 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Names edit
While Gevartius is known under many names (Dutch, English, Latin, but also e.g. French), we should be careful not to use names (as article title or in the article) which are not in use (at all or commonly). For example, the article was originally called "Joannes Gaspard Gevartius", which is a combination not used anywhere else[1][2]. And the article used the name "Johannes II Gaspar Gevartius", but since the father is called Jan and the son Jan Caspar, no numerals are used to distinguish them. No Gbooks hits for the numerical form, only two GBooks hits for the form without the numerical. The article currently uses "John Gaspar Gevartius"24 Gbooks hits and "Jan Caspar Gevaerts"222Gbooks hits as commonly used forms which have all the main elemens of the name (the Latin and Dutch surname, the Dutch and English first name, and both forms of his second name). The form "Caspard" for Caspar is only very rarely used[3] and should not be included here. In general, Caspar Gevartius gives the most results, followed by Gaspar Gevartius. Gaspard Gevartius is also in use (in French sources, so not really relevant here on enwiki), but Caspard Gevartius is unknown. Fram (talk) 08:24, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
- That is ridiculous the official names are the same, the are called the elder and the younger, so to amkes things easy, nr 1 and 2. I had no chanche to study his family but probably there might be more Jan, Joan or Johns. --Carolus (talk) 10:36, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
- Any evidence for any of this? We go with what is commonly used in reliable sources (preferably recent ones and ones in English), not with what we consider convenient. I find no evidence that they are called "the elder" and "the younger" (in English or Dutch), or even that they officially had the same name. They may be the seventh or seventeenth of the same name, but unless they are commonly referred with numbers or as "Elder" and "Younger", we should just refer to them by their name sa used in most sources. Please check WP:V, WP:RS, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:FULLNAME. Fram (talk) 10:47, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
- why don't you write it yourself, if you know it better every time? --Carolus (talk) 11:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
- If you want to write articles no one is ever going to improve, find some free website. On Wikipedia, a core principle is that everything yuo write may get corected, improved, rejected, ... and that when there is disagreement, we go with what reliable sources say. If you can't live with these principles, Wikipedia probably isn't the right site for you. You are welcome to contribute, but only if you can do so in a correct way. Fram (talk) 12:29, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
- why don't you write it yourself, if you know it better every time? --Carolus (talk) 11:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
- Any evidence for any of this? We go with what is commonly used in reliable sources (preferably recent ones and ones in English), not with what we consider convenient. I find no evidence that they are called "the elder" and "the younger" (in English or Dutch), or even that they officially had the same name. They may be the seventh or seventeenth of the same name, but unless they are commonly referred with numbers or as "Elder" and "Younger", we should just refer to them by their name sa used in most sources. Please check WP:V, WP:RS, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:FULLNAME. Fram (talk) 10:47, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
you do not get it do you? I have a problem with you! Not with wikipedia standarts, but hey, i will stop contributing. That is what you like anyway.--Carolus (talk) 13:28, 17 March 2017 (UTC)