Template talk:Family name explanation

Option

I always remove given names after the first occurrence per WP:LASTNAME. But sometimes when it is not obvious to me which is the surname (and in these cases there would be no hatnote), I just leave it. I have thought there should be a tag for this that would put the article in Category:Article with ambiguous surnames for a language/culture expert to fix. What do you think about adding this to the template, maybe with a special value for the first parameter (like "?") ? MB 22:41, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

If you can show buy-in from WikiProjects, the MOS crew, or anyone that would actually pay attention to that category, then tracking can likely be added in. Primefac (talk) 22:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Isn't the issue a bit bigger though? Focussing on surnames leaves out a massive chunk of the world, where surnames do not exist, or exist but people are never referred to by their surname alone. Maybe we need some mechanism where a biography article would specify a preferred short name for the subject, the way we've got a way to specify the default sort order (which is often a related issue)? Though on the other hand, we should generally be able to follow the usage in the article text itself (or its sources). Regardless, any templates or tracking categories are better named in as general way as possible (Category:Biographies with unclear short name?). – Uanfala (talk) 00:58, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, there are other templates in Category:Hatnote templates for names that are not currently covered by this template. I'm still not sure if it would be easier to fold them into this one (basically creating a bunch of subtemplates depending on input) or have a few different "types" of category (e.g. family name, patronymic name, "other"). Primefac (talk) 01:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Primefac, I still think this would be useful. At Swastika Dutta, the title had two names, there was a surname implied by default sort, but in the article the other name was used as the "short" name. I was unsure which was the actual surname and did not want to guess. As an experiment, I tried this, which displayed the hatnote In this article, the surname is  ?.. Within a day, someone had updated the hatnote (hopefully correctly) and I went back and fixed the rest of the article to use the surname. Proof it can be effective. I think this should be formalized. MB 16:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Telugu name link

@Primefac: Would you link Telugu to Telugu name (Redirected to Indian name#Telugu) rather that people, inline with most others? -- Ab207 (talk) 06:29, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Sure. Primefac (talk) 11:52, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Primefac It seems to be linking to people. Could you verify? -- Ab207 (talk) 22:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I accidentally undid the change when I updated from the sandbox. I've changed it back now. Thanks. Primefac (talk) 01:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Primefac: Hey, Thank you for fixing it then but it seems to be linking to people again. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Gah, same sandbox-copy issue again. I'll sync them right now to avoid this problem in the future. Primefac (talk) 14:25, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Category:Hatnote templates for names

Pages in Category:Hatnote templates for names that have been folded in to the sandbox: but have not yet been merged via TFD or tested

• Template:Catalan name
• Template:Chinese name
• Template:Eastern Slavic name
• Template:Korean name
• Template:Manchu name
• Template:Mongolian name
• Template:Ni-Vanuatu name
• Template:Ottoman Turkish name
• Template:Spanish name
• Template:Toponymic name

Templates that are currently not used (given here just to keep track of things):

• Template:Matronymic name
• Template:Singaporean name

---

Create list. Primefac (talk) 17:37, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Testcases. Primefac (talk) 00:51, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

It looks like Template:Dinka name would be able to be folded in easily. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 19:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Thai name link

@Primefac: Could you please add support for Thai, with the target link being Thai name? Thanks. TJRC (talk) 00:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Done one better and made it default for any valid language. Primefac (talk) 00:51, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Nicely done. Working correctly at Sorn (singer). Thank you. TJRC (talk) 01:29, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Slavic forenames

Is there anything to be done for forenames? Because the Slavic name template notes transliteration of the family name, but sometimes in Slavic names the forename is transliterated as well (or instead). Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 22:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

I suppose something could be done about that, but {{Slavic name}} didn't deal with that so I didn't put it into this template. Primefac (talk) 01:53, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Stage name for Chinese name

I posted this over at Chinese name template but did not receive any response so I might as well post it here. Can Chinese name template include the usage of stage or pen name as well, such as in Korean name template? I need to use it for Ming Dao article. Lulusword (talk) 15:42, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

In theory, yes, but right now Chinese is hard-coded to output <family name> then <generation name> (if the second name is given). I think I would need to add in a |pen= parameter to switch the wording from "is a generation name" to "is a pen/stage name". Primefac (talk) 14:46, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Hong Kong name

Can we have subset for Hong Kong name? It is neither Chinese name or English name, but usually fused the two as a "full name" to save writing space. For example, Patrick Ho is his English name, "Ho Chi-ping" is the romanization of his Chinese name. It just common but weird way to write his full name as "Patrick Ho Chi-ping", and sometimes render as "Ho Chi-ping, Patrick".

It is an issue given Charles K. Kao (born 高錕 Kao Kuen), the "K" actually not the initial of his middle name, but initial of his Chinese given name "Kuen ". Matthew hk (talk) 19:34, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Sure. Will it basically be the same text as an existing "pre-programmed" language, and if not, how should it read? Primefac (talk) 14:43, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

May be wording like

"In this Hong Kong name, the family name is X. In accordance with Hong Kong custom, this person may either preferred to use Western style name Y or Chinese style name Z to refer themselves. "

Not sure it is ok or not. Matthew hk (talk) 23:41, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Depends. Is the point of the hatnote to say that they might go by either Y or Z, or should there be an indicated preference? Not knowing the "history" as well, I feel like it should say ...Hong Kong custom, their Western-style name is Y and their Chinese-style name is Z or something along those lines if there's no specific preference. If there is a preference, well, I'm not really sure the easiest way to deal with that. Primefac (talk) 00:43, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Primefac, May be yours wording is better. Since sometimes media use Western-style and Chinese-style name in interchange for the same person. Sometimes different newspapers has their own preference and does not agree on the same common name. Matthew hk (talk) 01:04, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Cool, I'll load that up. Primefac (talk) 01:05, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done. both names (i.e. |2= and |3=) are currently required for the message to display properly. Primefac (talk) 01:11, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Catalan name

Hello. The template {{Catalan name}} was merged here, but the content is slightly different from the original template. Could the mod2 parameter for Catalan be changed to the following, the original content of the pre-merger template ? Thanks, Girrit (talk) 16:50, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

| Catalan =  and the second or maternal family name is '' {{{2|}}}''; both are generally joined by the [[:wikt:i#Catalan|conjunction i]]

I'm not super-thrilled with having a wiktionary link there, mainly due to the SURPRISE aspect. Is there an enwiki link we could pipe that to? Primefac (talk) 17:17, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the swift edit! Nothing as precise and spot on as the Wiktionary link. We could link the word "conjunction" to Conjunction (grammar), but I don't really see the real value in that. Girrit (talk) 17:58, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

I just noticed an error (my mistake), there should be quotation marks around the final "i". Girrit (talk) 13:56, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Fixed. Primefac (talk) 14:05, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Chinese name

Are there any way to have filled |1= and |3= and but have |2= hidden? Since person like Qian Zhongshu and Zhan Tianyou has modern pinyin transliteration but also have notable old transliteration that were used in a lot of Western literature. Matthew hk (talk) 23:57, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

I could add a postscript along the lines of This name is sometimes transliterated as <3>. Primefac (talk) 00:45, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Congolese names

I have just created the article Democratic Republic of the Congo naming customs and was hoping to create a new version of this template for Congolese names. In terms of phrasing, I thought:

In this Congolese name, [Y] is a post-surname, not a surname.

Alternatively:

In this Congolese name, the surname is [X] and the post-surname is [Y].

Of course, "Congolese" is potentially controversial because people from the Republic of the Congo follow entirely different naming customs. What does everyone think? —Brigade Piron (talk) 09:06, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

The second option would be easier to code (and in my opinion more helpful). As far as the "lang" param, I think "Congolese" would be acceptable, since that's how people from the DRC are called (based on our articles on the matter). Primefac (talk) 11:52, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Primefac. My only reservation is that some of the articles concerned will be of individuals without a post-surname (Paul Lomami-Tshibamba or Laurent Kabila never took post-surnames) while we have generally tended to use first-names and surnames within article titles (cf. Joseph Kabila rather than Joseph Kabila Kabange). As this is something fairly important in any biographical article within its scope, I think it would be more helpful if the template would fit pretty much all Congolese biographies, irrespective of the current article title. —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:23, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, first, one doesn't need to use this template on a page. Second, article titles of subjects don't always match their full name (e.g. Cher, who is really Cherilyn Sarkisian). In other words, we probably wouldn't use this template on the pages you mention, and that's not a bad thing. Primefac (talk) 12:35, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

I see. Would you be willing to code the new template, Primefac? I am afraid I would not know where to start. —Brigade Piron (talk) 12:52, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 14:24, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks, Primefac. I am not sure that "family name" is the appropriate term though because it is not necessarily shared by members within the same family. Would it be possible to change it to "surname" which seems more usefully ambiguous? —Brigade Piron (talk) 15:24, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Technically it links to surname. Primefac (talk) 15:24, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Primefac, is it really not possible to change it? As I mentioned before, family name is a really inaccurate in this context.—Brigade Piron (talk) 12:16, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

All of the templates that were merged into this one used "family name", which is why I chose to use that term. If there is no opposition, I can avoid the piped link and just use surname. Primefac (talk) 14:02, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Placement

Where should this template go? Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout says hatnotes go before maintenance templates, but I always see this one after. GA-RT-22 (talk) 00:18, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 8 February 2021

Please add support for Burmese names. Suggested text:

In this Burmese name, the given name is {{{1}}}. There is no family name.

― Tartan357 ^Talk 03:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done Primefac (talk) 13:24, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Primefac, can you please update the template documentation as well? ― Tartan357 ^Talk 15:58, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, though for future reference the /doc isn't protected so anyone can update it. Primefac (talk) 16:28, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Primefac, thanks, I didn't realize that. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 16:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Can it use language codes?

Could this template be updated to use language codes ie. lang=es as well as lang=Spanish? Most other language-related templates allow use of language codes. Not an urgent thing, but a "nice to have". Joseph2302 (talk) 16:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Possibly, but it would involve an entirely different set of switch statements to go from shorthand to the full language. I'll give it some thought and sandbox it if I think it can be done, but no guarantees. Primefac (talk) 17:53, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I was just going to ask the same thing.

Could you at least add automatic descriptions for the parameters, so that we know that language codes do not work now?

--Error (talk) 19:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

I just added a line to the documentation noting this (because it kept tripping me up). —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 17:08, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

only Hong Kong version has "they"

The template includes the code

   In accordance with Hong Kong custom, their Western-style name is  and their Chinese-style name is 

To keep the wording consistent with what is used for the other name types, I suggest change to

   In accordance with Hong Kong custom, the Western-style name is  and the Chinese-style name is 

because some people are still uncomfortable with singular they, and we don't have to have that debate here if we simply refer to "the name" instead of "their name" as we do in all other name types except Hong Kong names. 79.65.232.245 (talk) 08:50, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Weird, didn't notice that discrepancy. Fixed. Primefac (talk) 12:14, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Eastern Slavic

In this name that follows Eastern Slavic naming customs, the patronymic is YY and the family name is ZZ.

The above template is misleading because it flat out makes the claim that a name is "Eastern Slavic" when it's merely using an "Eastern Slavic naming convention" (i.e. Russian and Soviet naming convention), which is what the former hatnote used to say. The name itself could be Turkic, North Caucasian, etc. This gives off a misleading perception to readers of both the name (if it's non-Slavic) and the person bearing it (if they are non-Slavic). This really needs to be looked into and modified per concern. —DA1 (talk) 05:32, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Primefac (talk) 13:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Spanish

Name order (paternal, maternal) is no longer fixed in some Spanish-speaking countries. Hat note could be rephrased.

191.116.129.215 (talk) 23:03, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

To what? Would just dropping the "first or" and "second or" parts suffice? Primefac (talk) 19:27, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Maybe another option would be useful. The usual combination for most Spanish people is still paternal surname first and maternal surname second, but the current template does not work with some young people as Malcom Adu Ares, who bears mother's surname first. --Javierme (talk) 14:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

In the sandbox, I've tried adding a switch esmf that flops the order of paternal and maternal surnames for Spanish (modeling it after how nd works for Dutch marital names). It looks like that could work ... Template:Family name hatnote/testcases. — Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 15:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Documentation

Since the shift over to this template, I've found it confusing to figure out how to use it with different languages, in part because the examples were incomplete and the languages supported wasn't clear to me. I've tried to rework the documentation so that it shows clearly the code to use and the text exported for each language. Hopefully this is clearer for others and not just me ... —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 17:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Germanic name

The way lang=Germanic works doesn't seem appropriate. Germanic names deals with old Germanic given names like Æthelwulf, not German names where you want to specify the surname is "Trappe" not "von Trappe" or vice versa. Simple fix is to replace Germanic name in the code with German name. I'm not seeing instances where a Germanic name hatnote is in use or needed. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 18:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

It's used for a Dutch, rather than German, name at Herman te Riele. I for one think using this template for names with "von" is overkill as it must be pretty common knowledge, but who knows. Nardog (talk) 21:17, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I went ahead and changed Germanic to Dutch on Herman te Riele. It might be overkill sometimes, but it's not uncommon for those sorts of prepositions to be treated as a full-fledged part of the surname in many cases (at least in U.S. English), take Chris Van Hollen for example. In any case, Germanic name (about Anglo-Saxon name elements, not anything about surnames) doesn't seem to have any relevance to this hatnote and it's more likely to get used by someone who's intending to note a Germanic language surname. I guess that might be an alternate solution: replace the link to Germanic name with Germanic languages. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 01:41, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Ijebu name

With the text displayed for lang=Ijebu, the "Y" in Yoruba name should be capitalized. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 18:48, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Nardog (talk) 21:09, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Don't use italic markup within the template

See Template_talk:Lang#Unmatched_quote_character for an example (now fixed) where this was causing an unmatched quote mark to be displayed, with a full explanation by Trappist the monk. – Fayenatic London 21:04, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Not sure that's anything other than a GIGO issue, mismatching formatting due to improper template use. Primefac (talk) 21:36, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Vietnamese name

The output for Vietnamese name, "In accordance with Vietnamese custom, this person should be referred to by the given name" is not true sometime. For example, Phan Bội Châu and Phan Chu Trinh, whose article use this template, are never referred to by their given name Châu or Trinh in Vietnamese, but by their family name Phan or their pen names Sào Nam and Tây Hồ/Hy Mã respectively. That's because they lived in an older generation where it is disrespectful to call someone of high status by their given name. Same reason why Hồ Chí Minh is called Hồ not Minh, Tôn Đức Thắng is called Tôn not Thắng.

And even in today Vietnam, you rarely see a person of high status referred to by their given name only. They are almost always referred to by their full name. Example: Googling "Tổng bí thư Nguyễn Phú Trọng" (General Secretary Nguyễn Phú Trọng) returns 3 million results, while "Tổng bí thư Trọng" (General Secretary Trọng) only returns 85,000 results, and almost all of them are from anti-VCP sites such as BBC, VOA, RFI, etc.

--KomradeRice (talk) 11:26, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

If a person is called by their surname, then the hatnote is not necessary, since it follows the traditional house/Wikipedia style of using the surname only. This template is for use when there is something unusual about the name in order to explain why the surname isn't the primary use case. Primefac (talk) 06:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

I share User:KomradeRice's concerns. User:Primefac notes that "If a person is called by their surname, then the hatnote is not necessary" is true in many cases, but in others (e.g. Chinese) the {{Family name}} hatnote is designed to tell the reader which name is the surname, i.e. the one used in the text of the article. The line "In accordance with Vietnamese custom, this person should be referred to by the given name" is not true in contexts like an encyclopedia article (as Vietnamese Wikipedia usage can attest to). —  AjaxSmack  02:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 13 October 2021

Change Germanic to German. The information at Germanic name deals with personal names and not family names, making the generic output of this template inappropriate for Germanic names. German name, on the other hand, lines up with the information conveyed through the hatnote. Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 12:24, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

To editor Carter (Tcr25): trying to sense the impact of this change. If for example, the hatnote is used with |lang=Germanic, and we change "Germanic" to "German", won't that break the hatnote? P.I. Ellsworth - ed. ^put'r there 00:37, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Paine Ellsworth, as best I can tell, it's used that way on nine pages and every one of them should point to German name (or maybe Dutch name). They all are using the hatnote to explain von, van, ter, or zur in the surname, not dithematic given names. There are two instances where the hatnote is used with |lang=German: both of them involve a name that mixes cultural traditions/practices in a way that might be better handled as text instead of with the hatnote. I'm not sure how the previous {{Template:Germanic name}} was used before it was folded into {{Template:Family name hatnote}}, but it wasn't mentioned specifically in any of the merge discussion. Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 01:51, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

To editor Carter (Tcr25): okay, then  done. Now you can fix these with |lang=German. P.I. Ellsworth - ed. ^put'r there 02:16, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Paine Ellsworth. I've updated all nine (most to German name, but the van ones to Dutch name). Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 02:32, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

It's my pleasure! Paine  02:39, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Lebanese names

In Lebanon, full names are as follows: first name + father's name + surname. Is there a way to adapt the template to include this? Nehme₁₄₉₉ 23:13, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

It depends, I suppose, on what your proposed hatnote would look like. Primefac (talk) 07:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Something to the effect of: In this Lebanese name, the father's name is Ali and the family name is Maatouk (for someone named Hassan Ali Maatouk, for e.g.) Nehme₁₄₉₉ 12:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Should be possible. I'll try to make some time this week to look into it. Primefac (talk) 21:31, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: Also non-Arabic names (such as Albanian) use this system. This is why I would prefer to have a "fathername" parameter, rather than having a specific parameter for Lebanon. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 11:35, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

For what it's worth, it doesn't really matter what we call the parameter; the switch statement itself defines what text gets used. This means if multiple languages/cultures use the same naming scheme (e.g. "father's name") it's just a matter of adding that name to the appropriate part of the switch statement. Primefac (talk) 11:38, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

@Primefac: Ok, I see. I'm not really well-versed in how the code of this template works, so I trust that you know what you're talking about. Let me know if/when you'll apply the changes to the template. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 11:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done, so {{fnh|Ali|Maatouk|lang=Lebanese}} gives

In this Lebanese name, the father's name is Ali and the family name is Maatouk.

Primefac (talk) 09:37, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! Nehme₁₄₉₉ 16:22, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Many other Arabic names work like this, though not all (Syrian doesn't, for example, while Palestinian has father's name and grandfather's name). A good idea would probably be to add parameters for "fathername=" and "grandfathername=", so that we can have a more general template: "In this name, ...", rather than "In this Lebanese Arabic name, ...". Nehme₁₄₉₉ 12:23, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

It might be worth linking to/looking at Arabic name in thinking about how to structure this; there's also {{Infobox Arabic name}}. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 12:46, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Those seem to refer to historical Arabic names. Lebanese names don't use "Teknonymic", "Epithets", "Toponymics", etc. I think adding two parameters for father's name and grandfather's name is a good idea, so that it can be catered to different naming systems in the Arab world (Lebanese uses father, Palestine father + grandfather, Egypt uses a range between father and great grandfather, etc.) Nehme₁₄₉₉ 12:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Spanish names with 3 names

Mireya Moscoso, Carmen Osbahr, Marcela Agoncillo, Hilaria Aguinaldo, Saturnina Hidalgo, María Cadilla, and María Teresa Uribe (also Carmela Eulate Sanjurjo and Ana Roque de Duprey which use a note) use a custom hatnote template for Spanish names with 3 names such as

This name uses Spanish naming customs: The first or paternal family name is Moscoso, the second or maternal family name is Rodríguez and the marital name is Arias.

What should be done with these? Gonnym (talk) 14:27, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

For the moment, they should probably be converted to use {{Spanish married name}} or potentially {{Spanish colonial name}}. Primefac (talk) 14:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

VPR discussion on method of surname clarification

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Method of surname clarification. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:29, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

Proposal: param to clarify compound first names with parts resembling family names

Consider Maria de los Reyes Romero Vilches (originally created, incorrectly, as Reyes Romero Vilches). In this Spanish name, the first or paternal surname is 'Romero' and the second or maternal family name is 'Vilches'. However, one can easily see how someone might confuse the function of 'Reyes', or wonder whether the initial template user missed one of the family names. I could see adding an optional named parameter |given name= (or, given, or first, or first name) to generate:

In this Spanish name, the first or paternal surname is Romero and the second or maternal family name is Vilches. The given name is Maria de los Reyes.

to clarify situations such as this one. It needn't be limited to Spanish surnames, and could be helpful in other cases. Add |gender=m if you want, to generate this for Zhou Enlai:

In this Chinese name, the family name is Zhou. His given name is Enlai.

Maybe better than |gender= would be |pronoun=value, to better support names of non-binary individuals using the correct pronoun in the hatnote. Maybe a first name param is not quite cricket, given the template name is "Family name hatnote", but I don't really see that as a problem, and we should probably add a redirect from Template:Ethnic name hatnote anyway, especially given that Template:Family name points somewhere entirely unrelated. Mathglot (talk) 20:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Or move this template to Ethnic name hatnote, which seems more descriptive and unique, and have the current name be a redirect. Mathglot (talk) 20:26, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Proposal: usurp redirect 'Template:Family_name'

Currently, Template:Family_name points to Template:Infobox name, which I find kind of ridiculous. There are only 18 inlinks to the redirect, and only one in article space (at Goodman (surname) ). The rest are a smattering of archived discussions in user talk, WP:talk, and some hatnotes specifically to unscramble the mess. Let's just fix Goodman (surname), and usurp the redirect. Mathglot (talk) 20:24, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

I'd support that. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 14:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Proposed merging: Template:Philippine name with Template:Family name hatnote

Good day everyone! I wrote a proposal to merge Template: Philippine name with Template: Family name hatnote for the reason to avoid confusion regarding the differences between the Philippine and the Template:Portuguese name templates as well to minimize for at least 2 variations of the above-mentioned template. Also, there's an alternate template written on my sandbox (User:RenRen070193/sandbox) and I tried to replace the current one but I was prohibited by the administrator of this particular form doing that particular template. RenRen070193 (talk) 01:14, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

Bulgarian

In this Bulgarian name, the patronymic is X and the family name is Y.

In this name that follows Eastern Slavic naming customs, the patronymic is X and the family name is Y.

The above template {{family name hatnote|X|Y|lang=Bulgarian}} doesn't display the second parameter ("Y") which is the surname and says surname instead of patronymic for the first one ("X"). It should be similar to the Eastern Slavic one. Anthony Whitaker (talk) 10:09, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

That's because Bulgarian isn't currently a pre-set value in this template. Should it be? Primefac (talk) 09:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Most articles where the subject is Bulgarian currently use the Eastern Slavic hatnote because it does the job but it's not accurate. Bulgaria is a South rather than Eastern Slavic country and the link in the hatnote redirects to an article explaining the naming customs of the ex-Soviet states. Either that should be changed or Bulgaria should get a separate hatnote (which I imagine would be less work). Anthony Whitaker (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Primefac, sorry for pinging, was just wondering if I could have an update on this. Thanks. Anthony Whitaker (talk) 11:47, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I went ahead and added it within the sandbox (test). The argument about South Slavic vs. Eastern Slavic makes it seem a reasonable addition. Only question would be if other South Slavic languages use the same sort of naming convention and if so would separate switches be needed? Spot checking Serbian name, Croatian name, and Macedonian onomastics (which is where Macedonian name redirects), it doesn't seem necessary. (There's no Bosnian name article.) —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I've implemented, sorry for the delay (it's been on my list but somewhat far-down the priority order). Primefac (talk) 12:47, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Primefac, I'll go through and update the 170 or so folk with WikiProject Bulgaria banners that link to Eastern Slavic naming customs. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 13:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Primefac, much appreciated! Anthony Whitaker (talk) 15:53, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Slowly working through them all list is here. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 16:04, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Done (along with checking against WikiProjects North Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, and Yugoslavia). There were a few instances where changing Eastern Slavic to Bulgarian looked like they'd raise additional concerns, so I didn't change them. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 12:22, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 7 December 2022

Could Chilean name be added to the template please? It should be the same format as Spanish name i.e " Chilean = and the second or maternal family name is ".--Obi2canibe (talk) 21:32, 7 December 2022 (UTC) Obi2canibe (talk) 21:32, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

 Completed – see [test cases]. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 06:34, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Edit request 14 December 2022

Description of suggested change: Tweak the language shown when only a single element is provided for a Mongolian name to make it shorter and more in line with the text of similar situations for other languages. (Implemented in the sandbox.)

Diff:

−

The article title contains neither a [[patronymic]] nor a [[surname|family name]].

+

There is neither a [[patronymic]] nor a [[surname|family name]].

—Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 16:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:20, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Efn

Any specific reason Template:efn Chinese name and Template:efn Spanish name exist when the standard one seems to work well? Kaffet i halsen (talk) 09:57, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Probably because it's easier to type out {{efn Chinese name|Lee}} than it is to type out {{efn|In this [[Chinese name]], the [[Chinese surname|family name]] is Lee.}}. Primefac (talk) 10:39, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Some people prefer endnotes/footnotes to hatnotes ... —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 14:58, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Kaffet i halsen, there are two main reasons to prefer footnotes over hatnotes. The first is emphasis — a hatnote is an extremely visible position, going above even the opening paragraph, so it's not an ideal spot for what is essentially a piece of trivia about naming practices that readers can pick up just by reading the article anyways. The second is emphasis. The purpose of hatnotes is to help readers locate a different article if the one they are at is not the one they're looking for, and that's what readers expect from them. Using them instead for surname clarification muddles that purpose, and means it's no longer safe for readers who know they've arrived at the correct article to ignore them.

Surname clarification was placed in hatnotes long ago since we basically didn't know where else to put it. There has been discussion more recently about shifting toward footnotes, and I would particularly encourage it for articles that have other hatnotes and/or already have footnotes, but it's hard to change a status quo that's been ingrained this long. Until that happens, we have both options.

Best, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:10, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I understand. Kaffet i halsen (talk) 07:57, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Request for "Macau" type of name request like "Hong Kong" name

Hi! I'm trying to get what one sees at Carrie Lam (Hong Kong-style western and Chinese names) displayed also at Edmund Ho (Macau-style western and Chinese names) but this does not seem to work. The responses "Macau" and "Macao" should have the same result.

Thank you, WhisperToMe (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

I've tried this in the sandbox and it looks like it's working – see [test cases]. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 15:49, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

@Tcr25: Good to know! Maybe I should ask a template editor to put it in if it wouldn't be controversial? WhisperToMe (talk) 22:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's a controversial or complicated one, so you could wait a little longer for someone to get around to it or go ahead and ping someone. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 01:25, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I meant to ask yesterday for the specific language that you wanted to be used, but got sidetracked. Sandboxing and testcases do just as well! Primefac (talk) 08:09, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Merging in efn templates

@Primefac, I've been thinking about improving the Category:Explanatory footnote name templates recently. I really like the consolidation you did of all the name clarification hatnotes, so I was wondering if it would be possible to use the same core for the footnote templates. I envision {{Family name footnote}}, which would reference the same core code for generating the text as this template, but just wrap it in a footnote rather than a hatnote.

It looks like the hatnote itself is currently in {{family name hatnote/core}}, though, so I'm not sure if there's a way to do that currently. Do you know if we might be able to shift anything around to make that possible? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:23, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Maybe? If one wanted to make the inputs and outputs identical, and only have the difference be between whether one is using {{hatnote}} or {{efn}}, then I suppose we could move this template to a mid-ground naming (e.g. "family name explanation" or somesuch) and have {{family name hatnote}} and {{family name footnote}} be wrappers for it, each passing a parameter that would switch whether we use hatnote or efn in the /core. Primefac (talk) 08:05, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Having a "family name explanation" that doesn't automatically invoke a hatnote or footnote actually works really well, since there are some pages, like Mao Zedong, where we have the explanation within a larger footnote, so all we want is the text. Currently that requires a workaround |textonly=yes parameter, but with your idea, the explanation template could just be invoked directly.

I've set things up in preparation, and it looks like all is working correctly at {{Family name hatnote/testcases}}. To lay it all out, {{Family name hatnote/sandbox}} is a wrapper which invokes {{Family name explanation/sandbox}}, which then invokes {{Family name explanation/core/sandbox}}. {{Family name footnote/sandbox}} works similarly, just invoking a footnote instead.

As a temporary safety measure, I made the core default to a hatnote rather than to plain text to ensure no loss of functionality during implementation. The first step will be to implement the code in the core and move it from {{family name hatnote/core}} to {{family name explanation/core}}. Then we can implement the wrapper code at {{family name hatnote}}. At that point, it'll be safe to remove (after testing to be sure) the temporary default in the core. The last step will be to fix the transclusions of the existing footnote templates to switch them to {{family name footnote}}.

Feel free to let me know if anything in that plan seems amiss. It'd be helpful if you could template-protect {{family name explanation}} preemptively, but if not it'll get triggered automatically soon after implementation. I'll send an invite to WT:ANTHROPONYMY in case anyone else wants to comment and wait a day or so, and then proceed if there are no issues. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Implemented the switch. Will now go through existing uses of the efn templates, and will update the documentation shortly. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:53, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Gee. Thanks for giving me time to give feedback and thoughts. Primefac (talk) 07:29, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh, apologies, I didn't know you were looking to give any as you didn't reply. Next time, just ask; I could've delayed the timing I laid out above. And post-implementation thoughts/feedback is still welcome. It looks like everything is working fine from what I've seen. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 14:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Between IRL work and the ArbCom case, I'm stretched a little thin, and 36 hours isn't exactly a long window to not reply. Not the end of the world, and if it works then more power to it. Primefac (talk) 08:06, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Macau type of name

Hi, with Macau names, the given name is not usually hyphenated. However, there appears to be an error with the output of this template in the article of Edmund Ho:

In this article, the surname is Ho. In accordance with Macau custom, the Western-style name is Edmund and the Chinese-style name is Hau Wah.

The Western-style name should be Edmund Ho, and the Chinese-style name should be Ho Hau Wah. WikiEditor50 (talk) 14:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

The hat note is set up based upon the inputs; for Edmund Ho, "Ho" isn't included in 2= or 3=, so it doesn't output. You could add "Ho" to the second and third fields to get the output you're looking for:

{{family name hatnote|1=[[He (surname)|Ho]]|2=Edmund Ho|3=Ho Hau Wah|lang=Macau}}

—Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 15:15, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. WikiEditor50 (talk) 15:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Extraneous links

I've noticed this to go against WP:HATEXTRA - there's links to multiple items. It's especially odd to see links to generic terms like surname, which goes against WP:OVERLINK. As it's been like this for many years, I'm wary of just going ahead and changing it. What would be the reason to keep the extraneous links? --Joy (talk) 14:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

WP:HATEXTRA seems to be in regards to disambiguation type hatnotes; this template is clarifying for the reader information within the article. "Surname" can seem generic, but not all varieties of English prefer that word over "last name" or "family name" and in some versions of the template a less-well-known term like "patronymic", "matronymic", or "toponymic" may be what's used and linked there, so to keep it parallel, retaining the link on surname seems appropriate to me. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 14:23, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

It's still front-loading a sea of blue links at the very top of the article. Even when it's just two of them, it deviates from standard practice, and I don't quite see the value. For example, Javier Solana shows at the top "In this Spanish name, the first or paternal surname is Solana and the second or maternal family name is de Madariaga. Francisco Javier Solana de Madariaga ..." I don't see why it's beneficial to the average reader to link surname after linking Spanish name that explains the exact same thing right there in the lead of that article. --Joy (talk) 15:33, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Tcr25: here's a courtesy ping in case you missed the above. --Joy (talk) 18:36, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi Joy, I disagree on the value. For me, it's about a quick scanning of how I should expect to see the person referred to in the article when I'm reading it, which isn't what's explained by a stating of the full name in the lede. I don't find it to disruptive or problematic. I also find it more helpful and less distracting than the footnote Sdkb prefers mostly because I have to actively look for the footnote to see what it says instead of skipping over the hatnote if I'm not interested in it. It might be reasonable to remove some of the linked terms in the hatnote or at least discourage people from linking the name elements, i.e., Chong (surname), but I still don't find it problematic or a violation of WP:HATEXTRA / WP:OVERLINK. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 13:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I followed the link to the first entry where this was used and found Chong Chieng Jen which starts with:

In this Chinese name, the family name is Chong (张).

Chong Chieng Jen (simplified Chinese: ...)

This is quite clearly a case of bad and excessive linking. We don't need to link both Chinese name and Chinese surname articles in quick succession, the average reader shouldn't be prompted to go read *three* other articles before reading the lead section of the biography. The pipe link to Zhang (surname) from Chong (张) is pretty close to a violation of WP:EGG as well. --Joy (talk) 18:15, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

That's not an issue with the template, per se, but it is an example of why the template should probably discourage editors from adding an additional link for a name. That said, I don't think it's a matter of prompting the average reader to look at three other articles before reading the page they're on, but instead a matter of providing convenient links for readers that might want/need them. For the average reader, there'd be no need to link New York City or Tokyo in the lede of an article, but that's a common practice. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 18:25, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure that it isn't an issue with the template. The invocation there is:

{{family name hatnote|[[Zhang (surname)|Chong (张)]]|lang=Chinese}}

So the lang=Chinese part somehow generated the first two links without the editor specifically doing it.

I'm fine with providing convenient links - as long as we do it in line with the WP:OVERLINK and WP:HAT guidelines. For example, the parts that say:

Too many links can make the lead hard to read. In technical articles that use uncommon terms, a higher-than-usual link density in the lead section may be necessary.

The purpose of a hatnote is to help readers locate a different article if the one they are at is not the one they're looking for.

Each additional link in the hatnote besides the ambiguous or confusable topic(s) makes it more difficult to find the desired target.

So if someone navigated to a biography of a Spanish or a Chinese person, that alone is not really by and large supposed to be a 'technical article', but the naming aspect can be too technical on average, written in a way that uses uncommon terms. So the reader is in the right place, they don't need to locate another article, but the link density should be increased in the lead section to help anyone interested in naming. There's nothing to support increasing link density *above* the lead section, which is instead explicitly discouraged. --Joy (talk) 08:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

The template used lang= to determine how the hatnote is phrased and to link to the relevant article on naming conventions. The linking of the surname is the editor's decision I was referring to. In that specific case, Chinese surname should probably be the link for "Chinese name" since the hatnote is about surnames. lang=Chinese Indonesian has a similar issue.

I hear that you feel this hatnote is a problem, but I don't see it. It's not a disambiguation hatnote, so the point quoted above about "makes it more difficult to find the desired target" doesn't apply. I see this hatnote as a bit of helpful info that sets the reader up for expectations of how the person will be referred to in the article. The links are there to help someone who might be unfamiliar with language/country/culture's the naming conventions. If there were no links in the hatnote, would the problem still exist for you? —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 12:03, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't think we agree in the premise - there is not supposed to be such thing as "not a disambiguation hatnote", conceptually. This is technically a hatnote but it breaks the rules on the purpose of what is otherwise conventionally known as hatnotes by readers and editors alike. --Joy (talk) 13:56, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

These sorts of family name hatnotes have been in use since well before July 2011 when a link to Category:Hatnote_templates_for_names was added to Template:Hatnote templates documentation (Special:Diff/439598624), which in turn was merged with Wikipedia:Hatnote in 2015 (Special:Diff/675361695). {{Family name hatnote}} consolidated a number of existing family name hatnotes into one template, but there are still more than a dozen other standalone hatnotes for helping to clear up how someone is referred to an article. It wasn't until 2020 that I see efforts to encourage the use of footnotes instead of hatnotes for these (Special:Diff/944015173). Looking deeper, it seems this was all discussed in 2011 with the same arguements on both sides (including use footnotes) without establishing a firm consensus. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. A year later, there was Wikipedia talk:Hatnote/Archive 4#Family name hatnotes but then much more recently there was Wikipedia talk:Hatnote/Archive 8#VPR discussion on method of surname clarification which was archived without anyone analyzing a conclusion? --Joy (talk) 19:54, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

In any event, my focus here was supposed to be on the overlinking, and that's one thing that I haven't seen in these discussions. I guess I'll have to move this to WT:HAT. --Joy (talk) 20:07, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Good question, @Joy. Name clarifications are not normal hatnotes, so the guidance at WP:HATNOTE doesn't apply particularly well. As Carter notes above, the guideline states that hatnotes are supposed to be for disambiguation, whereas this one is not, which is part of why I and some other editors consider family name hatnotes an improper use of hatnotes and prefer footnote name clarification instead. That said, I agree with Carter that "surname" might not be as generic a term as it might seem at first glance, and that the other items generally either meet the normal standard for linkability in text or are useful to have to keep everything parallel (so that we don't get drawn into messy debates about which languages are better known). {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 15:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

The order of these links implies that the average English reader needs to be told what a surname really is, before reading the rest of a biography, yet after reading the specific article on naming that is linked beforehand. The guidelines on how to use hatnotes for navigation should still apply, and this apparent spaghetti logic goes against the spirit of all of them. --Joy (talk) 15:36, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Sdkb: here's a courtesy ping in case you missed the above. --Joy (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I saw your comment and maintain my view. To expand on your frame, having the hatnote above the opening sentence implies that the average English reader needs to be told about naming practices before reading even the most fundamental details about the person from the first sentence. That doesn't make sense, which is why we should be shifting away from using hatnotes as name clarification. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:45, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I definitely agree with that. Should we try to use WP:TFD to try to repurpose this template? --Joy (talk) 12:22, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

We already have {{Family name footnote}}, which uses the same core ({{Family name explanation}}) as this one. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 14:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. The part about TfD that scares me is front-loading a TfD link on top of all these articles, it sounds maddeningly against the point of reducing the number of off-topic links. --Joy (talk) 17:57, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

What about Portuguese name

Are we going to try to fold Template:Portuguese name into this scheme? Mathglot (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Mongolian name patronymic name unknown

When lang=Mongolaian and the second parameter is not given, the template displays "There is neither a patronymic nor a family name." Is it too arbitrary to say so? Maybe the person does have a patronymic name, but is unknown to public. It would be more accurate to say "There is neither a patronymic nor a family name in the title of this page." -- 小林子冲 (talk) 21:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

No. Primefac (talk) 13:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Catalan name amended

The hatnote, when set for Catalan, used to include generally joined by the conjunction "i" (or similar) at the end, and at some point recently this was removed. Is there a reason for that? Kingsif (talk) 03:28, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

See Special:Diff/1194642276 by Mathglot. Primefac (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

• @Mathglot: Could this change be discussed? You say that Catalan surnames are Not really "generally" connected by i, and that changing the note to "sometimes" isn't worth it.
  Unless we found a survey of how Catalan people use their names in practice, it's hard to really know the first one (i.e. birth certificates and official documents only have a place to put first and second surnames, not one line to write both out with/without a conjunction, so it is tradition that marks whether it is used or not and by documents alone we can't really know, made harder by people typically using their first surname only in most situations).
  However, I think having something there is absolutely worth it, as otherwise the template reads the same as when set for Spanish, and this has already caused removal in favour of Spanish/just Spanish.
  In the case there, of Alexia Putellas, the first line of the article shows that the subject's surnames are written differently in the two languages, which would warrant both templates (and the note relating to Catalan). More than that, if only one template was to be used, the default selection should have been Catalan (place of birth, native and primary language, cultural identity, and the fact "putellas" is a Catalan word) - but the editor went with Spanish. This is one example, but as a case study, it shows that by not having some distinguishing measure in the template, it is liable to be removed in favour of just the Spanish one even when that's not appropriate (how I see that edit is, with both reading the same, editors with less knowledge of the languages may/are likely to assume it is simpler to just use Spanish as the broader one).
  It is neither possible nor appropriate to explain all the differences between Spanish/Catalan and why some surnames will be considered Catalan instead of/as well as Spanish in this template, but this one thing is something that warrants a mention and, I think, protects the use of it being set to Catalan. Kingsif (talk) 22:44, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

  The issue here is the question of the removal of generally joined by the conjunction "i" from the Catalan family name hatnote: was that the right decision, or not? (Other issues, like whether there should be separate entries for Spanish or Catalan should be raised separately.) Imho, it was the right decision, for two reasons:

  # it isn't appropriate in a hatnote / family name guidance note;

  # it isn't true.

  First things first, though: the hatnote, as User:Tcr25 said above, is

  a bit of helpful info that sets the reader up for expectations of how the person will be referred to in the article.

  Exactly so. It's so you know, for example, if Xi Jin Ping is Mr. Ping, or Mr. Jin Ping, or Mr. Xi, and other very basic information about a foreign name and its parts. The Catalan name notice is about the format of a name, not about statistics or comments about what the majority of Catalan names look like. For more information about Catalan names, including how common different forms are, readers can go to Catalan names; statistics or commentary about what usual forms they may have, is inappropriate for a hatnote/guidance note of this type. It should be as brief as possible, while still getting the basics of what's what in the different bits of text that are actually in the person's name, not introduce extraneous information that may be appropriate content for an article, but delays them getting to the article if stuffed into the hatnote. That is the most important reason, and is sufficient reason on its own not to include it.

  Nevertheless, there is another reason not to include it, namely: the claim is false. I did a non-random survey by checking three categories and one article, and here is what I found:

  * Category:20th-century Catalan people – 3 of 19 names have "i" in the name

  * Category:Catalan people stubs – 13/102

  * Category:Members of the Institute for Catalan Studies – 17/81

  * List of people from Catalonia – 69/394

  This data does not support the assertion about "i" in Catalan names. Admittedly, Wikipedia is not an ideal source for this kind of survey, but I doubt that a better, larger, randomized sample would discover different results. In any case, whether it would or wouldn't isn't really the point; the point is, the person adding content is the one that needs to support it, and the claim about "generally" is unsupported. But even if it were, it should still be excluded anyway as not pertinent to the note. Mathglot (talk) 01:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

  I acknowledged that it would be hard to know if "generally" is accurate, and my thoughts/comment weren't based on that. You mention it not being appropriate and not being true, but only explain the not being true part.

  My main point was, the removal of the text that made the Catalan hat note different to the Spanish one, appears to have caused an editor to remove the Catalan hat note inappropriately. If this is going to happen in other articles where the hat note should say and link to Catalan, but unaware editors see the templates as duplicates and remove the 'smaller' language, that's going to be a problem.

  But to address your thoughts, besides the fact it's probably more widespread than it looks in cases of the i just not being included in English and Spanish language sources, and so not making it onto Wikipedia, which we would need a better survey to know, I do think it is appropriate to include in the hat note or at least have as an option:

  In articles for people whose names do have i, the hat note explains that this word isn't (usually) a/part of a surname in itself, but that (where it is used) it is a Catalan custom to separate surnames with it - an explainer to prevent confusion when reading the full name at the start of the article compared to (usually) just the first surname throughout. It does serve the purpose you describe. Especially when thinking about the situation without it in the hat note: in articles where the i is used, a hat note that mentions the two names surrounding it but not the i will likely lead to unaware readers wondering what the i is – the hat note would not be serving its purpose if it failed to mention it. There's also the chance in those cases of readers, potentially, thinking the i in the article it is a typo and removing it, based on seeing the names but not the i in the hat note.

  And of course I am still concerned about Catalan names being inappropriately labelled Spanish if editors suddenly think there is no difference between the two just because the templates are no longer different, and would like to hear suggestions for remedying that if you don't think that an option to mention "the i isn't part of the surname but is part of the name" is reasonable. (I'm sure an "i=yes" optional parameter could be set up to stop it appearing on articles it isn't needed on.) Kingsif (talk) 02:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

  It sounds like you're trying to fix a problem of people failing to use it correctly, or rather, one person so far. If so, the problem isn't with the template, it's with the person who removed it in a way you disagree with, so go put the template back if you want and see if they (or anyone) complains. We can't go around "fixing" templates just because someone, some day, might use it wrong. If you think the template documentation is responsible for that one case, then feel free to update that part of the documentation (I wouldn't, especially for something that hasn't been demonstrated to be problematic, but it's one option). The template is not the place to go into details about Catalan name construction; that information already exists at Catalan names and is already linked from the template; no reason to duplicate it in the template.

Turns out that that it was the Catalan names section that made the original claim about "usually" that no doubt influenced the choice of wording here, and there's some history behind it. It was not sourced when first added, nor later. It has had an up-and-down history, having been inserted in 2004 as a categorical statement (not even softened by a "usually"), then got a "usually" in 2005, changed in 2008 to "usually (but not always)", then in 2009 to "sometimes", then a few months later back to "usually" again, where it remained, unsourced from beginning to end until I removed it.

The right way to handle this issue, imho, is to improve the Catalan names section, finding good sources and writing up a summary of what the truth of the matter is about Catalan names, including whatever relevant, sourced information can be found about the i conjunction. At that point, we're done, because that is the proper venue for detailed information about the construction of Catalan names. The template explains which name is the maternal one for a given biographical article, and which one is the paternal one; that is all it needs to do, and any additional info about the construction of Catalan names is unnecessary detail, which is already present elsewhere and one click away for anyone who wishes to delve further into it. Mathglot (talk) 03:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, inappropriate use/not use is one thing I am trying to solve, but so is the incompleteness of the hat note. As I said, when the i is used, the hat note failing to mention it could cause confusion. And that is a problem with the template. I also think that if editing the template can prevent inappropriate use/not use, why not do it - you have said you don't think the responsibility should be on the template, but I do, so I will look for solutions myself. Kingsif (talk) 14:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

In these three examples, which is better: #1, or #2?

• Dutch (for Vincent van Gogh) {{Family name explanation|van Gogh|Gogh|lang=Dutch}} :
  1. In this Dutch name, the surname is van Gogh, not Gogh.
  2. In this Dutch name, the surname is van Gogh, not Gogh. The prefix van is a Tussenvoegsel, a type of family name affix positioned between a person's given name and the main part of their family name.
• French (for Simone de Beauvoir) {{Family name explanation|Beauvoir|lang=French}} :
  1. In this French name, the surname is Beauvoir.
  2. In this French name, the surname is Beauvoir. The prefix de is an onomastic French particle of non-nobiliary origin, thus not considered part of the surname.
• Arabic (for Bashar al-Assad) {{Family name explanation|al-Assad|lang=Arabic}} :
  1. In this Arabic name, the surname is al-Assad.
  2. In this Arabic name, the surname is al-Assad. Although descended from a dynasty, in this name the 'al' is not the dynastic آل (Āl, as in Āl Ṣaʻūd) but the definite article ال, rendered 'al-' when part of the full name, or 'Al-' when the family name is used alone.

Number 1 is better in all three cases. There is no reason to include extraneous information that, while certainly very interesting, is already explained at the linked articles Dutch name, French name, and Arabic name. At the top of an article, it is just bloat, and redundant bloat at that. I would have no problem with adding a #Terminology or #Onomastics section to all three articles, in which the #2 version could be added, and expanded upon if desired. But it does not belong in a hatnote. Mathglot (talk) 23:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

None of those examples are directly comparable, and I'm sure you know it. I don't know if you've deliberately chosen the shortest family name hat notes and then expanded on them in the longest way possible just to be WP:POINTy, but it seems that way. For a real comparison, just compare the Spanish (current Catalan) and previous Catalan hat notes.
But we can look at the Dutch one and say that, for functional purposes, that is what we realistically need the Catalan one to do: say that the i counts, like the Dutch one is saying that the van counts. Comparatively, by removing the part about i entirely (rather than come up with a solution, which is all I am saying needs be done), you have turned the hat note into the Catalan equivalent of the Dutch one just saying "the main family name is Gogh". Which I'm sure you'll agree is just not helpful; the template not fulfilling its purpose. Kingsif (talk) 00:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

• @Primefac: Based on the responses, I feel it is clear that the user's understanding of what they removed from the hatnote is not sufficient for them to have made that unilateral edit, and I request that it be undone. Kingsif (talk) 01:03, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

The hatnote editing guideline says in its lead sentence:

"Hatnotes are short notes placed at the very top of a page or a section." (emphasis added)

That is only a guideline, and can be ignored if contradicted by policy, or for other compelling reasons. So far, I see no reason to violate it, and I haven't heard a rationale more persuasive than WP:IJDLI. That said, I am happy to abide by the results of an Rfc, should you choose to start one. Mathglot (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

You're really going to say I'm being IJDLI? I clearly only started this thread, after noticing the change before, when I saw an issue with use of the template - a little respect, please. I haven't said the hatnote needs to be long, but also, if you don't see issues stemming from your change as a "compelling reason", it is because you are choosing not to. I also think you're suggesting an RfC to prolong this process, when really you made an undiscussed unilateral edit (and it has been challenged, so if I could edit the template it would have been reverted to STATUSQUO) and there's no reason to not just come up with a better option in a less formal (or even unilateral again) manner.
Look, I think you're trying to improve the notes but it's not just about trimming, and I believe you know that. If you only wanted brevity and didn't care about clarity, you would've chopped every hatnote down to just "In this article the subject is referred to by the name [name]" without any of the Dutch "not Gogh", the Icelandic note about patronymics not being names, nor the Spanish/Portuguese/Catalan explanations of two surnames being distinct (when typically only the first is used; and I also think if your argument here is that the i is rarely used, why are we including both surnames in the first place). But you didn't, so you do care about clarity, hence I think you either do not know enough about Catalan to recognise the problem, or you don't want to admit you made an error. I'm not bothered either way, but there is going to be a better option to improve this hatnote, and that's all we need.
I have not said the hatnote needs to be the same as it was, or even long, just that the i should be mentioned when appropriate, and so far you haven't been forthcoming with a view on that or any suggestions - or forthcoming with any progress in discussion at all, only attempts at justifying your edit (something we don't need - we know why you did it, that doesn't make it the best edit, though).
I suggested adding an optional parameter before, and it does not need to be detailed, so I'll suggest a specific and ask just for your view on this, okay: how about an optional parameter that renders as "these are joined by i." (with no need for a wikilink if the Catalan name is already there)? Kingsif (talk) 21:47, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I think this thread has jumped the shark, is way too many words already, and has long since ceased to be productive.

...if you don't see issues stemming from your change as a "compelling reason", it is because you are choosing not to.

I reject your characterization; that is not what I am doing. If you sincerely believe that is the case, there are behavioral guidelines that constrain me (and all editors), and there are options open to you to address that.

I also think you're suggesting an RfC to prolong this process...

When editors appear to be deadlocked, a classic method of resolving the issue is to start an Rfc; I'm not sure I've ever heard of the idea of using an Rfc "to prolong the process" before; what would be gained, or what would the payoff be? To invest a whole lot more time on a topic I am heartily tired of, than I already have? As already stated, I would be fine with your starting an Rfc; I am also fine with any other method of dispute resolution you would favor. What I am not fine with, is carrying on with endless discussion of this that goes nowhere and resolves nothing, and I think I am about to bow out of the discussion in favor of whatever DR method you choose, and let things go as they may.

I have given this my best shot; I have spent a lot of time to explain how the words you wish to include were added without sourcing ages ago and have never been sourced for many years, neither here, nor in the Catalan names article along with diffs from history; I have pointed out that besides being unsourced, the assertion you wish to include is also false, and I have included four pieces of evidence for this. I have pointed out that even if it were true, which it is not, the correct place for that assertion is as explanatory detail in the article about Catalan names, not in a hatnote. I have tried hard to satisfy you and spent a lot of effort to include guideline and policy links that are applicable to the best of my ability, and at this point, I really have nothing new to add, other to say that I am tired of all this and I feel we are going around in circles. At this point, I don't think there is anything more to be gained by continuing the same way we have been, because it would inevitably be a rehash or repetition of what has already been said; this repetition has already started. Nevertheless, I realize you are not satisfied by any of my arguments and think they are all wrong; I get it. But the way forward to resolution, imho, is not by further argument with me; this is obviously deadlocked. WP:DR is the way, and it gives you various options; please choose one, and proceed in whatever manner you think best. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

You are the one contributing excessive words. As I said, all you have done is try to say why you made the edit. I knew why, I did not have an issue until a mainspace edit was made showing that your edit was detrimental. I have not said the previous wording should stand as you viciously continue to claim, but have asked you to contribute to a solution for improvement because I, unlike you, cannot unilaterally make changes to the template. You haven't tried to work with me at all, so, yes, it seems like you are wanting to fob this off or wear me down without any useful contributions. Please, try to be collaborative, especially when your WP:BOLD edit is challenged. Kingsif (talk) 12:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

In the interest of WP:TPEBOLD I have undone the edit in question. I will admit that I do not know enough about Catalan naming conventions to have any opinion on the matter, so it might be of use to cross-post a request for more eyes at relevant/related WikiProjects and/or WP:3O. Primefac (talk) 15:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

TPEBOLD is all well and good, but you should have read the thread a little more closely. By restoring unsourced (and false) information, you do our readers a disservice. It is not my responsibility to prove that this information is false (though I have already provided evidence for that above), it is the responsibility of the person wanting to keep that information to provide sourcing. TPEBOLD is a guideline, and upholding WP:VERIFIABILITY is policy; the bold move is restoring unsourced, incorrect information after it was removed once; that WP:BURDEN is now on you. Mathglot (talk) 16:06, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Discuss improvements or let improvements be made if you have no opinion on them. Kingsif (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Formal WP:CHALLENGE. Demonstrate that this information is verifiable. Mathglot (talk) 16:16, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

You are still being disingenuous - I have not once tried to argue that the text needs to remain the same, no need for "generally", and have in fact proposed making it an optional parameter for the articles where it is used. I believe you are trying to reframe the discussion to suit your own ends. I insist you stop being disruptive: either contribute meaningfully or don't at all.
But if you want evidence to counter your English-language category searching, I recommend doing a count of names in equivalent Catalan-language categories, where you will find your assertions of rarity quite easily disproven.
As I see it, this further demonstrates the need for a clarifying note, if readers of English Wikipedia see the i infrequently. Kingsif (talk) 16:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Responded to non-content issues at your talk page. Mathglot (talk) 09:08, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

As suggested, I posted this at WP:3O. I'm also fine with posting it at WikiProjects as well, or using any WP:DR method likely to be fruitful. Mathglot (talk) 02:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Third opinion

IOHANNVSVERVS (talk · contribs) wants to offer a third opinion. To assist with the process, editors are requested to summarize the dispute in a short sentence below.

Viewpoint by Kingsif

The dispute stems from @Mathglot: having removed the acknowledgement that Catalan surnames (when written in full) are joined by i in the language-specific surname hatnote – ostensibly because they think it is inaccurate based on an English-language Wikipedia search, and for brevity – and then another user removed the hatnote from an article where both it and the acknowledgement of i were relevant, because of the change.
While I have asked for suggestions on improving the hatnote that do not have to say the i is common and which can be shorter, or even optional (addressing the concerns), Mathglot has shunned any attempt at discussion and instead simply tried to defend why they made the original edit and say it should stand. I do not know why they have refused to discuss other options even when I have outlined one and asked them explicitly to respond, but at least they have sought 3O. Kingsif (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Viewpoint on hatnotes purpose - perhaps relevant

As I understand it, hatnote name templates serve two primary purposes: to identify the name an article subject will be identified as throughout the article, and to clarify for readers who have expectations of English names any differences. In the case of the Catalan name template, there is a likeness with Spanish (and others) in that people typically have two surnames, and that the father's is typically first and the one used in most scenarios - there is also the difference in that many Catalan names separate the two surnames (when the name is written in full) with i. That Spanish and English language sources may remove this does not take away from the fact that it exists; the lack in English naturally gives more reason for it needing to be acknowledged (not necessarily fully explained, but acknowledged) in the hatnote. In all the time the hatnote included the acknowledgement, I never saw (in 5+ years I would say) any misuse; within months of the change, there was a detrimental edit because of it. Kingsif (talk) 17:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Viewpoint by (Mathglot)

It's about whether the {{Family name hatnote}} that appears page-top on some biographies of Catalan people (category, list) should contain a clause explaining the meaning of the conjunction "i" seen in some Catalan names. (That's a summary of the content dispute; this is my first time with 3O; am I supposed to give an argument here in favor of some position? Mathglot (talk) 18:47, 23 March 2024 (UTC))

Thank you. The instruction (which is from a template) that "editors are requested to summarize the dispute in a short sentence below" is not clear. But yes, please briefly explain your position regarding the dispute. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Mathglot, that is not a true summary. I have not advocated for the hatnote to contain a clause explaining the meaning of the conjunction "i", nor has the hatnote ever contained an explanation of what i means (just that it is there) so that cannot be the dispute. With this established, are you now open to discussion? Kingsif (talk) 21:14, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Comment: I don't think I can resolve this dispute so I'll be relisting it at WP:Third opinion. Thanks to both editors for their summaries, I'm sure they will be useful for whoever does respond to this. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 20:26, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

IOHANNVSVERVS, thanks for your clarification; I'll know better for next time. Mathglot (talk) 20:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

3O Response: As it seems this is not a universal or even near-universal practice in Catalan names, I don't think the template should always or by default include it, as when the text appears where the convention is not used that could be confusing to the reader and in any case is unnecessary. However, is there any reason it would not be acceptable to include an optional parameter, defaulting to "no", which could be set to display the explanatory text on articles for people whose names do use this convention? It seems to me that might be the best solution. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:22, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

That could be a creative solution, if it were restricted to names which actually had the particle, it would make more sense. In that case, any description should be worded to apply solely to the name of the person in question, as opposed to making a general statement about other names not the topic of the article. I.e., the hatnote starts out: "In this Catalan name, ..." (iirc, all language names handled by the template start "In this...") and whatever we say about "i" should apply to *this* name, and not whatever might be true about other Catalan names. There might be a technical issue involved with implementing this, as Catalan is only one of a couple of dozen languages handled by the template, and the parameter set of the template doesn't currently have a place for it. That is not insurmountable, but raises the question of how much we want to explain in the hatnote, rather than in the biographical article, or at the linked term Catalan name where there is already a description of the makeup of Catalan names in general. I don't see a need to duplicate general information about Catalan names in the hatnote, but if there is consensus for that, I wouldn't stand in the way. However, that bit of extra information is an assertion of fact that would be subject to WP:V, and it seems more natural to add it to Catalan names where it could be explained and footnoted. As long as it is covered and footnoted there, I think one could argue that if consensus is to duplicate it in the hatnote, it wouldn't need to be sourced in the hatnote as well.

However, I think any decision to move in that direction would have to deal with the question of precedent; i.e., why duplicate into the hatnote information about name affixes or particles (such as i, von, van der, or de) that are better handled by the "LanguageName names" article, when the family name template does not do that for other languages? See examples above. Mathglot (talk) 20:29, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

In terms of precedent, there is no true comparative in terms of the actual type of particle, so we can only compare in terms of purpose. The Dutch hatnote already says "is van X, not X" - to make it clear that the extra word is included (when it could just say "is van X"). If it was possible to make a Catalan note say "is X i Y, not X Y", I would have suggested that, but there is the added complication of mentioning the two surname thing. If we aren't bothered with noting there are two surnames then the Catalan, Spanish, Portuguese etc. hatnotes can all be reduced to "In this [wikilink appropriate article] name, the surname is [complete surname]. The person is referred to as [name used in article]." That is a different discussion. But yeah, Dutch note and the info on two surnames already present, I believe sets a good precedent for including enough information in the hatnote so the complete surname is clear to a reader, which includes i.

Is it possible to add another optional parameter, as in the Dutch married name - or, and maybe this would take another discussion, we could split Catalan back out to its own hatnote to improve functionality. I know that in unusual cases I have had to use a custom hatnote because of how restrictive the 'all in one' hatnote is, but most users (especially those without great knowledge of surnames in the language) just slap on the generic hatnote even if it's wildly incorrect. So having optional parameters in the generic hatnote would encourage users to ask themselves if any of the options apply and either look it up or ask someone. Kingsif (talk) 20:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Technically speaking, any of those are implementable, but I think a wider consensus would be needed. Mathglot (talk) 20:54, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

If we both agree, and the 3O thinks it best, what is stopping it from just being done? Most edits to the template seem to be undiscussed or with an equally small consensus (having only looked through the last 100, at least). Kingsif (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

@Kingsif and Mathglot: Although I will not act as an additional 3O, I was thinking of a response as the original 3O before Seraphimblade graciously stepped in. I think brevity may be an important factor being that many Catalonians have a Spanish name in addition to a Catalan one, and many hatnotes can get crowded. A lengthy explanation is not needed; if more context is wanted, a reader can go to Catalan name. However, if there is no explanation of the Spanish conjunction y in a name, then I don't really see why there should be one in Catalan. Simply saying which name is paternal and which is maternal seems to work in Spanish. Any reference in the article is usually only done with the first last name, anyway. _signed, SpringProof ^talk 21:57, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) SpringProof, agree with brevity.

Kingsif, we may agree that it is implementable, but I don't know that we agree what should be implemented. What wording is being proposed? My basic view is that the {{Family name hatnote}} should identify the family name(s); other stuff should go somewhere else. It's a departure from previous practice to include non-names in the family name hatnote, but nothing wrong with moving in that direction if there's support for it but I do think it would need a wider consensus. As far as undiscussed edits, this template is the result of a difficult merger of dozens of individual language family name templates with different appearance and parameter sets, and it took some time to add them all in and shake out bugs or inconsistencies. Most of the edits were just a result of the development process; any others may simply have been minor or not generated any opposition. Mathglot (talk) 22:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

In response to SpringProof (no response required): minor note that nobody has asked for an explanation of i. And major note, the comparison with Spanish is not sensible as y has no official status (unlike i) and is most commonly used when one of the surnames itself has two parts, not to join two surnames, and so if a y is present (very rare) it will be written in one of the surnames.

Anyway, (so, to Mathglot), first I think it is probably important just as background to note that the i, where used, is technically part of the name. (That's why it's used.) But yes, we have not agreed upon a wording, just the principle. If we are not to make further changes to the hatnote(s), simply add an optional parameter, then I would propose the optional parameter should replace the sentence-end period and read , which are joined by i. Kingsif (talk) 23:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

What principle; not sure I understand. My preferred version of the template is the penultimate one, i.e., rev. 1208726024‎, which generated the following for Jordi Pujol:

In this Catalan name, the first or paternal surname is Pujol and the second or maternal family name is Soley.

However the current version, reinstituted per your request, shows the following for Jordi Pujol:

In this Catalan name, the first or paternal surname is Pujol and the second or maternal family name is Soley; both are generally joined by the conjunction "i".

and I am opposed to that. What are you proposing for the optional parameter, and what wording for this one for example? Mathglot (talk) 23:54, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

The principle of a change. So, my proposal for the optional parameter is in green in my previous comment (actually, change it to ; these at the start, it doesn't follow). In terms of Pujol, interesting choice. His name is Jordi Pujol i Soley, which even Spanish Wikipedia and Simple English Wikipedia have, and yet English Wikipedia does not. I am not going to get into other issues, but for a long time there have been concerted efforts to de-Catalan Wikipedia, especially in terms of Catalan politicians, and the fact the lead of his article only calls him Spanish despite being the president of Catalonia… yeah. So first I would update the name in the article, and then the note would read in full:

In this Catalan name, the first or paternal surname is Pujol and the second or maternal family name is Soley; these are joined by i.

Which is similar to the version you oppose, but without "generally". Of course, if the article was not updated, i.e. there was no i mentioned anywhere, the last clause would not be there (i.e. it would be the same as what you say is your preferred version) - the idea is to have the hatnotes be accurate and agree with the article.

But honestly, I wouldn't be opposed to removing the extra text about paternal/maternal, too, as it doesn't add anything functional that first/second hasn't made clear. And I would probably personally like another sentence at the end saying "In this article the surname is [common surname]." Kingsif (talk) 00:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

But why add these are joined by i, when that is stating the obvious just from looking at it? How is that an improvement over the briefer version without it? No additional information is conveyed. I would be opposed to removing paternal/maternal, as they are not always in the same order in different languages or cultures. Mathglot (talk) 02:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

I guess paternal/maternal is a different discussion, but it doesn't add anything useful IMO (that there are two surnames is the clarification). As for your objection that the i note is stating the obvious and that one can see it just from looking at [the name] — the same can be said of everything included in all of the hatnotes. You can look at the written surname and see, look, there is the name. The reason to include the note is, as I've said, because readers unfamiliar with Catalan names will not know if the i is a typo, if it's an attachment of the first/second surname, or whatever else. (As with the Dutch van note, it is to make clear "this belongs in the name" and to establish the relationship between it and the other elements.) Or; if a reader is somewhat familiar with how Catalan names are written they will already know that there are two surnames and these are joined by i — but the mere existence of the hatnote presumes that the average reader is not familiar. They will "just look" at two surnames and an i and not know what's going on at all, or make inaccurate assumptions based on their experience with English names. Why would we clarify some of the surname elements, but not all of them? The i is as much a part of the surname as any other element and should be clarified in the hatnote; the hatnote's main purpose is providing clarity, so there is no reason to exclude a clarifying note. Kingsif (talk) 02:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot: This is another side comment, but I have found the edit that changed Pujol's name here - vandal also changed the hatnote. An anti-Catalan vandal IP, evidently, in case the edit interests you. Kingsif (talk) 02:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

An aside to the discussion: it doesn't have everyone, but the online version of the Catalan Encyclopedia is probably the prime source to check surnames. Kingsif (talk) 02:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

You said,

the same can be said of everything included in all of the hatnotes. You can look at the written surname and see, look, there is the name.

No, that is the whole point of the hatnote: you cannot tell what is there without the hatnote, because you don't know which are given names and which are maternal or paternal surnames and that's why we need them. In Lee Kwan Yew, Syngman Rhee, Mao Tse Tung (Mao Zedong), Sérgio Vieira de Mello, or Mobutu Sese Seko, which parts are given names and which are surnames? Do they all even include a given name in the title? (Hint: one of them does not.) Without the hatnote, it's hard to tell. In the hatnote at Francesc Pi i Margall, unless you are familiar with Catalan naming conventions, you do need the hatnote to tell you that the first or paternal surname is Pi and the second or maternal family name is Margall, but you don't need the hatnote to tell you that they are joined by 'i', you can see that just by looking at the title (in this case) or at the first sentence (many other cases). Adding they are joined by 'i' doesn't tell you anything you can't see for yourself.

As far as explaining the "i" or worrying that it's a typo, the expression "In this Catalan name..." is linked to Catalan names where that is explained, so we don't need to duplicate that in the hatnote. But I have said all of this three or four times previously in this discussion. There have been a couple of interventions from two new editors, and I think both have been helpful with new ideas or by nudging the discussion in new directions, at least for a bit. But now it really seems like we are going around in circles and I don't feel any progress is being made. I think if you want to achieve consensus for this, what is needed is more points of view; either by getting WikiProjects involved, or maybe you'd like to start an Rfc. Mathglot (talk) 04:43, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

No, that is the whole point of the hatnote: you cannot tell what is there without the hatnote This was literally my point, if you didn't read the rest of my comment. I almost said the same verbatim. Please, read. We have a hatnote because we presume readers do not know how foreign language names are constructed. If we are presuming that, why would you then presume that just by looking at the name readers will know what the i is? Or that it's not worth mentioning because they can click on the language link - which, yeah, they could for any other element of the name and so the hatnote would entirely be redundant. I didn't want this to be long, but to address your thoughts that, in my view, are flawed (I thought that what I am about to say was a clear implication from my last comment, but making it fully clear now): if someone is only familiar with English surnames, they would most likely see "Francesc Pi i Margall" and not know what is what at all. So we tell them both Pi and Margall are surnames. That is something different to their expectations and it has not addressed every word there; with no knowledge of Catalan, they have no expectation or idea of what the i is or if it is supposed to be there. We cannot assume that a reader, who knows so little about the language to need to be told what the surnames are, will make any assumptions (however logical it seems to us) about the rest of the surname. For someone with no prior knowledge of Catalan names, the thought "oh so if those are the two separate surnames (a brand new concept), that random 'i' is clearly there to join them, makes sense" is not a natural thought pattern. Without mentioning it, we are leaving the reader with more questions. Does that make sense or do we have to repeat ourselves some more? Kingsif (talk) 14:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Circular. No progress. WikiProjects; other DR; Rfc. Mathglot (talk) 19:21, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot and Kingsif: Why don't just write: "In this Catalan name, the surname is X i Y"? Otherwise, the clause about i just reads as common sense to me. Somebody can see: "Oh, two last names joined by a vowel! How cool!" It is redundant with Catalan names being linked in any case. I agree with Mathglot. _signed, SpringProof ^talk 04:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I could accept that, but it's less than ideal because it really isn't the surname, it's the surnames (plural). The whole point of the {{family name hatnote}} for many languages is to identify what they are: paternal, maternal, patronymic, or something else. Mathglot (talk) 04:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mathglot and Kingsif: Okay, then I recommend no note at all. I.e., "In this Catalan name, the first surname is X and the second surname is Y." RfC might be warranted. _signed, SpringProof ^talk 05:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

RfC may be warranted, but I also think expertise needs to be considered. In any case, if we were to get into RfCs I have been considering starting one to ask if all family name hatnotes should include "In this article, the subject is referred to as X" for a long time and would prefer to address that before debating specific wording. Kingsif (talk) 21:45, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

As noted early on, I was fine with Mathglot's change and assumed logic would prevail until it didn't and misuse occurred. There are users who don't know enough and think they're helping by making edits to align names in articles with hatnotes, and those are just the ones editing Catalan topics in good faith. If we can be more clear, why not. Kingsif (talk) 21:41, 1 April 2024 (UTC)