Talk:Harry (given name)

message: I do not see why my edit was reverted.  The reason for the reversion was not written on this page indicated.  The main edit that seemed to be reverted was my switch from hypens to commas.  Commas are the standard on Wikipedia disambiguation pages and this switch is important for consistancy.  Either way, something needs to be done about them as in the switch back to hypens, several of the commas were missed.
Also, in the switch back, several names were put out of alphabetical order, some were inexplicably deleted, and subjectivity was added into some descriptions. Neelix 15:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: The thought occurred to me that the items in the list should be the other way round, eg Andrews, Harry, as this makes more sense than a list starting off "Harry" for every item, and it would enable items like Debby Harry to be put, if necessary, in a different section.  Sweetalkinguy 13:51, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Right way round 

message: I generally agree with the comment above...  what's the point of enumerating every Harry on Wikipedia?  Special:Allpages will basically do the same thing.  And other names (eg. Joshua, David, Christopher, etc.) haven't tried to be complete.  --Interiot 18:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, as I said, it is getting silly, like something out of Monty Python.  There are two points.  If it is done at all then it has to be complete, or else what is included and what is omitted becomes an arbitrary choice out of keeping with an encyclopaedia.  If it is done purely mechanically, then it gets out of logical order (is Harry Dean Stanton under H for Harry, D for Dean or S for Stanton, and then what about Harry F Byrd?).  There will also be omissions, look at all the Harry Johnsons.  I am sure checking them all individually has still left some out, and some are positioned arbitrarily, but it is as close as possible.  And, as you rightly say, what is the point, and why not do it for Tom and Dick as well.  There are much bigger messes on Wikipedia which limit its usefulness, for example, descriptions of categories and allotting articles to categories, the worst surrounds Oscars and allotting titles and names to more than one simultaneously or at all.  Guy 03:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why enumerate all of them? 

message: The 'harry' culture is somewhat similar to the british chav culture.
Is there any evidence to support this?  The term chav is a recent invention of the British popular press and is virtually meaningless, wheras "harry" appears to be a Norwegian usage of their upper classes being disparaging about the "hoi polloi".  Do Norwegians youths wear mock Burberry caps and get drunk and disorderly in public?  If you are making a comparison, I would suggest a better comparison is Sloane Ranger in the original Peter York sense, although in this case the objects of attention are rather higher in the social order, and this term too rapidly became meaningless.
I suggest this comment stay here until any evidence to support reinstatement is produced.
:I agree. The term 'harry' rarely appears in the same context as the English term chav. I'd say "slask" is a more appropiate Norwegian word for it, actually, though it's still not exactly the same thing. 85.166.252.68 16:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Chav" 

message: --CopyToWiktionaryBot 22:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007-02-11 Automated pywikipediabot message 

message: I can't find any information about the name - country of origin, first historic Harries, etc. (And this kind of info is what I actually wanted to find.)
212.76.37.142 15:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wiktionary:Transwiki:Harry or Wiktionary:Harry.  Pan Dan 17:24, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information about the name 

message: Re:, no Sweetalkinguy, it was not a disambiguation page.  Notable people are not commonly referred to by the public by their first names.  A person searching for Harry W. Addison would not think to enter "Harry" as a search term.  BTW, please be aware that calling someone's good faith edits "vandalism" is a violation of WP:AGF.  Pan Dan 00:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation 

message: No, I don't have a source, but shouldn't Harold be included in this list?
I know for Henry, which the article cites, also can be nicknamed with "Hank", but Harold and Harry are pretty close, and I imagine some Harolds call themselves or are called Harry also. ~ GoldenGoose100 (talk) 06:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harold? 

message: Harry is spelt with a c 86.8.3.91 (talk) 20:43, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harry