Talk:Almenas
Add topicLatest comment: 8 months ago by ~2026-80954-2 in topic Singular
 | This set index article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Singular
[edit]User:Altenmann, can you please why we should deviate from the standard of using singular here as is the standard for indices concentrating variant renderings of a single surname? ~2026-80954-2 (talk) 14:55, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- These are two different surnames. --Altenmann >talk 18:03, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- User:Altenmann, then why are they at the same article? One of two things is true, either they are variants of the same surname, in which case the singular should be used, or they are different surnames in which case there should be two different indices. ~2026-80954-2 (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- The main criterion is convenience for a reader to search for a word. "Almenäs" may be spelt without diacritics. Therefore splitting the page into two is an unnecessary formalism. --Altenmann >talk 20:36, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- It depends, if you are going to have information about the name then splits are often done, which may be the intent here, to avoid mixing topics. Otherwise, even when the etymology is distinct, we use the singular to refer to a name with a discrete rendering regardless of varied origins, see for example Kanta (given name). ~2026-80954-2 (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- The splits are done when the list becomes too long. (Right now there is a discussion of this kind: Talk:Bogomil (name)). Your example of Kanta is invalid, because the English word is the same. Here we have two different words with different etymologies, so the use of singular looks ridiculous to me. We do have cases when the same word has several different etymologies, and we do write thusly: "<XXX> is a surname with several possible origins." --Altenmann >talk 21:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- User:Altenmann, exactly singular hence "is" as you provided in your last sentence. In fact, this case is especially ridiculous because even if the second etymology were not present at all, we would still have a name that is varyingly rendered with or without a diacritic so the proper intro is singular no matter what. ~2026-80954-2 (talk) 21:08, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- The splits are done when the list becomes too long. (Right now there is a discussion of this kind: Talk:Bogomil (name)). Your example of Kanta is invalid, because the English word is the same. Here we have two different words with different etymologies, so the use of singular looks ridiculous to me. We do have cases when the same word has several different etymologies, and we do write thusly: "<XXX> is a surname with several possible origins." --Altenmann >talk 21:04, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- It depends, if you are going to have information about the name then splits are often done, which may be the intent here, to avoid mixing topics. Otherwise, even when the etymology is distinct, we use the singular to refer to a name with a discrete rendering regardless of varied origins, see for example Kanta (given name). ~2026-80954-2 (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- The main criterion is convenience for a reader to search for a word. "Almenäs" may be spelt without diacritics. Therefore splitting the page into two is an unnecessary formalism. --Altenmann >talk 20:36, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
- User:Altenmann, then why are they at the same article? One of two things is true, either they are variants of the same surname, in which case the singular should be used, or they are different surnames in which case there should be two different indices. ~2026-80954-2 (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2026 (UTC)