This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.
If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.Hong KongWikipedia:WikiProject Hong KongTemplate:WikiProject Hong KongHong Kong articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was no conclusion, default to not moved. The discussion below established that both names are valid, without overwhelming preference for one or the other. In the absence of a need for disambiguation so far, default to no change. Deryck C.11:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Connie Mak → Kitman Mak – Her stage name was Connie while she was on contract with Crown Records. Then she became Kitman after she left Crown. Some sources declare her as Kitman. Nevertheless, I'm torn. --RelistedCúchullaint/c 20:25, 12 June 2012 (UTC)Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 01:33, 30 May 2012 (UTC) --George Ho (talk) 23:29, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Connie Mak → Connie Mak Kitman – At first, I doubt that combining English and romanized names are used. However, I learned that Ivy Ling Po is unbeatable, and there is no naming conventions guideline for Hong Kong people. The prior request to prefer "Kitman Mak" failed, so this time I request including "Kitman" in the title. --Relisted. —Darkwind (talk) 05:49, 29 September 2013 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 06:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Don't twist things into something that holds no worth or truth take serious. Grammar isn't about proper names; that's just a ridiculous notion there. Heck, ENGVAR even explicitly state that proper names do not apply to Engvar. --Cold Season (talk) 19:21, 9 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Connie Mak Kitman isn't more common. It is also a wrong convention to combine an English and Chinese name like this in first-last-first name. --Cold Season (talk) 04:27, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Slady doesn't support it and uses the current title as a distinct name; Broadway uses both; even ignoring the variability of hypens, capitals, and spaces at the "kitman" part at the others, it doesn't meet over the current title. IAR doesn't benefit the article in this context. --Cold Season (talk) 13:16, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Connie Mak → Kitman Mak – Or Kit-man MakorConnie Mak Kit-man? In later years, she dropped the name "Connie" in favor of 麥潔文, especially when she quit one record label and then signed contracts with another major one. Later albums didn't use "Connie Mak" ([1][2][3]. Compilations use "Connie Mak" ([4][5]) only when she no longer works for these record companies. 1985 article refers her as "Connie Mak". Yahoo recently uses the name, but I don't know. "Kitman Mak" is used by Star, Sun, this and RTHK. "Connie Mak" isn't as common as it was in 1980s. Well, she wasn't popular outside HK or China when she used English and Chinese names. Both names are used recently, so it comes down to WP:DIVIDEDUSE. If we can't use "Connie Mak Kit-man", which SCMP uses, then Kitman or Kit-man? If we can extend to Chinese sources rather than stick to English-only ones, then this source also uses "Kitman". George Ho (talk) 11:44, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Not moved for lack of a clear consensus to move. This is a very difficult call, as it is a very close dispute, but it is problematic that there is no proposed move target that appears to be the clear best target. bd2412T00:38, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's no standard for Hong Kong names nor there is a naming convention specific for Hong Kong names, it needs to follow either the English convention name Connie Mak, or Chinese convention Kit-man Mak. Even the guideline provide in the WP:NCP suggested Most biographical articles have titles in the form <First name> <Last name>. I'd like to see where it says <Last name> <First name> <Last name> can be tolerated. TheAvatar (discuss–?) 18:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. If one wants to prove that there is some kind established convention of naming in Hong Kong, I would like to see a source for it. At the moment, all I see is people basing it on random inconsistent usage in sources. Thus, revert to common name in English or transliterated Chinese, and not some kind of self-invention of English-Chinese blend. --Cold Season (talk) 19:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I can't believe this. First you tried to re-rename articles without discussion. Then you are trying to make similar discussions that will bend backwards, like Talk:Raymond Chan Chi-chuen. Recently, you accuse me of being a sockpuppeteer of that voter. Perhaps you shall be reported. (Not yet, but I'll do so if conflict keeps up.) As for the renaming, I can't do anything about the subject's decision, lack of adequate rules in regards to Hong Kong people, and conflicting sources. Cold Season is against the current title but pretty indecisive on either Chinese or English names. The current title helps stabilize the article for now until we can develop more rules and discussions. --George Ho (talk) 23:08, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, Cold Season, she has not been recognizable nowadays, but she has been notable. Perhaps her inadequate recognition is the reason for the article's name change. No one has been familiar with her and her names. At first, I assumed that dropping "Connie" would make searching this article easier because she dropped it. However, due to people's unfamiliarity with this person, I realize that keeping Connie and her Chinese name in the title is really for the best. --George Ho (talk) 23:19, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Cold Season, Tavatar:WP:NCUE says this: "It can happen that an otherwise notable topic has not yet received much attention in the English-speaking world, so that there are too few English sources to constitute an established usage." Connie Mak Kit-man has been seldom covered by reliable English-language sources, so her name must be "Connie Mak Kit-man". --George Ho (talk) 21:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not temporary. Based on Conciseness in WP:NC, we should always go with the shortest title that we can identify the subject from another. As far as I can tell, there seems to be only one Connie Mak in the entire Wikipedia. TheAvatar (discuss–?) 21:52, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I did propose "Kitman Mak" two years ago, but she has been proven not known as "Kitman Mak" or "Connie Mak" outside Hong Kong (or China) to begin with. --George Ho (talk) 22:06, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also, haven't you forgotten the "recognizability" criterion? She has been recognized as "麥潔文" and "Connie Mak" and "麥潔文 (Kitman)", but only Chinese-language sources use these names. English sources have been nowhere to be found. --George Ho (talk) 22:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not because you knew which way the editor would !vote, as both Cold Season and Ohconfucius have agreed with your opinion at each talk page to which they were alerted? (User:Ohconfucius was alerted to the discussions here; I did not mention him earlier because he hadn't commented, but he has now.) AAR the closer will be aware of what happened now and can weigh our ideas on whether or not it was canvassing. Dekimasuよ!18:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There are always complaints from those on the 'other side' whenever there are suspicions about canvassing. I participate quite regularly in RMs. You are just speculating because he posted to my talk and I happen to have the same view when I popped up here. You don't know I wouldn't have shown up if he hadn't left a message there. -- Ohc ¡digame!01:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am not on any "other side"-except for asking editors to refrain from personal attacks and to try working this out at WP:MOS-ZH, I have not done anything in any of these requests except close them, and closed one as "no consensus" to move to the longer form as my next edit after I made the note here. Having closed over half of all RMs in the last two months, I am aware of the extent to which you have participated in move discussions over that time, and my note was informed by this. Dekimasuよ!19:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, Procedural Oppose, Speedy procedural close Per my opinion last time; This was recently closed, so the nominator should have gone to WP:MRV to dispute the result, as the move was properly formulated, and open for the requisite about of time. Adding flipflop nominations a week after the move closed is bad process. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It's clear just be looking at the above that there was never any consensus for the current name, so it should be moved back. In any event, there is only one Connie Mak, and the tagging on of the Cantonese cluster as a suffix is but a local convention bound to create no end of confusion to the wider audience. -- Ohc ¡digame!06:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I stand by my vote on leaving it as is because I can't change your mind about choosing the English name (Connie) over the Chinese name (Kitman). And I still don't see how, despite irritating some readers, the current title lacks potential of stability. --George Ho (talk) 10:05, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. I don't mind it either, but non-Asians have not recognized her as either name because she hasn't gained international fame status like martial arts or gun-shooting actors these days. Even Leslie Cheung has a cult status amongst critics and art enthusiasts alike internationally. --George Ho (talk) 07:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. A title should not be an exhaustive list of all names a subject has ever been known by. Typically, HK singers articles use the format of Engrish first name followed by surname (see entries at Category:Cantopop singers). Redirects will get readers where they want to go. — AjaxSmack01:56, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
I have just modified 2 external links on Connie Mak Kit-man. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
