Forum:Middle names

Recently there has been a discussion about removing middle names from article titles, such as Tom Marvolo Riddle being changed to simply, 'Tom Riddle'. The original discussion can be found here. What does everyone think?-- 18:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

We need a "Naming convention's policy" so as to avoid any future problems. I suggest we use the same policy Wookiepedia and Wikipedia use, which is, In the case of Alias vs Real name to always use a person's given birth name excluding titles and middle names. I think this policy is the best one. –K.A.J•T•C•E• 18:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This is one of the topics that I had planned to vote on in IRC if we ever had a meeting. Personally I'm all for full names (allowing the most unique article name).  I'm a bit unsure about what to do with w/ maiden vs. married names. Also our policy is currently to use their "common" name -- its just not really written out what that means. -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 20:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree wiki DarkJedi613 and think that married names should also be in the article name. 22:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we should use the policy KAJ mentioned - birth name excluding titles and middle names. One, because there is precedent in other wikis. Two, because it doesn't clutter article names. And three, because using married names in some cases calls the character by a name they have never been referred to as in the books (e.g. Hermione Weasley, Luna Scamander, etc.). However, I wouldn't object to using married names when that is how the character is typically/always known (e.g. Molly Weasley, Alice Longbottom). Oread 22:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * In terms of married names...if a character is called by it then I would say use it, but if they're never called by it (Ginny Potter perhaps?) then don't use it. And I 100% agree about no titles in the article name. -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 03:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay - on the middle name issue: As long as there is uniformality across the wiki, I'm okay with either option. However, I will say that, by including middle names, we will clear up a lot of the James Potter I/James Potter II debates since one will be at James Sirius Potter. On the married name issue: married names should not be in the article name, but should be refered to as their full name in the article introduction and infobox. Titles: absolutely no titles in article names for characters whose full name is known. However, a special case should be made for certain articles like Mr. Lupin, Mrs. Lupin, etc. - Cavalier One ( Wizarding Wireless Network ) 09:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok I'm going to be bold and propose a policy. The benefits of this policy is that it doesnt leave room for argument, so there will be no future scrapping about what articles should be called what. It's mainly my own invention plus some elements of Wookiee and Wikipedia.

Naming Conventions Policy
. E.g. Tom Marvolo Riddle vs Lord Voldemort = Tom Riddle full bith name as known minus middle name.
 * Alias vs Real name. Always use a persons full birth name, exluding titles and middle names


 * Given name vs Nickname. always use a persons full given name. E.g. Ron Billius Weasley vs Ronald Billius Weasley = Ronald Weasley. Full given name minus middle name.


 * Maiden name vs Marital name. Unless a canocial source states that a character changed their name after marriage then the maiden name should be used. E.g. Ginerva Molly Weasley vs Ginerva Molly Potter = Giverva Weasley. Full given name minus middle name and no source refers to her as Potter so maiden name is used instead.

Thats it I think. No stone is left unturned if we adopted this policy it would completely remove the problem about naming arguments. - –K.A.J•T•C•E• 10:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that is better than it is now but we still should use middle names to make it the most unique and encyclopedic. Anyway according to that Ginny should be Potter since she was refered to as a Potter in the epilogue. 10:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Is she? Sorry I missed that, it should be Ginerva Potter then. But as for middle names, the article titles dont need to be unique they need to be enyclopedic and uniformed, adding middle names achieves the exact opposite by making them overly long and messy looking. As Oread said this is the precedent already well established on other wikis, middle names in article title clutter them up and make them look unprofessional. And as I ahve already said using middle names to establish between charcters who have the same name is rendered obsolete by the disambig pages. - –K.A.J•T•C•E• 11:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we should include middle names, and get rid of disambig pages.-- 12:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think no middle names, and any marraige that took place during or after the series should NOT change the name in the article (for example, it remains Fleur Delacour, Nymphadora Tonks, Hermione Granger, but it changes to Lily Potter). 12:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * How does middle names make it look unprofessional/unencyclopedic? I'd almost beg to argue the opposite. I like the rest of it -- although the wording of using a characters "full birth name" doesn't make sense to then say "exluding middle names".
 * Also one other comment about a "titles" -- do we all agree that "titles" are Mr., Dr., Mrs. Prof., etc. but not things like Jr. or Sr. or III, etc? (In other words I'm saying the Jr./Sr. should be included.)
 * The only stone left unturned is if two characters still have the same name...which would be handled by a disambiguation policy which I'm working on right now (its not up on any of my pages yet).
 * In terms of married names...if they're referred to it then it should be changed I think. The other option with married names is to do something like Ginerva Weasley Potter (but then you almost need to do that with like Molly Prewett Weasley...which is weird since she's never referred to as that). -- DarkJedi613 (Talk) 20:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your opinion Freakatone that is ignoring Canon just because they are more commonly known as a certain name and our policy says that Rowlings word is law. I agree with DarkJedi613 about full names including middle names being better. It just makes more sense. 05:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that Instead of having middle names, such as Tom Marvolo Riddle, instead, we could

put only the letter. For example, Tom Marvolo Riddle ~ Tom M. Riddle. Good Idea, Eh? HPZack147852369 19:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)