Talk:Edmé-Antoine Durand

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

France Low‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Title[edit]

Ther seems to be a mistake in the article's title. It should be spelled 'Edme-Antoine Durand', since he died in 1835 and the spelling 'Edmé' only appeared around 1850. Againstdisinformation (talk) 04:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As this is an issue of WP:COMMONNAME, I've run references to him using Google Scholar (see this breakdown for Edmé-Antoine Durand, as opposed to the breakdown for Edme-Antoine Durand). Ngram Viewer showed no results for either. What this would indicate to me is that the WP:TITLE is not fixed as being dependent on any form of common usage, therefore my preference would be to eliminate the diacritic and use that as a redirect to the article under "Edme-Antoine Durand". This also takes into account the original spelling as being preferred. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:37, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On what do you base your claim that "Edmé" only appeared around 1850? I note that Edmé lists quite a few articles that use the acute accent over the final "e" for people who lived all or most of their lives before 1850.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:31, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing these other articles out. It may be the case that they are all mistaken about the name of people living before 1800, but not necessarily. I should not have said that the spelling 'Edmé' apppeared in 1850, since it was not a sudden phenomenon but rather a progressive one. However, 'Edme' is the original spelling and it is still considered to be the correct one nowadays (by purists). As for Durand, his first name is consistently spelled 'Edme-Antoine'. Durand is notable for the collection he offered to King Charles X and which is now at the Louvre museum. All references to it (that I know of) have the spelling 'Edme'. As for the other articles, I am going to investigate. Againstdisinformation (talk) 12:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The British Museum (who own part of his former collection) uses Edmé in its 487 +1 references to him in their online records.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All the authoritative French sources use 'Edme' [1], as they do for all the persons mentioned in the other articles. However, if the British Museum uses 'Edmé' we could leave it. Therefore, I suggest that either we leave things as they are, or we remove the diacritic everywhere. Againstdisinformation (talk) 01:06, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, COMMONNAME addresses the use in English. French nomenclature is irrelevant if it is overridden by an English norm. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I don't mind leaving it as it is, it was one of my two suggestions. Againstdisinformation (talk) 10:28, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the text, Joséphine de Beauharnais is referred to as 'Josephine Beauharnais'. This is a clear mistake, I could not find any reference to her in the sources, either French or English, that uses the form 'Josephine Beauharnais'. I have therefore corrected it. If you think I made a mistake, feel free to revert it. Againstdisinformation (talk) 11:05, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That convention was adopted due to the pre-existence of an article on her. You can find some arguments as to how the bio title was arrived at here. Unless there are strong case by case arguments for using a different naming convention, Wikipedia article titles should be wikilinked using the convention used in the corresponding Wikipedia article's name space (as is with all other subject matter). Bear in mind that there have been various constructs discussed per article title, therefore we maintain the conventions used in other articles for parity. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 01:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have done some more research. The scholarly literature seems to use 'Edme' consistently.[2] [3]. Againstdisinformation (talk) 11:29, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Toddy1:Any suggestion? Edme for all, or do we leave it as it is? I f we decide to make the change, I can provide the sources. Againstdisinformation (talk) 18:50, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Iryna Harpy: Toddy1 has not been online for the last 24h, so I ask you the same question. Againstdisinformation (talk) 13:11, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a process for this: Wikipedia:Requested moves. It is clear from research that a case can be made either way. Therefore an appropriate course of action is to propose the move using the method described at WP:RM#CM. Since you currently seem to thing that it should be moved to the version of the name with no accent, you should present the case using that process.

Your 11:29, 12 September 2015 post refers to two links:

Roman Art from the Louvre, by Cécile Giroire and Daniel Roger. This mentions Edmé-Antoine Durand on pages 30 and 273. Pages 30 and 273 call him "Edme-Antoine Durand". Note that page 27 refers to "Cécile", so the decision to use "Edme" rather than "Edmé" was not due to a belief that accents should not be used in English.
The Encyclopædia of Egypt during the Reign of the Mehemet Ali Dynasty 1798-1952, by Patrick Richard Carstens which refers to him as "Edme Antoine Durand" on page 215. (Note the lack of hyphen.)

Of course there are other books:

Photojournalism and the Origins of the French Writer House Museum (1881-1914), by Elizabeth Emery which refers to "Edmé-Antoine Durand" on page 17.
The Amasis Painter and his World, by Dietrich von Bothmer, which refers to "Edmé-Antoine Durand" on page 98.
The Restoration of Ancient Bronzes: Naples and Beyond, edited by Erik Risser and David Saunders, which refers to "Edmé-Antoine Durand" on the first page of chapter 7 (sorry the original does not have page numbers).

-- Toddy1 (talk) 16:12, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have done an impressive work. 'Edme' was used consistently, or at least predominantly, by French sources before the nineteenth century. Since around 1850 there is a wide variation in the French as well as the English sources. I think this stems from the fact that it is an exception to the rule that, in French, absent a diacritic, the vowel e is mute in the last syllable. Therefore, this seems unnatural and, I think, this is what led people to believe that there should be a diacritic. We can either be purists and use 'Edme', which is the spelling used in his life time (as well as for the people mentioned in other articles), or we can consider that both spellings are currently used and leave it at that. Either way,I have no objection. So I leave it to you to take the final decision. Againstdisinformation (talk) 19:46, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a change, it is best that you use the Wikipedia process.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I don't see any quick fix for this. In order to move the article, I'd suggest that you should propose renaming via WP:RM#TR giving your reasons as to the preference. I'm okay with it staying as is considering that the British Museum uses the diacritic version, so long as a redirect it created from "Edme-Antoine Durand" to this article. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:56, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]