Talk:House of Aviz
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
House of Aviz is part of WikiProject Portugal, a project to improve all Portugal-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Portugal-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. |
|
Portugal To-do:
|
|
 |
House of Aviz is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
|
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:
|
|||
[edit] Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 13:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- House of Aviz → House of Avis — The current spelling of this dinasty is "Avis". "Aviz" is the Portuguese archaic spelling. Dantadd 13:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- Add # '''Support''' or # '''Oppose''' on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.
- Oppose. - per WP:UE and WP:COMMONNAME. --SigPig |SEND - OVER 17:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit] Discussion
I see no discussion here. Two editors expressed their opinion and that is it? The End? All Portuguese monarchs, at the time they've lived, had names written in the old spelling, but nowadays this is just a matter of paleography, and the names are written with the current spelling, here on the English Wikipedia and elsewhere. Therefore, it makes no sense to keep "Aviz" with the old spelling and the name of the monarchs in the current spelling. It's just not coherent. But I won't lose my time with this en.wiki bureaucracy. Dantadd 21:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- "Fixing" names to a spelling used nowadays is a bad Portuguese habit, and it's good that such practice isn't often observed on the English Wikipedia. Names may change, but people who lived in another time have no fault that their names suffered variations in the future. For the sake of accuracy, it's good that records are kept immutable through time. It has nothing to do with wp-en bureaucracy, we just have different standards here.--Húsönd 00:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Convert to the current spelling is a very good habit, for the sake of the language and literacy, and it's even prescribed by law. But you're missing the point: nobody wants to erase old records and correct them. We are talking about using the current and correct spelling in secondary and tertiary sources. Wikipedia is not a primary record and it's not a transcription of original records. Dantadd 13:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sourced it is, variants occur (both Aviz and Avis are verifiable). Undeniable however is the fact that "Aviz" was the name of the royal family at its time, not Avis. If the surname "Einstein" starts writing as "Heinstein" in the future, it doesn't seem wise to change the article about Albert Einstein to a most inaccurate Albert Heinstein just to conform to an unrelated etymological evolution.--Húsönd 17:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: The names of royal houses are different. It is much like a territorial designation, the spelling can change over time and the use is retroactive. Charles 18:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Sourced it is, variants occur (both Aviz and Avis are verifiable). Undeniable however is the fact that "Aviz" was the name of the royal family at its time, not Avis. If the surname "Einstein" starts writing as "Heinstein" in the future, it doesn't seem wise to change the article about Albert Einstein to a most inaccurate Albert Heinstein just to conform to an unrelated etymological evolution.--Húsönd 17:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Convert to the current spelling is a very good habit, for the sake of the language and literacy, and it's even prescribed by law. But you're missing the point: nobody wants to erase old records and correct them. We are talking about using the current and correct spelling in secondary and tertiary sources. Wikipedia is not a primary record and it's not a transcription of original records. Dantadd 13:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Of course the use is retroactive. If it was not like that we would still write "Affõso Hẽriques" for Afonso Henriques or "Ioam", "Joham", "Joam" etc. for João I etc etc. Wikipedia is not an exercise of paleography and it's not the historical record itself. Dantadd 22:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Most of the other languages used "Avis", as noted down the left side of the page. Charles 10:00, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
