 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1  Previous Next
|
|
Name Suffixes and commas |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: October 30, 2011 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Based on this rule Quote:
•Certain name standardizations are performed during contribution. e.g. John Smith Jr becomes John Smith, Jr.
Here he only states that ",Jr." as an example. I did some research and the normal convention of "Chic Ciccolini III" should be "Chic Ciccolini, III " from a grammatical perspective. But the grammar rules do state since it is a name a personal preference can be used. I am thinking that we should apply the grammatical rule of a comma since we are doing it for other suffixes like Jr and Sr. The Invelos rule does not state that as incorrect since it is just sshoeing those as examples. It would clean up common names and the CLT if we were forced to credit all name suffixes with a preceding comma. My belief is that the rule was made to remove the personal intent in order to arrive at data consistency so it would be appropriate to credit "Chic Ciccolini, III" instead of "Chic Ciccolini III" Thoughts? |
| | Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Scooter1836: Quote:
Based on this rule
Quote:
•Certain name standardizations are performed during contribution. e.g. John Smith Jr becomes John Smith, Jr.
Here he only states that ",Jr." as an example.
I did some research and the normal convention of "Chic Ciccolini III" should be "Chic Ciccolini, III " from a grammatical perspective.
But the grammar rules do state since it is a name a personal preference can be used.
I am thinking that we should apply the grammatical rule of a comma since we are doing it for other suffixes like Jr and Sr. The Invelos rule does not state that as incorrect since it is just sshoeing those as examples.
It would clean up common names and the CLT if we were forced to credit all name suffixes with a preceding comma.
My belief is that the rule was made to remove the personal intent in order to arrive at data consistency so it would be appropriate to credit "Chic Ciccolini, III" instead of "Chic Ciccolini III"
Thoughts? To clarify my example Chic Ciccolini III would look like Chic Ciccolini, III[Chic Ciccolini III] like we do with Jr., and Sr. and we would treat both as the same person in common name threads like we do with Jr., and Sr. |
| | Registered: December 27, 2009 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | In 40 years of collecting name data, from sports, music and film I would have to say that 90% who use Jr. or Sr. use a comma. But very rarely is a comma used before a Roman Numeral in names. |
| | Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ateo357: Quote:
In 40 years of collecting name data, from sports, music and film I would have to say that 90% who use Jr. or Sr. use a comma. But very rarely is a comma used before a Roman Numeral in names. That may be true on the preference point But with suffixes it seems we should have data consistency as well. To cut down on the common names. We should go one way or the other. Always enter a comma or no comma | | | | Last edited: by Scooter1836 |
| | Registered: October 6, 2008 | | Posts: 1,932 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Scooter1836: Quote:
...
I did some research and the normal convention of "Chic Ciccolini III" should be "Chic Ciccolini, III " from a grammatical perspective.... Where did you find that grammatical rule? |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | It isn't one I was ever taught. I was always taught comma with Jr or Sr... no comma with roman numerals. But things have changed since I been to school.
Other then the above comment... I will say when it comes to standardizing... it has to come from Ken... otherwise it is against the rules for using most commonly credited form. Just like the Jr/Sr standardizing came from Ken. | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | As far as I know, due to their personal nature, there are no grammatical rules for names. There are, however, rules for writing. This is from a Q & A at The Chicago Manual of Style website: Quote:
Q. John Smith Jr. or John Smith, Jr.? John Smith III or John Smith, III?
A. Traditionally, it would be John Smith, Jr., and John Smith III. But beginning with the fourteenth edition of The Chicago Manual of Style (1993), the recommendation is to use no commas in either case (see paragraph 6.47 of the sixteenth edition):
John Smith Jr.
But please note that within text, if you decide to use the more traditional comma before Jr. or Sr., the function of the comma is to set off these abbreviations, so an additional comma is needed after the abbreviation if the sentence continues (as in my first sentence above). As you can see, while it was traditional to include a comma before 'Jr.', it was never used for the 'III' suffix. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
| | Registered: October 30, 2011 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,870 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
As far as I know, due to their personal nature, there are no grammatical rules for names. There are, however, rules for writing. This is from a Q & A at The Chicago Manual of Style website:
Quote:
Q. John Smith Jr. or John Smith, Jr.? John Smith III or John Smith, III?
A. Traditionally, it would be John Smith, Jr., and John Smith III. But beginning with the fourteenth edition of The Chicago Manual of Style (1993), the recommendation is to use no commas in either case (see paragraph 6.47 of the sixteenth edition):
John Smith Jr.
But please note that within text, if you decide to use the more traditional comma before Jr. or Sr., the function of the comma is to set off these abbreviations, so an additional comma is needed after the abbreviation if the sentence continues (as in my first sentence above).
As you can see, while it was traditional to include a comma before 'Jr.', it was never used for the 'III' suffix. Well should we instead be changing those that have the comma to not having one? It seems to be the consensus so far that it should not. we do have several in the DB with the comma in the form of "Chic Ciccolini, III " That rule just states the Jr, Sr as examples. But we also use it to deal woth initials like "J. D. Smith[J.D. Smith]" So should we be converting "Chic Ciccolini, III" to "Chic Ciccolini IChic Ciccolini, III]" as a standard convention? My goal hers is to discuss the data consistency and I really don't care which convention is decided. Just we should be consistent with our suffixes (at least by type) | | | | Last edited: by Scooter1836 |
| | Registered: September 30, 2008 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 1,805 |
| | Posted: | | | | Just posted my thoughts in the common name thread, but right now I'd say no.
Roman numeral conversions aren't standardized with the contribution process like Jr. and Sr. names are. If we start doing it ourselves, we'll have some people doing it and some people not doing it, which will just cause a bigger mess. Until we hear something further, or Roman Numeral last names get standardized through the contribution process, we should just keep doing it the way we are now. The rules state "Certain name standardizations are performed during contribution" and these aren't part of those certain name standardizations. | | | | The night is calling. And it whispers to me soflty come and play. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Actually those are done by filters that Ken put in. Which is what the rules state... that they are standardized. Quote:
Certain name standardizations are performed during contribution. e.g. John Smith Jr becomes John Smith, Jr. See the part of the rule I put in bold. As the rules stands... any standardizations done has to be done by these filters. Anything else must be done per Credited As rules. I would vote against any contributions trying to standardize anything other then what the filters do. What needs to be done is see if Ken wants to add this to his standardization filters or not. | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | I might be mistaken but it is my understanding that invelos has filters built into the program for some of this data. Should that data even be brought into the discussion? I believe the following are standardized by invelos: "J. D. Smith[J.D. Smith]" Jr. or Jr Sr. or Sr Are there any others? Edit: I see Pete is faster than I am.  | | | | Last edited: by Kathy |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | I agree with Pete and Merrik. While I have no problem with a discussion or a poll, we can't decide on a convention as they can't be enforced. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |