Wikipedia:Using nicknames

This Wikipedia page has been superseded by historical reference.

Apply

1. Do what our other articles do, especially recent (not decade-old) featured articles and good articles, but check the talk pages for discussion of why particular choices were made.
2. When in doubt, do what the majority of general-audience reliable sources do for the subject in question.
3. The primary goal is clarity for those unfamiliar with the subject. Browbeating readers as if they are idiots is not a tactic for achieving it.

There is no need to "explain" short names (hypocorisms and diminutives) that are common and conventional (to English speakers), like Bill and Liz.

• Don't do it with quotation marks, e.g. Albert Beeson "Al" Ceesdale.
• Don't do it by parenthetical insertion into the name, e.g. Albert Beeson (Al) Ceesdale.
• Don't add a note about it, e.g. Albert Beeson Ceesdale, better known as Al.

(This does not apply to short names that are common outside English but not in this language, e.g. Dima for Dmitri in Russian.)

An important exception to the above rule of thumb is when we want to make the point that the subject is almost always known by the shorter name (and our article title uses that form), in which case any of the above can be used, though the longer form is the clearest. There are multiple obvious approaches to lead sections when editors do feel some such annotation is warranted, and which one to use is a matter of context and of editorial discretion at a particular article. Examples:

• Albert Beeson Ceesdale, best known as Al Ceesdale
• Albert Beeson Ceesdale, known professionally as Al Ceesdale
• Al Ceesdale (born Albert Beeson Ceesdale)
• Al Ceesdale in the lead, with Born: Albert Beeson Ceesdale in the
  infobox
• Albert Beeson (Al) Ceesdale

(Avoid the quotation marks form, Albert Beeson "Al" Ceesdale; such scare-quoting implies doubt or judgmentalism when applied to conventional short names as opposed to nicknames.)

None of these approaches are needed in running prose (i.e., outside the lead of the subject's own article).

• Just use the form preferred by
  reliable sources
  , even if it's a shortened one, and link to the article on the person.
• If the person is not notable (i.e., has no article here and is never likely to have one), then our readers don't care what the full versus shortened name is, anyway.

Do not use a short form for a subject who may use one in private life but who is virtually never referred to that way in the press. Examples:

• Magic Johnson

(Quotation marks are not needed in such a case, because the public is already familiar with such a figure and we know that it is a nickname; the lead will provide the real name, anyway.)

Otherwise, use something like:

• Xenia Youill Zounds, often known as Fisty Zounds
• Xenia Youill Zounds, known professionally as Fisty Zounds

(or whatever the context dictates).

The parenthetical insertion approach can be done in running prose (passing mention at another article, not in the subject's own lead) when a diminution or abbreviation is unusual:

• Catherine Camile (CeeCee) McGillicuddy

One can also sometimes use the quoted insertion style for a nickname in running prose (again, not in the subject's own lead):

• Catherine Camile "Ferret" McGillicuddy

(This style is frequently used in articles on organized crime when referring to mobsters commonly known by such epithets.)

Never put quotation marks around a professional pseudonym or a legally changed name.

• Wrong: "Winona Ryder", born Winona Horowitz

Do not put both quotation marks and parentheses around a nickname or press appellation:

• Redundant: Rudolf ("Minnesota Fats") Wanderone

It is unnecessary and unhelpful to put quotation marks around the names of fictionalized, alter-ego personas created by entertainers, except when contextually helpful to distinguish between the performer and the performance, the reality and the fiction:

• Sasha Baron Cohen's roles as Ali G and Borat
• Sasha Baron Cohen's "Ali G" attitude is markedly different from the "Borat" stance, and neither reflect the actor's own stated views.

(In the former case, we are addressing them as characters, like Superman or Bilbo Baggins; the latter we are approaching analogously to titles of works of performance art, and distinguishing their in-universe behavior from the actor's own personal qualities and from each other.)

For persons with numerous nicknames and aliases that can be attested in sources but which are unlikely to be familiar to many if any readers, it is not necessary to list them all. Examples:

• Various criminals have used dozens of aliases, especially if they were engaged in various forms of financial fraud. Our readers do not care what all of them were.
• Various professional wrestlers have used dozens of stage names. Our readers generally only care about the subject's major characters in televised appearances, not what they used as amateurs at carnivals when they first got started. While some of those details might be pertinent to an "Early life" section or the like, they do not belong in the article lead or the infobox.

Finally, do not add pseudo-nicknames that are just some writer's (often a sports journalist's) evocative turns of phrase.

• If a newspaper headline refers to an Australian player with something like "Melbourne Menace Takes Title", that does not magically make the player's nickname "the Melbourne Menace". Treating it as one is forbidden original research on the editor's part.
• If a dozen sources call him that, then you have a case for inclusion of it as a nickname in a Wikipedia article.