2. a)Some misspelled tags remaining: 'sophia coppola' is 'sofia coppola', 'wadja' is 'wajda', and 'stanislawa przbyszewska' is 'stanisława przybyszewska'.
b)Personally I would also like to see all names in the same format. This would make it easier for future posters to decide how to tag an entry dealing with a person who does not yet exist as a tag. It does make sense to have a 'camille desmoulins' tag because there is also a 'lucile desmoulins' tag and they are not the same topic, but then it would be logical to have 'maximilien robespierre' beside the 'augustin robespierre', too, as opposed to calling the former merely 'robespierre'. Though I do see how it would clash aesthetically with practically every other historical figure's being identified by last name only, members of the CSP especially. Anyhow. I would suggest either making the rule 'multiple individuals of the same last name are to be given their (best-known) first names in addition' or deciding that 'if multiple individuals carry the same name the most prominent one is to be listed by last name and all others to be distinguished by the addition of a first name' (might then be considered putting the last name first in the tag for the sake of an orderly index: 'desmoulins', 'desmoulins lucile'; 'robespierre', 'robespierre augustin', 'robespierre charlotte'), but at any rate to apply the same format to all as far as possible. (Or else: 'Last names except for women, juniors, and journalists!'.)
Similarly, the majority of historians or fictioneers are given both (and in the first name/last name order, which is why it could be bothersome to introduce the use of last name/first name as in the above scenario, since obviously the writers should then be adjusted, too), e. g. 'albert mathiez', 'hilary mantel', whereas Andrzej Wajda is only, well, 'wadja'. Same for 'godard'. (Speaking of whom, why have a tag for him and one for 'weekend'? No other individual work has its own tag.)
c)It can be argued that 'napoleon' is the most reasonably chosen tag for the individual in question because he is so widely known in the anglophone world under just that name, but shouldn't we either make him 'napoléon i' (like the Louises XVI and XVII) or 'napoléon bonaparte' - or even (depending on what is to be the rule re: multiple individuals of the same name - there might be other Bonapartes cropping up in discussion someday) just 'bonaparte'? What about particles? Why 'de gouges' but 'sade'?
d)And what is the rule/consensus regarding accents? There are accents on 'hébert', 'barère' et al, but there are none on 'napol[é]on', '[é]l[é]onore duplay', and '[é]lisabeth le bas'. For the former, see previous point; for the latter there is no reason.
e)The 'queries' tag is virtually pointless if it is as imprecise as that. Nobody is going to read through eighty-five queries to find out whether their own exists already or whether they happen to be able to help out with an unanswered one. Perhaps distinguish between: 'queries: facts' ('Where was X at the time Y did Z?', 'When did W meet X/come to Y/do Z?', 'What would have been the amount of W among X in Y in the year Z?', etc., questions pertaining to solid information presumed available somewhere), 'queries: citations' ('I read somewhere that W said X about Y to Z; is this true? If yes, what is the original source, and if no, who first spread the rumour?'), 'queries: theories' ('What are the possible explanations for/different theories about ... ?', 'Your take on ... ?', 'Has anyone else ever wondered if ... ?', questions that presumably cannot be answered definitely with reference to primary sources but are matters of interpretation/speculation, be it yours or that of someone you read - though some of these are hardly queries at all but discussions or polls), and 'queries: recommendations' ('What is a good book on Z?', 'Has anyone here read/seen Z? How is it?', 'I really want to cut my hair à la Collot d'Herbois, know any salons in southern Vermont that could pull it off?'). That narrows it down a little bit.
These are minor complaints and you've already spent hours sorting out the tags as it is, which is great, but the system would be even more useful if it were more ... systematic :D
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2010-02-04 04:20 pm (UTC)a)Some misspelled tags remaining: 'sophia coppola' is 'sofia coppola', 'wadja' is 'wajda', and 'stanislawa przbyszewska' is 'stanisława przybyszewska'.
b)Personally I would also like to see all names in the same format. This would make it easier for future posters to decide how to tag an entry dealing with a person who does not yet exist as a tag.
It does make sense to have a 'camille desmoulins' tag because there is also a 'lucile desmoulins' tag and they are not the same topic, but then it would be logical to have 'maximilien robespierre' beside the 'augustin robespierre', too, as opposed to calling the former merely 'robespierre'. Though I do see how it would clash aesthetically with practically every other historical figure's being identified by last name only, members of the CSP especially.
Anyhow. I would suggest either making the rule 'multiple individuals of the same last name are to be given their (best-known) first names in addition' or deciding that 'if multiple individuals carry the same name the most prominent one is to be listed by last name and all others to be distinguished by the addition of a first name' (might then be considered putting the last name first in the tag for the sake of an orderly index: 'desmoulins', 'desmoulins lucile'; 'robespierre', 'robespierre augustin', 'robespierre charlotte'), but at any rate to apply the same format to all as far as possible. (Or else: 'Last names except for women, juniors, and journalists!'.)
Similarly, the majority of historians or fictioneers are given both (and in the first name/last name order, which is why it could be bothersome to introduce the use of last name/first name as in the above scenario, since obviously the writers should then be adjusted, too), e. g. 'albert mathiez', 'hilary mantel', whereas Andrzej Wajda is only, well, 'wadja'. Same for 'godard'. (Speaking of whom, why have a tag for him and one for 'weekend'? No other individual work has its own tag.)
c)It can be argued that 'napoleon' is the most reasonably chosen tag for the individual in question because he is so widely known in the anglophone world under just that name, but shouldn't we either make him 'napoléon i' (like the Louises XVI and XVII) or 'napoléon bonaparte' - or even (depending on what is to be the rule re: multiple individuals of the same name - there might be other Bonapartes cropping up in discussion someday) just 'bonaparte'?
What about particles? Why 'de gouges' but 'sade'?
d)And what is the rule/consensus regarding accents? There are accents on 'hébert', 'barère' et al, but there are none on 'napol[é]on', '[é]l[é]onore duplay', and '[é]lisabeth le bas'. For the former, see previous point; for the latter there is no reason.
e)The 'queries' tag is virtually pointless if it is as imprecise as that. Nobody is going to read through eighty-five queries to find out whether their own exists already or whether they happen to be able to help out with an unanswered one.
Perhaps distinguish between:
'queries: facts' ('Where was X at the time Y did Z?', 'When did W meet X/come to Y/do Z?', 'What would have been the amount of W among X in Y in the year Z?', etc., questions pertaining to solid information presumed available somewhere),
'queries: citations' ('I read somewhere that W said X about Y to Z; is this true? If yes, what is the original source, and if no, who first spread the rumour?'),
'queries: theories' ('What are the possible explanations for/different theories about ... ?', 'Your take on ... ?', 'Has anyone else ever wondered if ... ?', questions that presumably cannot be answered definitely with reference to primary sources but are matters of interpretation/speculation, be it yours or that of someone you read - though some of these are hardly queries at all but discussions or polls),
and 'queries: recommendations' ('What is a good book on Z?', 'Has anyone here read/seen Z? How is it?', 'I really want to cut my hair à la Collot d'Herbois, know any salons in southern Vermont that could pull it off?').
That narrows it down a little bit.
These are minor complaints and you've already spent hours sorting out the tags as it is, which is great, but the system would be even more useful if it were more ... systematic :D