Talk:Godfrey Rolles Driver

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Godfrey Rolles Driver. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060904135109/http://cdli.ucla.edu:16080/wiki/index.php/Driver%2C_Godfrey_Rolles to http://cdli.ucla.edu:16080/wiki/index.php/Driver,_Godfrey_Rolles

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:44, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 22 April 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: CONSENSUS TO NOT MOVE There does not appear to be consensus for this requested move. Necrothesp suggested an alternative title but it was not discussed further, so if they want to pursue that I would suggest opening a new RM. (closed by non-admin page mover) creffett (talk) 02:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

---

Godfrey Rolles Driver -> G. R. Driver - Per WP:COMMONNAME. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 01:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

WP:INITS provides, "Generally, use the most common format of a name used in reliable sources: if that is with a middle name or initials, make the Wikipedia article title conform to that format." This follows from the principle established in WP:COMMONNAME. WP:INITS continues, "If reliable sources write out several or all of a subject's given names nearly as often as they use initials, prefer the version with the names written in full." As demonstrated by this ngram, the subject's name is only used a small fraction of the amount of time compared with his initials. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 04:40, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:34, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

• @207.161.86.162 and Buidhe: queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

  I have added to the above rationale for the move. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 04:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

• Why not use full name, which is less ambiguous. buidhe 02:18, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

  @Buidhe: The full name cannot be "less ambiguous" when the proposed title is entirely unambiguous, as the term is understood by the disambiguation guideline.

  As to why, WP:INITS provides, "Generally, use the most common format of a name used in reliable sources: if that is with a middle name or initials, make the Wikipedia article title conform to that format." This follows from the principle established in WP:COMMONNAME. WP:INITS continues, "If reliable sources write out several or all of a subject's given names nearly as often as they use initials, prefer the version with the names written in full." As demonstrated by this ngram, the subject's name is only used a small fraction of the amount of time compared with his initials. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 03:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

• Don't move: the sources given don't suggest that he was more commonly referred to as "G.R.", and it's a more distinctive title. There is much more likely to be another "G. R. " than another "Godfrey Rolles". I note that there are already redirects from both G. R. Driver and Godfrey Driver, as there should be. PamD 07:49, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

  To which sources are you referring, PamD? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 05:45, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  Those in the article, such as "Obituary: Sir Godfrey Driver" (not "Obituary: G. R. Driver"). PamD 07:21, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

  Does the ngram not suggest that the majority of sources, however, use his initials? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 04:35, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

  Are such sources bibliographic or biographic? And do they generally reflect what he chose to call himself? AnonMoos (talk) 09:03, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

• Move to Godfrey Driver. That's generally how his obituaries refer to him (including in The Times). In his era, especially the earlier part, it was customary to refer to people by their initials in the media, but that doesn't make it the common name. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:10, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
• Don't move -- The initials-only thing is an outdated British bibliographic custom of earlier eras which I tend to find annoying. There's no reason why Wikipedia should emulate it in article titles. If he was actually mainly known by initials, as were O. Henry, e e cummings, or V. S. Naipaul, then it should be moved of course, but there would have to be evidence for this... AnonMoos (talk) 18:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

  The initials-only thing is an outdated British bibliographic custom of earlier eras which I tend to find annoying. There's no reason why Wikipedia should emulate it in article titles. How do you reconcile that position with WP:INITS, AnonMoos? If this is a common practice amongst writers of that era in much of the English-speaking world and it should be disregarded, as is your position, should it not then be addressed by WP:INITS? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 05:45, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I think it was more a practice among publishing houses and scholarly journal editors, with respect to works referred to in what they published, regardless of the wishes of the authors of such works. That's why I used the word "bibliographic". In a few cases, it led to the absurdity of reducing a woman's name to initials, and then appending "(Miss)" or "(Mrs)" to make sure that everybody knew that she was a woman. Obviously, Harriet Martineau did not refer to herself as "H. Martineau (Miss)"... AnonMoos (talk) 11:07, 23 April 2020 (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.