This article is written in
Hong Kong English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
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 is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all
Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to
join this project.Hong KongWikipedia:WikiProject Hong KongTemplate:WikiProject Hong KongHong Kong articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all
LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the
project page or contribute to the
discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Requested move 10 December 2014
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Not moved for lack of consensus favoring the proposed move. Since
Ray Chan is already an occupied title,
WP:NATURALDIS also comes into play here, and favors using a natural variation of the name over the addition of a parenthetical.
bd2412T00:42, 24 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Raymond Chan Chi-chuen →
Ray Chan – I'm surprise I was not made aware of the previous move, even though I created this page. It all seems like someone is trying quietly make all these moves to this non-existing HK convention as that IP stalker is saying without notifying anyone. There's no standard for Hong Kong names nor there is a convention on Wikipedia, so we follow the Chinese convention or English convention. If you got a Hong Kong convention, show it to me. Raymond is an English name, therefore follows the English convention with only First and Last name in the title, in this case
Raymond Chan or
Ray Chan. If he's more notable by his Chinese name, then rename the title to
Chan Chi-chuenTheAvatar (
discuss–
?)
17:25, 10 December 2014 (UTC)reply
I strongly suggest you refactor your proposal here, which does not appear to
assume good faith on the part of George and is a
personal attack on the IP editor. Move requests are collected at a central location,
WP:RMCD, and it is not at all unusual for the same group of editors to be aware of and comment on the same requests. Please restrict your comments to the changes you would like to see to the titles of the articles in question.
Dekimasuよ!17:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)reply
Agreed. I'd like to see some proof beyond bing results (which don't work for me somehow). Are there official English-language (government) websites where he has an entry?
Hekerui (
talk)
18:33, 14 December 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Haven't you paid attention lately? Sources have used both names, but choosing one over the other makes searching for this article harder for average readers. "Raymond Chan (Hong Kong politician)" is a form of parenthetical disambiguation and has longer characters than the current title. Perhaps someone would rather drop out the parenthesis and act as if the article should be "Ray Chan" or "Raymond Chan". Speaking of Raymond Chan, there is
Raymond Chan, a Canadian politician. Sources have barely or rarely used
Ray Chan in referring to the HK politician. "Raymond Chan Hong Kong" has
100+ results, but there are many Raymond Wongs.
Current title and
Chinese name are easier searches. --
George Ho (
talk)
23:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)reply
By the way, this is a low-profile politician whom we are discussing here. He is neither
Jackie Chan nor
Chow Yun-fat nor
Donald Tsang. He is Raymond Chan Chi-chuen here, a politician whom many may not be familiar with, so we must take his level of notability so seriously, especially if you are concerned about the naming of the person. --
George Ho (
talk)
01:56, 11 December 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose, Speedy procedural close the last move was only recently closed. If the nominator wants to dispute the closure, he should use
WP:MRV. Flipflop move requests right after the last move request is bad process --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
06:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)reply
I understand the request resulted from frustration because the user was not contacted. To throw out "flipflop move requests" as if the user does this regularly is not necessary either, how about some deescalation, we're here to find a resolution for the best of the encyclopedia, no?
Hekerui (
talk)
18:33, 14 December 2014 (UTC)reply
The user already knows about the article alerts page at WP:HK, as the previous request would have shown up there, since he's talked about it at
WT:HK. The user has made a bunch of move requests to flipflop the result recent of moves. He's even called them "speedy moves" in other some of the other flipflop nominations, even though the move requests were not bold request nor did they appear at
WP:RMTR, they were open for longer than the standard open request period for
WP:RM discussions as standard move requests. --
67.70.35.44 (
talk)
10:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
I have just modified one external link on
Chan Chi-chuen. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}).
YAn editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: move as proposed. It appears the previous move happened with very little discussion, and there is a clear consensus to reverse that decision. (
non-admin closure)
Bradv17:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Chan Chi-chuen →
Raymond Chan Chi-chuen – The article was renamed as result of the
multi-page move. However, that discussion lacked participants. I was unaware of the moves. I propose reinsertion of "Raymond" into the title. Other sources still use "Raymond". Besides sources,
criteria, to which WP:COMMONNAMES refers, have not been discussed. Also, we put ourselves or sources before "general audience"/"readers". This needs proper discussion. More will be explained at the Discussion section.
George Ho (
talk)
21:56, 28 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Support – I also believe the name "Raymond Chan" is more commonly used in English media, and hence the proposed title would be more recognisable to most readers. Citobun (
talk)
05:32, 12 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Very few sources or less use "Ray Chan Chi-chuen", like
(again) HK Free Press. Multiple sources use "Raymond Chan Chi-chuen"; Google and Bing can prove that. I tried finding sources using just "Chan Chi-chuen" but found none. --
George Ho (
talk)
22:07, 28 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Criteria may be goals (not rules), but a title must generally meet all five criteria. My analysis:
Recognizability - The full name is recognizable. Sources adding "Chan Chi-chuen" also use "Raymond"; but made "Chan Chi-chuen" recognizable.
Conciseness - The proposed title is more concise than previous title "Raymond Chan (Hong Kong politician)". However, the present name is more concise.
Naturalness - "Chan Chi-chuen" might be the name for quicker search, but "Raymond" is also natural name to search for. Also, the person is lesser known to readers.
Precision - "Chan Chi-chuen" could be precise, but the present title is more precise. Also, it distinguishes from the other
Raymond Wong, the Canadian politician.
Meeting criteria isn't enough. In fact, "recognizability" is also insufficient. However, very little or no sources, independent of .gov.hk websites, abandoned "Raymond" in favor of "Chan Chi-chuen". The present title "Chan Chi-chuen" might meet all criteria, but
WP:COMMONNAMES would not accept the abandonment of Raymond.
WP:NC-ZH is insufficient; so are
WP:NCP. Another sufficient page would be
WP:NCUE; multiple English-language sources use "Raymond" and "Chan Chi-chuen" in similar articles. Default to "Raymond Chan Chi-chuen" instead. --
George Ho (
talk)
22:38, 28 November 2016 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Naming in infobox and linking to the article
Lmmnhn, I don't know why you insist on removing "Raymond" from every page linking to the article. The consensus at RM favored reinserting "Raymond" in the article title. --
George Ho (
talk)
12:01, 13 December 2016 (UTC)reply
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved. There is no consensus to overturn the previous move. It appears that it is somewhat unconventional to use both English and Chinese names together, but there does not appear to be consensus on an alternative at this time. (
non-admin closure)
Bradv20:17, 31 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Raymond Chan Chi-chuen → Chan Chi-chuen – I was the one who requested to change it to the previous title so I wonder why it was reverted back to the current title without being invited to the discussion until now. But my reasons for making the move is as stated before: There are some articles who use the "English name+Chinese family name+Chinese given name" but as you can see they are not the created by trained wikipedia editors who are familiar with the common practice. On the contrary, there are more examples which use just "English name+Chinese family name" or "Chinese family name+Chinese given name". If you see the legco.gov.hk you can see that Chan Chi-chuen goes by his Chinese name only. To be honest, although George Ho says there are many English sources use "Raymond Chan Chi-chuen" rather than "Chan Chi-chuen", but let me remind you that is the common practice for them to use the "English name+Chinese family name+Chinese given name" just to be clearer, such as "Donald Tsang Yam-kuen" instead of "Donald Tsang" or "Albert Ho Chun-yan" than "Albert Ho", but that would not make the basis for changing the title from "Donald Tsang" to "Donald Tsang Yam-kuen" or "Albert Ho" to "Albert Ho Chun-yan". So I would like to revert it back to what it was, that is "Chan Chi-chuen" instead of the long and unnecessary "Raymond Chan Chi-chuen".
Lmmnhn (
talk)
12:09, 13 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Oppose - This has gone far enough. I did invite you, but that was when no one showed up at the time. Multiple secondary sources use "Raymond Chan" and "Raymond Chan Chi-chuen". Official governmental website is not the only source to rely on at all.
George Ho (
talk)
12:17, 13 December 2016 (UTC); My bad. 07:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Also, the consensus in the above RM agrees with the current title. Even when you would have voted "oppose", the results would be the same. --
George Ho (
talk)
12:39, 13 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Yes you did, at 07:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC) but the move was made at 17:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC), 10 hours after your invitation in which other concerned editors and I would have very limited time to raise our objection. In all due respect, the editors who supported the moves are unfamiliar to me and not main contributors in the article or in Hong Kong biographies.
Lmmnhn (
talk)
12:05, 14 December 2016 (UTC)reply
"Raymond" or "Ray" - English-language news sources tend towards using Raymond or Ray rather than Chi-chuen as the primary form of his given name.
Deryck C.11:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)reply
I have no objection to change it to "Ray Chan" (like it was used to be before George Ho changed it) or "Raymond Chan (politician)" if that is the case. But the "English first name+Chinese family name+Chinese given name" format is just not the common practice and too redundant.
Lmmnhn (
talk)
11:57, 14 December 2016 (UTC)reply
I'm okay with both disambiguation schemes - Ray[|mond] Chan [(Hong Kong politician)|Chi-chuen] are all acceptable to me. If I have to prioritise I'd do 1st "Ray Chan (Hong Kong politician)", 2nd "Raymond Chan Chi-chuen".
Deryck C.22:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)reply
It appears that "Raymond Chan (Hong Kong politician)" or "Ray Chan (politician)" would be the most satisfactory solution for all parts.
Lmmnhn (
talk)
18:10, 15 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Agreed, it seems "Raymond Chan (Hong Kong politician)" seems to be the clearest way considering the way the name is most commonly rendered in HK Eng media
Kdm852 (
talk)
02:18, 16 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Before closing the discussion, I must notify this: the article is no longer move-protected. Also, there have been discussions before this one.
George Ho (
talk)
05:37, 18 December 2016 (UTC); edited 21:25, 20 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Oppose. It's possible that a case can be made for Raymond Chan or Ray Chan, disambiguated if necessary (this brings up other issues), but the proposal under discussion here has no legs whatsoever.
Andrewa (
talk)
19:59, 21 December 2016 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is similar to the naming conventions we follow for Singapore related articles. If the English name is widely used in the media, we use it as well - regardless of the legal names. For example, if I go by
this document on the LegCo website (see page 13, line 4),
Joshua Wong is actually called "Wong Chi-fung". But we don't use that - we use the common name used in English language sources. Over here, I see a lot of mentions for "Raymond Chan". As such, the article should stay where it is. --
Lemongirl942 (
talk)
14:41, 27 December 2016 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Currently, "Chan Chi-chuen" is used.Edit: However, previous revisions show frequent changes on the name. At the beginning,
Ray Chan Chi-chuen was used. Shortly, the name in the infobox changed to
Raymond Chan Chi-chuen. This year, the name changed to
Ray Chan and then to
Chan Chi-chuen.
Shall "Chan Chi-chuen", "Raymond Chan Chi-chuen" or "Raymond Chan" be the name in the infobox? If neither, what shall the name in the infobox be? Listed for RfC.
George Ho (
talk) 03:26, 2 January 2017 (UTC) Amended.
George Ho (
talk)
12:57, 17 January 2017 (UTC)reply
You advocated for the current name as you claimed this was his proper name according to reliable sources. Why would the infobox be different?
Bradv01:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Support Raymond Chan Chi-chuen or Raymond Chan (second choice) for the infobox. English name, family name, Chinese name is a format which sees reasonably common usage in Hong Kong. -
Ryk72'c.s.n.s.'23:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Prefer Raymond Chan Chi-chuen. Both Raymond and Chi-chuen are commonly used in English-language sources, often together like this. Raymond is more common but in an infobox it helps to have both given names. The Sia case isn't directly relevant because his stage name is Slow Beat!
Deryck C.11:42, 17 January 2017 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Requested move 4 November 2017
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
This was requested at
WP:RM/TR but as a quick perusal of this talk page will show, it is far from uncontroversial. Pinging
Lmmnhn so they are aware a discussion has been opened in their name.
Jenks24 (
talk)
06:19, 4 November 2017 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.