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 writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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 writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science 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 scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture
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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
This might be the most used spelling, but for a RM I would like to see not just two (or, for that matter, ten or twenty) references, but a comprehensive analysis of (i) whether she is mentioned in the English literature sufficiently to talk about the most common spelling - if not, we go with WP:RUS, which is Shulman; (ii) that Schulmann in the English sources is considerably more frequent than Shulman - or, at the very least, that the sources using Schulmann are consistently of higher quality than the sources using Shulman. Without these points made, this is a non-starter.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The spelling Ekaterina Schulmann is used in English media including NYT and The Economist which are generally regarded as high-quality. The spelling is used in her academic publications: example. She uses the spelling in her facebook and calls Schulmann spelling right [3] and Shulman wrong [4] in her blog. According to WP:UEThe choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage. So we have a strong pevalence of Ekaterina Schulmann spelling in English-language media, and in her English-language academic publications, also she personally prefers to be called Schulmann not Shulman. M5 (talk) 22:13, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Quoting User:Netoholic whose opinion was suppported by consensus in Talk:Fyodor Dostoevsky#Requested move 1 March 2018: "We need to remember that WP:VERIFIABLE is core policy, whereas WP:Romanization of Russian is just a guidance essay, not even a guideline. Decision on this specific name should only be based on reliable expert sources on this topic. It would be WP:OR to try to use either of those articles on our own, which is why WP:UE says if there is a common English-language form of the name, then use it, even if it is unsystematic."
So we have a scientist who writes her scientific papers in English and publishes them in English-language journals and books under the name Ekaterina Schulmann which reads perfectly well in English. We have a number of other reliable English-language sources which agree with this spelling, including NYT, The Economist and every English-language source mentioned on her RANEPA profile (those include The Guardian, The Telegraph, Independent and others, click "Все публикации и выступления в СМИ >>" on [5] for full list). The only reliable source who calls her Shulman is Washington Post article said to "spelling name wrong", and WaPo is not consistent with spelling: other article mentions "Ekaterina Schulmann". The English-speaking author, her editors reviewers and publishers, other reliable sources call her Ekaterina Schulmann and so should Wikipedia. --M5 (talk) 08:38, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I also know how to cherry-pick things. For example, RFE/RL consistently uses Shulman [6][7], as well as this book [8] for example. I would like to see a comprehensive analysis, which I do not see at the moment. With the evidence presented, my conclusion is there is no consistent way English media address her name, which brings us back to WP:RUS.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:55, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I checked every English source on RENEPA profile, I would not call that cherry-picking but maybe "comprehensive analysis"? RFE/RL is not using either spelling consistently[9], so we can just dismiss it along with WaPo. This leaves us with many reliable English-language sources supporting Schulmann, and this quote from Gessen book: "Yekaterina Shulman, Tsarstvo politicheskoy imitatsii, Vedomosti" which is just quoting source in transliterated Russian, not a proper English translation. And WP:RUS is just some guide to do a permissible original research when no reliable sources for spelling exist, not a blessed gold standard to evaluate existing sources with. --M5 (talk) 15:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But why have you only checked the sources listed at her webpage? I am not really surprised they use the spelling she prefers.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I realize I was pinged here and likely have the expected opinion of this, so closer is free to ignore my vote. But this English spelling is clearly the preferred spelling by this person in the English-language papers she has authored[10][11] and shown in her personal Facebook page. The majority of secondary sources use that spelling also, and the ones that don't use it seem most often to reference her from Russian-language writings/appearances, and so are likely attempting to transliterate/translate as Yekaterina/Ekaterina/Catherine and Schulmann/Schulman/Shulman in various combinations. Ekaterina is quite common compared to Yekaterina generally, so should not be much of surprise. Her chosen last name spelling is a bit uncommon, but not unheard-of. Overall, MOS:IDENTITY applies, so if anyone thinks reliable sources are unclear, then we should use the name expressed by the person for themselves. -- Netoholic@12:44, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting quote from Schulmann's blog [12]: "here is BBC News - global, not the Russian variety - quoting me right but spelling my name wrong [Yekaterina Shulman]. Stalina na vas net, transliterators! [...] UPD: They got it right! Glory to the workers of the press! It's now Ekaterina Schulmann, as it should be". She has some strong opinions about speling her name (who hasn't). And sources like BBC sometimes correct their mistakes. So should we. --M5 (talk) 15:40, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Schulmann's opinion is relevant per MOS:IDENTITY. The fact that BBC corrected spelling error is relevant to the evaluating the reliability of the sources. ("In general, the more people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing, the more reliable the publication.", see WP:CONTEXTMATTERS). --M5 (talk) 16:08, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As the discussion being relisted, here is my summary of the facts known so far. There is a person with the Russian first name Екатерина commonly written in English as Ekaterina and with the last name of German origin Schulmann, which is written in Russian as Шульман. If you mechanically apply BGN/PCGN romanization to words Екатерина Шульман you get Yekaterina Shulman. This person is mostly known as a political scientists and secondary as a political commentator. All of her English-language works (three cited in this article plus about dozen in her RANEPA profile) are signed as Ekaterina Schulmann. One the other hand we have some book quoting her Russian work mechanically transliterated along with her name as "Yekaterina Shulman, Tsarstvo politicheskoy imitatsii". As for her political commentary, we see some discrepancies. Some of high-quality media which publish political commentary call her Ekaterina Schulmann (NYC, The Economist), some call her differently in different publications (WaPo, RFE/RL), some first call her Shulman and then correct the name to Schulmann (BBC). As for her personal preferences, she is not only consistently writes her name as Ekaterina Schulmann but unequivocally insists on this spelling as the only correct one. Any additions and corrections to this facts based on reliable sources are appreciated. --M5 (talk) 09:33, 3 May 2019 (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.
.jpg){kind=small}
