Talk:Bojan Djordjic

Stats

How come the statistics in the table and the infobox don't match up? Also, what is the source for the non-UK clubs? Severo^TC 13:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Rangers - loan or move?

According to the text, Dorjic moved on loan to Rangers, but according to the Infobox, it was a move. Anyone know which it was? Darkson (BOOM! An interception!) 10:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

He has not joined Blackpool

He has not joined Blackpool it's only a rumor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarmet (talk • contribs) 10:21, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 19 May 2016

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 per consensus. SSTflyer 05:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

---

Bojan Djordjic → Bojan Đorđić – According to the article, this footballer is based in Sweden. The Swedish language generally seems to preserve diacritics, as evidenced by Zlatan Ibrahimović's name. (Obviously this is not the case for all European language transliterations. Other Swedish examples can be found by looking through some of the categories at the bottom of Ibrahimović's article.) Sure, Đorđić has played for Western teams, but he has also played for European and Asian teams. It seems reasonable to use how his name would be spelt in Sweden as the title of the article, per WP:SERBIANNAMES. Supplementary information: Đorđić's Instagram profile spells his surname using diacritics. Rovingrobert (talk) 05:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. What the Swedish language does or who he works for has nothing to do with. The guideline tells us to follow what English-language sources do. See BBC. Gulangyu (talk) 06:00, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
  • @Gulangyu: What's the story with Ibra then? Does his article use diacritics because his Twitter account does? Rovingrobert (talk) 09:30, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - The only source I've ever seen spell his name as "Bojan Đorđić" is his Instagram account. However, his Twitter name (not the @ but the actual name he calls himself) is "Bojan Djordjic", and every other source I've ever seen spells it that way too. There may be an argument for the ć, but not the Đ. – PeeJay 07:49, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
  • What would your response be if I requested to move this page to Bojan Djordjić? Rovingrobert (talk) 11:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
    • I would still oppose, since there aren't any sources that include the ć. – PeeJay 12:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
      • @PeeJay2K3: If there aren't any sources that include the ć, then why did you say 'there may be an argument for the ć'? (You may find this interesting also.) Rovingrobert (talk) 08:17, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
        • One source doesn't outweigh hundreds of others that don't use the diacritics. – PeeJay 12:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
          • @PeeJay2K3: Fine. So, how would you answer my 'other' question? Rovingrobert (talk) 13:43, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
            • I don't need to. There's not enough sources to support any change of name, so that's that. – PeeJay 15:46, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
              • @PeeJay2K3: We'll see what consensus decides before we start making concrete statements, thanks. Rovingrobert (talk) 05:09, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
              • @PeeJay2K3: Fact is, we're not lapdogs to the media. Why do you think all of these Jr. and Sr. articles have recently been moved to commaless titles without a majority of sources' concurrence? Rovingrobert (talk) 12:18, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

• Comment while he is the son of Ranko Đorđić he moved to Sweden as a teen player. 100% of straightforward Serbian bios (minus one) follow WP:SERBIANNAMES but the consensus doesn't extend to those who have taken nationality overseas nor the Dj/Đ shift. In this case print WP:RS Google Books use the Swedified version. Sport blogs and websites often aren't reliable sources for diacritics, but do show consonant changes. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:37, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
  • @In ictu oculi: Right, so if ever someone takes nationality overseas their name is bound to have changed at some point? Rovingrobert (talk) 09:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose as the rationale seems round-about, and doesn't address the question of what English-language sources do for this subject. If a move is appropriate, making a better statement about why. Dicklyon (talk) 00:07, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
  • @Dicklyon: Fair 'nough. But there is so much contradiction from one biography to another, from one source to another. Rovingrobert (talk) 01:29, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

    This is often true, but there is also nothing wrong with that. Each article can stand on it's own. If most of the 100s of opera singer articles do things one way because only a handful of editors really care to give an opinion, yet opera singer articles like Mario Lanza and Pavarotti are different because they are well known and 100s of editors care... that's fine. As long as no wiki-policies are broken, consensus can keep things different with no real damage. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:31, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): True, but sometimes there is no consensus on the popular articles, particularly with this topic. And that in itself makes it difficult for me to "address the question of what English-language sources do for this subject", as User:Dicklyon would justifiably like me to. Rovingrobert (talk) 07:25, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page moves. GiantSnowman 13:31, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose - as above, and per English-language sources. GiantSnowman 13:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
• Comment - also, much later in this RM request it was added to look at WP:SERBIANNAMES... a tiny section of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Cyrillic). It could really throw viewers of this discussion off if they only look at that tiny section (like I did at first) and fail to notice three items at the top of the article: 1) It's not a policy or guideline or process of wikipedia... it's simply a proposal. 2) the proposal is talking about Cryllic... not English spellings. and 3)even if it were someday a guideline rather than a proposal, it says right off the bat "If a name has a conventional English spelling, that is used." So only "when no commonly accepted form" of the name can be found in English do we even check the rest of the proposal. Linking only to that section of the proposal is very misleading to our readers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:59, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): Why not use the Latin transliteration anyway? Rovingrobert (talk) 23:17, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose for lack of sourcing, but without prejudice should sourcing be provided, or arise at a later time in a later RM. We routinely include diacritics, when the subject uses them consistently regardless of language (e.g. in all their social media, etc.), when the subject uses them in their native language and in English-audience-targeted materials (e.g. English version of their website, etc.), and/or when general-audience, independent sources use them, in English, at least some of the time, and the subject also does so in their native language. What we don't do is a) drop diacritics because a sport governing body (or whatever) and some journalists can't be bothered to include them, or b) impose the "normal" diacritics-using form found in a native language on an individual who may not prefer these details being included in their name in English (and in other languages that don't natively use diacritics). Doing the latter is original research and PoV-pushing about what a name "should" or "must" be, and WP is not in a position to tell celebrities what their names "really are" in any particular context (cf. hundreds of American Hispanic actors who have dropped the diacritics in their names, at least as public figures, and non-American ones like Stana Katic who doesn't spell her surname Katič, either). By the same token, when we have evidence that the subject insists on the diacritics, or that they regularly use them (without making a statement about it) and least some English-language sources respect it, that is sufficient for WP to respect it as well, and not side with jingoistic publishers who are trying dumb down their names. We've been over this probably at least 100 times now already, and the WP consensus on these matters in RM after RM after RM is pretty clear. It's the same when it comes to non-Western name order: Do what the living subject prefers, and in absence of stated preference, do what the subject seems to do in English-language works, especially if all the RS do not ignore that choice. We would only override subject preference if no RS took it seriously. The problem with the current RM is that we cannot act either way on unsourced supposition.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  14:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Note For Administrative Closer

There was some accidental canvassing done on this topic to sway the !vote in favor of the move. I'm sure it was just not knowing the rules by the editor. I really doubt the notified editors would even give an opinion here once they saw they were canvassed, but just be aware of the situation. Fyunck(click) (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

---

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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bojan Djordjic. 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/20150416025638/http://www.indiansuperleague.com:80/chennaiyin-fc/squad/midfielder-10671-bojan-djordjic-playerprofile to http://www.indiansuperleague.com/chennaiyin-fc/squad/midfielder-10671-bojan-djordjic-playerprofile

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 08:45, 12 November 2016 (UTC)