Biography Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Ice Hockey Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Darwinek has improperly moved this article without any discussion or evidence whatsoever. His tag team partner Husond has undone my reversion and threatened to block me for doing so.

As it stands now, there isn't even any evidence whatsoever that "Josef Vašíček" is a legitimate spelling of his name. And even if there were, that does NOT mean that it is the proper spelling to use in the article's name under our Wikipedia:Naming conventions.

In other words, as it stands now there isn't even any evidence to include a variant spelling in the introduction. Gene Nygaard 13:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, did I mention that Husond did not discuss his move, and did not provide any evidence in support of it, either? Gene Nygaard 13:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's your first evidence [1]. The article states the second evidence (born 12 September 1980 in Havlíčkův Brod, Czechoslovakia). And, should you be desperate for a third evidence, try Czech language. It's a good reading. --Húsönd 18:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Yahoo search? One that doesn't even try to remove the taint of Wikipedia? No attempt to filter out non-English usage? Get real.

That is of some utility in determining at variants exist. In other words, that it should be mentioned in the article's introduction. But you moved the article, without any discussion or even this minimal amount of evidence.

That is of some utility in determining frequency of usage, when we need to make the choice among alternatives for the one slot available for the article name. So look at this search and compare its 117,000 hits for "Josef Vasicek" with your paltry 2,100 hits for "Josef Vašíček". Your spelling probably beats out "Joseph Vasicek" in Yahoo hits for this particular person, but might not do so in English-language usage untainted by Wikipedia. That would take more analysis; it probably gets a higher percentage of other people with the same name than the other searches do.

Your "second evidence" is no evidence whatsoever, totally irrelevant. Remember Arpad Elo?? Sure you do. And in any case, you can get similar Yahoo search results for hockey players born in Canada or the United States who never had any diacritics in their names.

Your third evidence is no evidence at all. Interesting reading or not, it doesn't have a whole lot to do with the issue at hand; this is English Wikipedia, not Czech Wikipedia. Try English language. Gene Nygaard 12:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Joseph Vasicek variant has been used used in The Sporting News[2], sportzdomain.com[3], North Carolina State University[4], Videotron[5]], etc. Gene Nygaard 12:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These naming issues have been in debate for over a year. I'm glad an admin has come and used his powers to enforce his opinion. ccwaters 13:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admins do not use their "powers" to enforce their views on an edit dispute. Such behavior is not allowed. I'm editing this article as a regular editor.--Húsönd 13:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And you are threatening Gene with blocks for his involvement in the dispute. Whether those blocks are valid is another issue, but you need to choose what role you are taking in this issue. Be a impartial overseer or involved editor. Being both is a conflict. Wipe your hands of one of them. ccwaters 13:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Husond is acting exactly the same way here, as he did when he accused Jonathunder of wheel-warring for reverting his reversion of another of my reversions of an undiscussed, unreferenced move by Darwinek. In other words, he was clearly claiming there that he was acting in a role of administrator, policing my edits. He is clearly claiming to do so here, by threatening me with a block. So he needn't try to bullshit us here. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive213#Jonathunder's admin abuse. Gene Nygaard 13:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]