Talk:Alphonse Mucha

message: Most English-language sources seem to use "Alphonse", including the English version of the website of the Mucha Museum in Prague (although the Czech version uses Alfons).  Wikipedia's guideline on naming suggests using the name that English speakers will most readily recognize, so maybe the article should be moved to Alphonse Mucha? —Celithemis 00:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Celithemis on this.  The guidelines and common English usage suggest to use 'Alphonse'. SnappingTurtle 01:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Wiki policy is to draw from reliable sources. "Alphonse" would appear to be the correct English usage of his name. Ty 02:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

text: The move was to move the article to the name used in it according to wikipedia article naming.  This isn't de:W, the Czech Republic or France.  It's en:W which is English language so we follow major sources for usage.  Alphonse is used by the English site of the Mucha Museum in Prague,  and the Mucha Foundation.  Oxford Art online says Alphonse.  Books written by his son, Jiří Mucha , are titled Alphonse. Grove art online says, "Mucha, Alphonse [Alfons] (b Ivančice),   His birth name is  Ivančice, the common English version is Alphonse (and less often Alfons). Sargentprivate (talk) 10:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  No. It looks like you or someone you're quoting mis-read what is indicated by "(b)". Ivančice was the name of the town he was born in, not his given name. His given name was Alfons. Infrogmation (talk) 01:39, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, (b) for born I misread. But as in  Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English): "Use the most commonly used English version of the name of the subject as the title of the article, as you would find it in reliable sources (for example other encyclopedias and reference works)." Other sources to add to those previously given for "Alphonse": the Museum of Modern Art, the Tate, the Victoria and Albert Museum, the National Gallery of Australia, the Union List of Artist Names ("Mucha, Alphonse" as the primary name). The article name should be used for the article. Sargentprivate (talk) 08:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

text: WP:OWN much? While I agree with the move, the tone of your message above is along the lines of "This is the way it is. Deal with it. My way or the highway." This isn't how we do things here. Moving the article and then making that final edit to the redirect to prevent anyone other than an admin from moving it back hardly assumes good faith on the part of any other editor. Please work with other editors rather than steamrolling over them just because you think you're an expert on the topic (at least that's the impression I got from your "I own practically everything about Mucha in English" comment). This helps to preserve editing harmony. Thanks. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:30, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it's your snide accusation that constitutes an assumption of bad faith and borderline personal attack on your part; I did not add  to the redirect "to prevent anyone other than an admin from moving it back", I did so because it was a redirect from an alternative name, and that template is supposed to go on such redirects.  I did not "steamroll" over anyone.  I made a simple,  edit to bring this article in line with the 40-odd other Wikipedias that have articles on Mucha.  As already noted, I did not even notice that an unresolved naming discussion thread had ever been opened here.  As it is, it should have been labeled , since it's three+ years old and did not come to a consensus.  Obviously, if I'd thought there was such a discussion here I would have just opened a WP:RM about the issue. But stop overreacting please.  This is just a wiki and this is just text. WP:BOLD is policy, and WP:BRD is a standard operating procedure.  If you are convinced the article should remain at Alphonse Mucha, ask an admin to move it back, I'll open a formal WP:RM, and that will be that. Histrionics are not helpful.  Please see also your user talk page. — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖ⊝כ⊙þ  Contrib.  00:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry if you took my message as snide as it wasn't intended that way. I was merely pointing out how your move and then message here was coming across. As I already stated, I agree with your move, so there's no need to convince me about it. "Alfons" is definitely the correct spelling. In your original post, though, you specifically pointed out that if someone disagreed with the move they would have to open a discussion at WP:RM "since the redir now at Alphonse Mucha has been edited to include ." This comes across as you purposely editing the redirect to prevent the article being moved back by anyone other than an admin. If this is not what you meant by it, I'm sorry I misunderstood you. It is very easy to misunderstand that, however, given the way you presented it. I think that, in this case, it would have much more simple to move the article and then post a very short "I have moved the article to "Alfons Mucha" because almost every other Wikipedia (including the French Wikipedia) uses that title and more modern usage is trending that way from the previous adoption of the French spelling of his name." Keeping it short and simple like that would have been much more effective and explained the reason for the move very simply. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 02:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand what you mean now. I was simply observing the fact that trying to directly revert the move wouldn't work; I was not gloating.  This is just a wiki and it's just text, and no one's house is going to fall down if someone has to start a WP:RM thread to deal with my error (which was failing to notice that a previous dicussion here about the title closed without consensus, so I should have opened an RM instead of just moving the article; I still maintain that this was not actually a policy violation, just a WP:BOLD move that, obviously, was likely to trigger the R and D aspects of WP:BRD, and that Alfons Mucha is in fact the most proper article title, regardless how we arrive at it.  I apologize for mistaking your response as being more critical than it was.  Anyway, I did the move because it seemed obvious and necessary, added the R-from template because that's the proper thing to do with that type of redir, then after the fact noticed the old discussion when I came to the talk page to post precisely the kind of "I have moved the article..." message you suggest. At that point, I noted that the template would block simple revert and require a RM instead. I could have communicated it better! — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖ⊝כ⊙þ  Contrib.  08:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, text is pretty hard to parse into intent sometimes. Live and learn, I guess, for both of us. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 16:47, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

text: It isn't a case of ownership; before today's name change he'd only edited the article once , adding 11 bytes, also about the name. It's a case of being over-sure you are right, and disregarding relevant policies and the views of other editors, all too typical of this editor. An admin will I'm sure revert his changes, so he will have to go to the slight trouble of starting an RM discussion, which he should have done in the first place. He does not often edit in the visual arts area; if he did he would probably be more aware of how many artists are not known in English by their actual name in its local form.  Johnbod (talk) 19:42, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've generally found SMcCandlish to be a very conscientious editor, so I disagree that this is "all too typical" of him. Whether he edits in the visual arts area is irrelevant as any editor is welcome to edit in any area they so choose. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 02:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Johnbod has strongly opposed me on some other issues, including article naming ones. I'm not sure how "doesn't agree with me" seems to equate to "is a bad editor" to him, but oh well. Not really my problem. "The fastest road to failure is to try to please everyone all the time", as my grandfather used to say. — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖ⊝כ⊙þ  Contrib.  08:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

text: Again, if you have issues with my editing behavior, use my talk page, and stop abusing this article's talk page as a venue for editor criticism. (Second notice.) Alfons Mucha is  his name in its "local" (by which I guess you mean Czech) form only; it's his name globally, now even in France, and even in modern works in English about him. This article reflecting a refusal to accept that is a serious WP:NPOV problem. Suggesting that I'm ignorant of the visual arts and incompetent to edit in such articles is another borderline personal attack, based on nothing but your imagination. (As a matter of fact, one of my sidelines is trading in art and antiques, mostly 1880s to 1940s, and I have somewhere around US$20K worth of Art Nouveau and Art Deco on premises, so you might want to rethink you assessment.  I do not spend much time editing articles on everything I happen to know much about, just areas where I think WP's coverage badly needs improvement). Also, I have not "disregarded" any policies or the views of any other editors. I'll be perfectly happy with an admin reversal of my move followed by me or someone else opening a new WP:RM, because the original discussion here did not conclude with a consensus it simply petered out, the WP:COMMONNAME in English is clearly in flux, as shown by the reliable sources I alrady cited, and the arguments and reasoning for "Alfons" outweigh those for "Alphonse" (now that I see this old thread exists and anyone bothered to make any).  The case for "Alphonse" is what I call "COMMONNAME fetishism", a belief that that section of WP:AT exists in a vacuum and is the ultimate authority, when in fact all experienced Wikipedians know that its default advice is moderated, even sometimes overturned, by other concerns, most often WP:COMMONSENSE. — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖ⊝כ⊙þ  Contrib.  00:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "He does not often edit in the visual arts area" is what I said, and that is true, isn't it? You seem to say so yourself.  The rest is you whipping yourself up. Johnbod (talk) 02:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You said that, and then followed it with weasely implication of ignorance/stupidity on my part. You failed to consider the possibility that I know full well that in English we sometimes use Anglicized names because they're deeply historically embedded in our language (e.g. Magellan, Columbus), and that I understand that sometimes we continue to use these spellings in WP articles for WP:COMMONNAME reasons, but that I am making a clear argument that this is not such a case and should not be approached as one.  You also accused me violating policy without actually demonstrating this to be the case.  This is what is known as "character assassination". — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖ⊝כ⊙þ  Contrib.  08:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Alphonse vs. Alfons

message: images from la pater have beenposted to wikimedia, , but the article is so crammd with images i dont know where to put one. it needs its own article.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Le Pater

message: Will people stop moving this article? Anthony, you started the move discussion above and it was closed as no consensus, yet here you are, two days after it was closed, moving it in blatant disregard for the discussion above. If you disagree, there are other acceptable paths to take to resolve this dispute. Moving it like this is not the way to go about it. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 04:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No it is the way to go about it. The article had been at Alphonse for ages, with a discussion above 2 years ago clearly not in favour of a move. It was moved out of process & when I asked AA to move it back he started the discussion above. Ideally he would have moved it back first, as McCandlish says (end of section before the new RM) he would have done & before starting a RM. The RM was no consensus for a move back to Alphonse, but clearly would have been NC for a move to Alfons also. So we should preserve the status quo ante which, after some vigorous prodding from moi, AA has done. It is as it should be - see everyone again in what, two years? Johnbod (talk) 04:39, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Then he should have posted about it here, first. The way he did it is likely to inflame the issue with some who hold strong opinions on the matter (of which I am not one as I really don't care what title the article uses as long as people stop moving it back and forth). 08:25, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Well again, ideally yes. But AA does so much of the grunt work on moves all the time that we shouldn't grumble. Johnbod (talk) 12:33, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Okay, this is getting crazy 

message: I think this needs some historical context... Czech Freemasonry has been banned and restored several times over the years... so which "restoration" are we talking about?  Is it really worth mentioning? Blueboar (talk) 16:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restorer of Czech Freemasonry 

message: My grandma's maiden name is Mocha and we have been told we are related to him. My father traveled to Praqua to visit his family's hometown. Does anyone know more about his family? Nancy Nonnemacher (talk) 23:53, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related 

message: Did Mucha really have any Jewish origins? I can find no mention of that anywhere except in one interview (in Czech) with his grandson, where it is mentioned that Alphonse's grandmother had some Jewish roots . Whether that's true or not is probably up to a genealogist to find out. Mucha himself was, however, born into a Christian family, as were his parents. Also the arrest by the Gestapo was more a result of Mucha's Slavic nationalism than anything else. He was accused of being a "friend of the Jews" among other things, , but not of being of Jewish origin himself, which the Nazis would surely find out and use against him. So overall I'm doubtful whether there's any jewishness in Mucha's family to speak of.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baclinic (talk • contribs) 15:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mucha's family 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Alphonse Mucha. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060115145528/http://www.pricejb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/slav-epic/introduction.htm to http://www.pricejb.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/slav-epic/introduction.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:11, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:CZE-17-Republika Ceskoslovenska-100 Korun (1920).jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on . You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-11-28. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 13:13, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image from this article to appear as POTD soon 

message: I came here to leave a short note than Mucha had two signatures. The one in the infobox is, I suppose, the way he signed letters, but his more familiar signature on his artwork is simply "Mucha" underlined. But I see that people can't even agree on his first name so it is doubtful that this matter will ever be addressed. Can two signatures go in the infobox? Wastrel Way (talk) 12:57, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Signatures