This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Further to the recent editing of the James Caan page, I thought it might be a good idea to discuss his former name here. This first appeared on the page on 1 April 2008 as "Khan", but starting, as far as I can tell, in July 2009, a number of edits have changed this to "Khant" (his former name's also been changed to other things which are clearly vandalism, such as "Sercan Kobazoglu").
Well I've just done some checking on Google, and "James Caan" "Nazim Khan" currently returns 110 entries, including interviews with several national newspapers (the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph). "James Caan" "Nazim Khant", on the other hand, returns only 6, including the Wikipedia page itself, a couple of message boards, and a website called yourhiddenpotential.co.uk. This website has recently been added to the James Caan page as a link, but it's very obscure relative to the national newspapers, the article on James is quite poorly written, it was only posted on 15 August 2009 (at a time when the Wikipedia page said "Khant"), and the quote containing "Khant" is clearly taken from the Daily Mail interview, which says "Khan".
Therefore I think that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of James's former name being Khan, but of course I'd welcome other people's thoughts about this.
Stephen 86.151.52.236 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC).
These edits are all being made by single user Macgrissom, who has been doing similar things on two other articles as well. Being basically a wikipedian outsider, I'm still trying to figure out how to deal with it. -Graptor 208.102.243.30 ( talk) 12:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/james-caan-a-dragon-in-his-den-1779143.htm is a reputable reference from a well known paper, why is this being removed? Macgrissom ( talk) 12:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I've updated the article. Given the quote in the Name Change section, which comes from an article by Caan himself, we can safely conclude that all references to "Khant" are wrong. (We might also speculate that those references derive from this being wrong in the Wikipedia entry for a while, but that's beside the point.) Rd232 talk 11:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I've changed the page completely. Comments welcome. Mainly more content and structuring. 81.144.198.18 ( talk) 10:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Text and/or other creative content from Talk:James Caan (disambiguation) was copied or moved into Talk:James Caan (entrepreneur) with [315358081 this edit]. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Having the actor as anything but primary topic has been the subject of no discussion. The entrep. seems to have 1/10 the G-hits, and many of those may reflect such self-promotion as what sounds like a reality show. Also it may be relevant that he chose not just to respell the (well-known and honored) name "Khan", but to chose the spelling and new (apparently arbitrary -- James/Jacob and Nadim seem to show no relationship) given name that would cause most confusion and evoke perhaps the most famous remotely related contemporary -- granted, unfairly improving his notability does not detract from his notability in our eyes, but it seems likely that he has created some apparent notability (e.g. GHits created by our and others' disambiguations of the name) exceeding his real notability.
I don't want to take the time to do the two moves that will put the actor back as the primary topic tonite, but the closest thing to discussion has been the unsigned IP's "What about James Caan, entrepreneur. Wikipedia doesnt seem to have a page on him. www.jamescaan.co.uk " comment, and the hundreds of lks to the actor should neither be left as lks to the Dab, nor changed without sound discussion. I think reverting the move pending further discussion is fully justified.
--
Jerzy•
t
03:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
how can we change the bday in the info-box which doesn't match the text. edit mode doesn't seem to work Eugene-elgato ( talk) 18:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
One reason I restored it is because Cann specifically picked that name to encourage confusion with the actor. It's not as if they just both happened to wind up with the same name. Gigs ( talk) 18:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
This article is a shambles and a real embarrassment to WP. I have taken some small steps towards improving it but a great deal more work is still required. Rangoon11 ( talk) 12:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Agree..too much irrelevant information, seems more like a sale pitch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.60.30.169 ( talk) 21:15, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Further to the recent editing of the James Caan page, I thought it might be a good idea to discuss his former name here. This first appeared on the page on 1 April 2008 as "Khan", but starting, as far as I can tell, in July 2009, a number of edits have changed this to "Khant" (his former name's also been changed to other things which are clearly vandalism, such as "Sercan Kobazoglu").
Well I've just done some checking on Google, and "James Caan" "Nazim Khan" currently returns 110 entries, including interviews with several national newspapers (the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph). "James Caan" "Nazim Khant", on the other hand, returns only 6, including the Wikipedia page itself, a couple of message boards, and a website called yourhiddenpotential.co.uk. This website has recently been added to the James Caan page as a link, but it's very obscure relative to the national newspapers, the article on James is quite poorly written, it was only posted on 15 August 2009 (at a time when the Wikipedia page said "Khant"), and the quote containing "Khant" is clearly taken from the Daily Mail interview, which says "Khan".
Therefore I think that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of James's former name being Khan, but of course I'd welcome other people's thoughts about this.
Stephen 86.151.52.236 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC).
These edits are all being made by single user Macgrissom, who has been doing similar things on two other articles as well. Being basically a wikipedian outsider, I'm still trying to figure out how to deal with it. -Graptor 208.102.243.30 ( talk) 12:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/james-caan-a-dragon-in-his-den-1779143.htm is a reputable reference from a well known paper, why is this being removed? Macgrissom ( talk) 12:18, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I've updated the article. Given the quote in the Name Change section, which comes from an article by Caan himself, we can safely conclude that all references to "Khant" are wrong. (We might also speculate that those references derive from this being wrong in the Wikipedia entry for a while, but that's beside the point.) Rd232 talk 11:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I've changed the page completely. Comments welcome. Mainly more content and structuring. 81.144.198.18 ( talk) 10:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Text and/or other creative content from Talk:James Caan (disambiguation) was copied or moved into Talk:James Caan (entrepreneur) with [315358081 this edit]. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Having the actor as anything but primary topic has been the subject of no discussion. The entrep. seems to have 1/10 the G-hits, and many of those may reflect such self-promotion as what sounds like a reality show. Also it may be relevant that he chose not just to respell the (well-known and honored) name "Khan", but to chose the spelling and new (apparently arbitrary -- James/Jacob and Nadim seem to show no relationship) given name that would cause most confusion and evoke perhaps the most famous remotely related contemporary -- granted, unfairly improving his notability does not detract from his notability in our eyes, but it seems likely that he has created some apparent notability (e.g. GHits created by our and others' disambiguations of the name) exceeding his real notability.
I don't want to take the time to do the two moves that will put the actor back as the primary topic tonite, but the closest thing to discussion has been the unsigned IP's "What about James Caan, entrepreneur. Wikipedia doesnt seem to have a page on him. www.jamescaan.co.uk " comment, and the hundreds of lks to the actor should neither be left as lks to the Dab, nor changed without sound discussion. I think reverting the move pending further discussion is fully justified.
--
Jerzy•
t
03:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
how can we change the bday in the info-box which doesn't match the text. edit mode doesn't seem to work Eugene-elgato ( talk) 18:09, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
One reason I restored it is because Cann specifically picked that name to encourage confusion with the actor. It's not as if they just both happened to wind up with the same name. Gigs ( talk) 18:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
This article is a shambles and a real embarrassment to WP. I have taken some small steps towards improving it but a great deal more work is still required. Rangoon11 ( talk) 12:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Agree..too much irrelevant information, seems more like a sale pitch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.60.30.169 ( talk) 21:15, 7 July 2011 (UTC)