Talk:Jerald terHorst

message: This is important, guys and girls. Alright, so, we've decided that the article name and subsequent description of terHorst should utilize the Dutch/German grammar of a lowercase letter, dictating the origin of the name (As, in this global world, is commonly accepted. A name is meant to reflect the country of origin of said person, the clan they stem from, and their common given name. Ironically, many articles on Wikipedia still slaughter Clan placement and Given name placement for oriental roots, but that's not what we're talking about here, so I'll stop before I even begin.) If terHorst is how it's being presented in the title, make sure the rest of the article follows suit: IE. Starting paragraphs with his name, and unconsciously capitalizing the first letter. This fails for two reasons - One, you're breaking a rule by following another rule. One is "English Grammar", while the other is "Proper German/Dutch grade naming." So, instead of writing "TerHorst", as the beginning of the sentence, use his full name. Or throw in an adverb. Try to keep it in in a context that will allow for both rules to apply, without having the encyclopedia fucked up too too much. I'll edit what I mean out, but watch for it in the future. 74.12.4.128 (talk) 18:11, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This idea of avoiding the problem at the beginning of sentences by making sure to utilize both his given and surnames is inspired.  It is simple, elegant, and—I assume—acceptable to all parties.  Well done.  Unschool (talk) 03:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The final decision

message: Okay I'm totally new to actually contributing anything to wikipedia, but this very topic was really frustrating me. Like probably >90% of typical USERS who encounter Jerald terHorst's page, I wondered what was going on with his weird name, and I was disappointed that I had to search so much to get that explanation that could have been delivered in a single sentence without damaging the integrity of the article. If you are already familiar with this name or know of others like it, congratulations. But most english speakers aren't. Yes, this is a tiny issue, but wikipedia is ever so marginally worse for purposefully omitting this one trivial fact. If you applied this reasoning to every "trivial" fact on this website which the large majority of readers would presumably desire, you'd lose a lot of what makes wikipedia so satisfyingly informative and fun. (Along similar lines, I actually would appreciate the Gerald Ford article including some mention of the fact that he's not related to Henry Ford. It would resolve the ambiguity anyone would encounter upon realizing that two of the most prominent Michiganders just so happen to both be named Ford. In fact, I think there's an ever stronger case for including the Ford fact because it would clear up a common misunderstanding.) Idk, I'm kinda bummed after reading this. Can I just go ahead and edit it in and hope the naysayers don't notice because this is 12 years later?... Willabeasty (talk) 07:34, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Further Gripes

message: It's probably the result of how the article has evolved, but the current incarnation of this article possesses some of the worst headings I've ever come across.  I'm not sure that I'll do much better, so I invite others to review my choices and make changes as they see fit. Unschool (talk) 20:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section headings