prefer systematic transliterations, such as pinyin (WP:UE), in the absence of an established English name. --Cold Season (talk) 21:05, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

This sidesteps nothing, like ongoing discussion of the title of the article about Lu Lin. There is a common English name as established by reliable sources, both common and academic, do a google search or check out the refs cited on the page if you don't know. That name is "Lu Zushan". - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 21:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

• Support - even if "Lu" and "Lü" have a meaningful distinction to Sinophones, they do not to Anglophones. The both are pronounced "Loo" in English. Why would we include non-English letters in our article titles to preserve a pronunciation distinction that is lost on virtually all English Wikipedia readers anyway? Bobby Martnen (talk) 00:14, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Bobby Martnen I'm sorry but what do mean by Sinophones and Anglophones? These aren't terms that get much use, do you mean Americans/Australians/British who have knowledge of pinyin and those who don't? Or do you mean something else?

As for the MOS guidelines, if you disagree with the Wikipedia's guidelines for Chinese names the place to propose a change is at the guideline, not here at RM where we are implementing the guidelines.

These guidelines mainly deal with the systematic titling of Chinese-related articles. For issues of style within the article text, please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/China-related articles. If you disagree with any of the conventions, please discuss the issue within the talk page.

As it says, "If you disagree with any of the conventions, please discuss the issue within the talk page." not here. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:20, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.