Talk:Aptronym

Just wanted to note here that Doug Bowser is listed here under both aptonym and inaptonym, which is unusual but may be correct, as the character is both a prized commercial asset of Nintendo the company and a feared antagonist in the Nintendo fictional universe. Pharos (talk) 21:26, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

The important point is that both uses are reliably sourced. That's all that matters as for whether it's correct. Sundayclose (talk) 21:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

The inaptonym use, seemingly, isn't. The source provided indicates it's "coincidental" without any sort of judgment on whether this is an apt or inapt coincidence. Probably better not to list the same name twice in any case. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 22:33, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Aptronyms and inaptronyms are always a coincidence. A coincidence in a person's name and it's opposite meaning is, in fact, an inaptronym. The source doesn't have to use the word inaptronym. None of the examples (as far as I can tell) is a name that is intentionally given to someone by their parents to be an aptronym or inaptronym. The fact that "Rob Banks" is a police officer is a coincidence. He wasn't given that name because his parents anticipated that he would be a police officer. If we disallow coincidence, then all of the examples of aptronym and inaptronym in the entire article would be unacceptable. Sundayclose (talk) 22:54, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@Ser! is correct; the cited source doesn't say anything that can reasonably be interpreted as saying it's an inaptronym. AJD (talk) 02:25, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Again, the source doesn't have to use the word inaptronym. In fact, the sources for most of the examples in the entire article don't use the word aptronym or inaptronym. The comments about the name, it's coincidental connection to the character Bowser's name {"Doug Bowser, Nintendo of America's next president, shares a name with Bowser, the archnemesis of Nintendo's mascot Mario. ... Nintendo fans first picked up on the coincidence"), is quite sufficient to indicate that the name is an inaptronym. Sundayclose (talk) 15:44, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

No, the coincidental connection is sufficient to indicate that it's an aptronym, which it is, and which it's listed as in the article. To indicate that the name is an inaptronym, the source would have to make some kind of claim or implication that the name is coincidentally unsuited to the person, and no such implication is present. It would be an inaptronym if the president of Nintendo had a name like... "Robotnik", I guess. (Uh, if it was the 90s and Sega was still Nintendo's main rival, anyway.) "Nintendo executive shares name with Nintendo character" is a situation where the name is coincidentally suited to the person, not unsuited to the person. AJD (talk) 16:53, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Karl Schwarzschild, German physicist who calculated the size of a black hole, marked by its inescapable event horizon ("Schwarzschild" translates to "black shield" in German).

Actually, the German version of this article already lists him. The best mentions I can find, though, are this MinutePhysics YouTube video and this lesson from Brilliant. 79.146.86.132 (talk) 23:25, 12 August 2025 (UTC)

 Not done. Generally YouTube videos are not reliable sources. Anyone can create a YouTube video regardless of the reliability of what they say. Sundayclose (talk) 02:52, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

I see in the Inaptronym there is a British Police Officer named Robin Banks. There is also a Sergeant in Jackson, Georgia named Robyn Banks. 152.7.255.197 (talk) 11:22, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

@Sundayclose: I appreciate that there's a degree of WP:OR involved in including an example photo where we're relying on Wikipedia editors judging whether or not it is an example, rather than quoting a secondary source, but there is a lot of value in including a WP:LEADIMAGE as a clear visual introduction. Unless anyone has a strong belief that the image isn't an aptronym (perhaps "van der Ham" isn't a Dutch surname at all and it's an invented name where the person doesn't exist), I think this article can take a single example photo.

This was the only decent example I could see on Commons, surprisingly there were no good examples in English. It's used to illustrate the equivalent article on the Dutch Wikipedia: the word ham means the same as it does in English.

A look at Flickr also gives us the options of File:R A Glass opticians.jpg and File:Skidmore's Cycles.jpg, which I've now copied across to Commons. Belbury (talk) 19:12, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Although I appreciate the need for a lead image, adding unsourced content is not the way to get it. There is always a need for more images on Wikipedia, but violating policy is not an alternative to no image. You can seek consensus for an exception to a core policy of Wikipedia, WP:V. That policy is not based on whether "anyone has a strong belief that the image isn't an aptronym". The WP:BURDEN for finding a source is on the editor who makes the edit. All the other items in the list are properly sourced, and through the years many that were added without sources have been removed, and not just by me. It probably would be easier to find another name that can be sourced as an aptronym and has an image that can be used. Google is a good place to start. Sundayclose (talk) 19:35, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

That holds if I wanted to add C. van der Ham to the WP:LISTPEOPLE of "Notable examples", but I think a lead image is doing a very different job, and I don't think it requires the same degree of sourcing. When we illustrate an article like cappucino with a photo that an editor believes to be a representative cup of coffee, the criteria for its inclusion isn't whether a secondary source can be found that comments on that specific photograph or the cafe that served it, it's whether there's a discussed consensus (guided by sources as needed) that the image accurately represents the subject.

The only claims being made by including this photo are "a butcher exists called Ham" and "it is an aptronym when a butcher is called Ham", neither of which I think trouble WP:V's "likely to be challenged".

We could include a portrait photo of Alexander Graham Bell and write in the caption that his name is an aptronym, but a shop sign seems like a more effective MOS:LEADIMAGE. The reader gets much more immediate visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page by the suggestion that the subject is something to do with shopkeeper names. Belbury (talk) 16:53, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

No, the claim (whether directly or implicitly) is that the name is an aptronym. The article is about aptronyms, and if you use a name as an image descriptor there is no doubt that you are saying that the name is an aptronym. If you're not doing that, then the image is irrelevant to the topic. The image doesn't require source, but the description requires a source, and you can't have an image without a description. You also can't have an image that is not related to an item in the list. Your Alexander Graham Bell example is irrelevant to this discussion because Bell's name is, in fact, included in the list (and sourced) as an aptronym. If you can find an image of Bell that can be freely used feel free to do so. For that matter, any image of any sourced name already on the list can be used if the image is freely available. As for your comment that the name isn't "likely to be challenged", if we sink to that standard, then none of the names need to be sourced and we should go through the edit history and restore all those that have been removed as unsourced, including one that you yourself removed. You're stretching WP:V beyond credibility. Instead of spending your time grasping at straws, please source the content, or find another sourced example with an available image. Sundayclose (talk) 18:05, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

Many articles include original examples which editors have reached by discussed or silent consensus (eg. the equations at the top of algebraic expression) and nearly every article with a photograph is making the unsourced claim that the subject pictured is the thing that the article describes. I'm not sure what policy applies there.

Luckily there is a Dutch source that confirms that this exact photo of this exact shop sign is an aptronym (presumably because it's been in use on the Dutch Wikipedia for years and they found it when looking for an example to use), so I'll add that back.

The article would be better with a good English example for the English Wikipedia, though. I don't think we have one available on Commons yet (the R A Glass sign isn't very striking at thumbnail size), but if we found one and everyone on the talk page agreed that it was an aptronym, I don't see that we'd need to wait patiently for an English-language newspaper to also confirm that it was an aptronym before we could use it. Belbury (talk) 14:20, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

@Belbury: Although I appreciate your finding a source, you are simply wrong that "nearly every article with a photograph is making the unsourced claim that the subject pictured is the thing that the article describes". In the vast majority of images, somewhere in the article there is a sourced referenced that relates to the image. In the few cases where that is not the case, Wikipedia is always an incomplete project needing repairs. Feel free to make those repairs instead of wasting everyone's time by griping about the burden of finding a source. You are operating on the false assumption that the source must be cited adjacent to the image, which is absurd. Sundayclose (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

I think we must be misunderstanding one another.

If I manage to find or take a good English-language aptronym photo in the future, though, I'll raise it here first to see if we can sort that out. Belbury (talk) 16:13, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

No, I didn't misunderstand you. You made a blatantly false statement and I pointed it out. Sundayclose (talk) 21:23, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Formerly "chief restaurant officer" of McDonald's UK and Ireland, currently managing director at McDonald's Netherlands.

Is this source (archive) from The Times detailing her career sufficient enough to be included? Mr. Lechkar (talk) 13:33, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

The first few lines are about how appropriate her name is, so that looks good to me. ser! ^{(chat to me - see my edits)} 14:12, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

The Heaviside step function gives zero for negative arguments and one for positive arguments, thus a point could be made that one of its sides is "heavily weighted". The interpretation of weighing one side heavier than the other could be made in two opposing ways: visually, the negative side seems to be weighted down and thus heavier; but mathematically, the function weighs the positive side "heavily" while disregarding the rest. Both becomes especially clear when multiplying it with another function, as in

$${\displaystyle H(x)\cdot x^{2}}$$

This may seem very far-fetched and also too mathematical for this article, and also I couldn't find anyone in the vast realm of the internet who seems to agree with me on that interpretation (so no sources there). Lily.butterfly.161 (talk) 04:06, 19 February 2026 (UTC)