Talk:Huang Chia-hsin

Latest comment: 11 years ago by BDD in topic Move

Move

edit
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved, with a narrow majority in support backed by a guideline. --BDD (talk) 21:04, 14 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

Huang Chia-HsinHuang Chia-hsin – When using Wade–Giles, the second syllable of a given name should not be capitalised, see WP:NC-ZH#Romanization of names. Mohsen1248 (talk) 22:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC) Mohsen1248 (talk) 22:23, 31 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

  • Comment that is not generally true. In names, which use Wade-Giles, people will frequently capitalize the second syllable. While the prescribed form of Wade-Giles says not to do this, in practice, it is done. We should use the form used in the real world, not the form that is not used. So, do you have proof that this person spells it with a lowercase second syllable, or that the preponderance of sources do? This is not a historical figure, this is person playing now, in the 21st century, so it should be easy to see what the actual usage is, instead of the theoretical formulations that that guideline uses. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 03:56, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • comment the only reference this article is using uses "Chia Hsin Huang" so there isn't even a hyphen. Many Wade-Giles names don't feature hyphens in the real world, as you can see by checking phone books for regions with Chinese people who use Wade-Giles form names. This Facebook page of someone named "Chia-Hsin Huang" capitalizes the second syllable. As does the scholar that is listed in this bibliography or this Californian. So, clearly, the proposal needs support to show that the tennis player spells it lowercase, since many people with the same name do not. The only source in the article doesn't even use hyphens. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 03:59, 1 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Support. It's the correct format.--Cold Season (talk) 22:16, 12 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.