Talk:Wm. Theodore de Bary

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved as consensus to keep the article at it's current name has been established based on the

Wm. Theodore de Bary → William Theodore de Bary – "Wm." is a publishing abbreviation, not his given name. Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:26, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - "Wm." looks odd in the article title, and we don't generally use abbreviations of personal names. -Zanhe (talk) 04:37, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Support – Probably warranted. Sinologists I've met who knew him personally always called him "Ted de Bary", but we should probably just use his full name here.  White Whirlwind  咨  08:00, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral – In light of the discussion and arguments given here since I wrote my original comments, I'm now changing my stance.  White Whirlwind  咨  23:07, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. "Wm." was the form by which subject was known and one which appeared on the covers of his numerous books (https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Wm.+Theodore+de+Bary&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&gws_rd=ssl). Although Amazon's Author Page lists him as "William Theodore De Bary", the covers of all the books displayed there indicate "Wm. Theodore de Bary". Wikipedia has always made allowances for specialized pen names such as the lower-cased bell hooks. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 15:44, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you citing howlingpixel.com, a Wikipedia mirror? "William Theodore de Bary" is far more common than the abbreviated version. See Ngram graph. -Zanhe (talk) 17:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose "Wm." was not merely "a publishing abbreviation". It was his first name. See the obituary in The New York Times, "Wm. Theodore de Bary, Renowned Columbia Sinologist, Dies at 97", which says "He formally changed his first name to Wm., he said, to distinguish himself from his father, also named William." Also see his faculty page at Columbia University. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:02, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per

WP:COMMONNAME, common name trumps formal name. As the ngram above shows, "William" is far more common than "Wm." -Zanhe (talk) 19:10, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

• Oppose Zanhe raises a serious point, but
  WP:COMMONNAME recommends Bill Clinton rather than William Jefferson Clinton. Cheers... ch (talk) 05:59, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply
  ]

This is a really unusual case. Library indices normally use "William", whereas book covers usually use "Wm." (see the cover vs. the LOC cataloging data for his Sources of Chinese Tradition, for example). When Google indexes his works, it naturally uses the LOC cataloging data rather than the cover, making "William" far more common than "Wm." on Ngram. -Zanhe (talk) 07:53, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual indeed! My feeling is that we should follow his own designation and apparently legal name. It seems that the LOC usage is based on a misunderstanding, making it an unreliable source. I met him a couple of times, but never thought to ask him his name....ch (talk) 20:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.