Talk:Michael Everson
- /Archive mostly pre- and post-VfD discussions.
 | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 26 April 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This article was nominated for deletion on 20 July 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Does Michael Everson have a Chinese name?
We have an article for Andrew West and Ken Lunde, but not yet for Michael Everson, the major contributor of Unicode. ;-)
It might be "Āi Fúsēn"
I've just learned that Āiwénsēn is a standard transliteration for the names Eavenson, Evanson, and Evenson in Chinese, so I suppose it isn't suitable after all. (I learned it from this rather comprehensive page.) So I'm going to have to think about this some more. Evertype 20:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
That same site gives Āifúsēn 埃弗森 as a standard transliteration for the names Efferson, Everson, and Evertson. Apparently, fú 弗 was used at least in Korea and Japan as a sight-character equivalent to the dollar sign $; it has a Kun reading doru which would suggest dollar to me; the Korean reading is bul 불. I wouldn't think a currency character appropriate for my name at all; and fú 弗 also means 'not, negative', also infelicitous, in my view.
If fú is essential, there is a good one in 符 which means 'symbol' and is used in compounds: fúhào 符号 'symbol, mark'; biāodiān fúhào 标点符号 'punctuation mark'; fúhé 符合 'accord with, conform to' (nice for a standardizer); fúzhòu 符咒 'Daoist charm'. That's not so bad. Evertype 17:40, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
- Not so bad. What about 傅埋刻: the grandmaster of arcane types? 傅 (Fù) is an established surname. – Kaihsu 21:28, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
| Michael Everson's name in Chinese | ||||
| Pinyin | Simplified | Traditional | "Meaning" | Comment |
| Āifúsēn | 埃符森 | 埃符森 | Egypt symbol forest | The Egypt character 埃 refers to dust fines; 土 'earth' is the radical. 埃及 āijí is 'Egypt' per se.; 符 fú is 'symbol' as noted above, and 森 sēn is a tree rising above the forest, indicating rich growth or abundance. Another reading: Dusty Sign-forest. |
When it was thought the name might be "Āi Wénsēn"
- The name Āi Wénsēn 埃文森 has been thought suitable. The name was drawn up in consultation with Dr Lu Qin (the chair of the IRG), and others at the January 2005 ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 meeting in Xiamen. We rejected all of the Sūn Màikè choices in favour of a rather more appropriate name!
| Another former candidate for Michael Everson's name in Chinese | ||||
| Pinyin | Simplified | Traditional | "Meaning" | Comment |
| Āiwénsēn | 埃文森 | 埃文森 | Egypt script forest | The Egypt character 埃 refers to dust fines; 土 'earth' is the radical. 埃及 āijí is 'Egypt' per se.; 文 wén is 'writing' of course, and 森 sēn is a tree rising above the forest, indicating rich growth or abundance. Another reading: Dusty Word-forest. |
When it was thought the name might be "Sūn Màikè"
- The name Sūn Màikè 孙迈克 (Traditional 孫邁克) has been thought suitable. Màikè is a standard rendering of Michael and Sūn is a family name (see Sun Tzu 孫子 (Sūnzǐ) where the Traditional, not the Simplified, character is given) which means 'grandson' – a bit like "Ever-son" I suppose, in meaning and a little bit in sound – though "ever" is more distinctive in my name than "son". Before you enshrine this forever in the Chinese Wikipedia, perhaps there could be some discussion of this?. Evertype 19:18, 2004 Aug 15 (UTC)
- 'Michael' is from Hebrew Micha-el (מיכאל), 'Who is like God?'. In literary Chinese, this may be rendered 何神 (Hé Shén), and in turn Taiwanese (to which Everson has made a contribution) hô-sîn, which is a minimal pair with hô·-sîn, fly, which is all the more curious as Michael is the name of an archangel, and if he is not careful he can end up being Beelzebub. (By the way, the biblical Taiwanese transliteration for 'Michael' is Bí-ka-le̍k; but that is boring.) As for Everson, how about 永子 (Yǒngzǐ)?, but maybe 孫 is better after all. So I suggest 孫何神 (Pinyin: Sūn Héshén). -- Kaihsu 21:47, 2004 Aug 15 (UTC)
- By the way, the character I have rendered above as a middle dot in hô·-sîn should actually be U+0358, which Everson helped to get into the Unicode standard. So he has enabled his minimal-pair counterpart to be expressed correctly. -- Kaihsu 22:00, 2004 Aug 15 (UTC)
- Although 孙迈克 ("Michael Sun") is reasonably descriptive, the combination seems to lack "authority" (some say, stuffiness). On the plus side it projects friendliness. My 2 cents. A-giau 02:56, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- 'Michael' is from Hebrew Micha-el (מיכאל), 'Who is like God?'. In literary Chinese, this may be rendered 何神 (Hé Shén), and in turn Taiwanese (to which Everson has made a contribution) hô-sîn, which is a minimal pair with hô·-sîn, fly, which is all the more curious as Michael is the name of an archangel, and if he is not careful he can end up being Beelzebub. (By the way, the biblical Taiwanese transliteration for 'Michael' is Bí-ka-le̍k; but that is boring.) As for Everson, how about 永子 (Yǒngzǐ)?, but maybe 孫 is better after all. So I suggest 孫何神 (Pinyin: Sūn Héshén). -- Kaihsu 21:47, 2004 Aug 15 (UTC)
- So far I don't detect consensus. Evertype 19:43, 2004 Aug 21 (UTC)
- It is your name, Michael, so you can make a decision. One option is not to adopt a name in another language/script. -- Kaihsu 12:33, 2004 Aug 22 (UTC)
- Just leave it up to Michael, may be. People need time to decide a good name for himself as well as his family. :-D -- Tomchiukc 09:59, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- It is your name, Michael, so you can make a decision. One option is not to adopt a name in another language/script. -- Kaihsu 12:33, 2004 Aug 22 (UTC)
- I'm very interested in the question, of course. Let's consider my first name first. I see the humour, cleverness, and subtlety in 孙何神 (Traditional 孫何神) Sūn Héshén. Back-translations through the Hebrew! But I don't know how I'd feel answering to "Héshén". ("Hey! Seán!") But I'm wondering if other substitutions could be made. What about 迈刻 (Traditional 邁刻) Màikè? I guess this would mean 'engraved stride' (cf. 刻版 kèbàn 'to cut blocks for printing', 刻字 kèzì 'carve characters on a seal'); I like the "engraving" kè much better than the "gram" kè. And to continue the substitution, a different mài would seem sensible; what about 麦刻 (Traditional 麥刻) Màikè? I guess this would mean 'engraved wheat' (but cf. the use of 'wheat' phonetically in 麦克凤 màikèfēng 'microphone', 'mike'); that seems the best of the Màikè choices, to me. And a big question for me... is it permissible to change the tone? If so, how about 埋刻 (Traditional 埋刻) Máikè? I guess this would mean 'hidden engraving' which reminds me of writing system analysis (cf. 埋头苦干 máitóu kǔgàn 'to quietly immerse onself in hard work'). But these thoughts are just me playing with the dictionary. What do you think? Evertype 19:51, 2004 Oct 8 (UTC)
- Actually, it would be pronounced "huh, shun". "hey seán" would be written more like "hei shan". As for "maitou"... that allows for some pretty colourful plays on words.
- Let me try to put it in a tabular format (fun with Wiki HTML). The questions are: (1) Is it OK to substitute different characters for mài and kè? (2) Is it OK to change the tone to mái? (3) Are these names "good" with regard to "authority/stuffiness", "friendliness", authenticity, etc.?
| Former candidates for Michael Everson's name in Chinese | ||||
| Pinyin | Simplified | Traditional | "Meaning" | Comment |
| Sūn Màikè | 孙迈克 | 孫邁克 | grandson step able | one standard for "Michael" (Not necessarily the best standard for Michael.) |
| Sūn Màikè | 孙麦克 | 孫麥克 | grandson wheat able | mài substituted, cf. 麦克凤 màikèfēng 'microphone', 'mike' (The best of the Sūn Màikè names.) |
| Sūn Màikè | 孙麦刻 | 孫麥刻 | grandson wheat carve | kè substituted, cf. 刻字 kèzì 'carve characters on a seal' (Not so bad.) |
| Sūn Máikè | 孙埋刻 | 孫埋刻 | grandson cover carve | tone changed to mái, cf. 埋头苦干 máitóu kǔgàn 'to quietly immerse onself in hard work' (Not at all inappropriate...) |
Evertype 20:35, 2005 Feb 1 (UTC)
Does Michael Everson have an Irish name?
A question waiting to be asked, for symmetry of sorts. – Kaihsu 21:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, it's Michael Everson. Irish speakers often use the Irish form of my first name, Mícheál (vocative a Mhichíl). Everson is not an Irish name, and is possibly Old English Eoforssunu 'boar's son'. That could be literally gaelicized as Mac Toirc which is usually anglicized as Mac Turk, a name rarely found in Co. Down and originating from Galloway in Scotland. One could invent things, like Mac Eabhair 'ivory's son' or Mac Eibhir 'granite's son' but those aren't attested Irish names either. Pádraig Ó Snodaigh, owner of the Coiscéim publishing house, calls me Mac Síorraí 'eternal son', a translation playing on 'ever', which is rather Peter Pan-like. But really, it's Michael Everson in Irish, gaelicized a bit in An tEversonach 'Mr Everson'. On my mother's side we know of one Irish name, Doran, which is Ó Deoráin. Evertype 10:18, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Why is Michael Everson important?
In response to the current AfD in progress for this article, I'd like to ask an honest question: Why, exactly, is Michael Everson important? Specifically, in reference to the opening paragraph of the article:
- He's "an expert in the writing systems of the world" ... what, exactly, does that mean? That he can write in many different languages, or that he has won awards related to etymological research, or that he is a translator, or what? The rest of the article doesn't make this clear.
- He's "a linguist, typesetter, and font designer." So what? There are many linguists, typesetters, and font designers in the world. What makes this particular one encyclopedic?
- He's "one of the co-authors of the Unicode Standard." Unicode was developed by the Unicode Consortium, and the article Unicode says: Members include virtually all of the main computer software and hardware companies with any interest in text-processing standards, such as Apple Computer, Microsoft, IBM, Xerox, HP, Adobe Systems and many others. Is he an employee of one of these companies, or did he have a more active role in Unicode development; and if so, what exactly?
In short: this article talks about the problems in which the subject "has been active in supporting" or "has been actively involved in" or "has an interest in", but it doesn't go into specifics about what the level of this involvement is, and as a result the article comes off sounding a lot more like a resumé cover letter. So, why - exactly - is Michael Everson important enough to deserve an entry in an encyclopedia? I'm not saying he isn't, I'm just saying the article doesn't answer this clearly. Don't answer me here - please answer by improving the article's opening paragraph. - Brian Kendig 02:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- I've never met Michael Everson, but I did interact with him briefly several years ago on the IETF language mailing list. I came to this page after reading on Apple_typography#Fonts_in_Mac_OS_X that he had done work on OS X fonts. I'll just say that I find Everson's work fascinating and his bio eminently suitable for Wikipedia. Unicode is an incredibly important standard for enabling the world to communicate, and Everson has played an integral role at a number of levels. He's continually consulted on some of the tougher issues, and the whole Klingon thing is quite amusing. I think it's absurd that this page is still flagged for possible deletion and has its neutrality questioned. My only question is who he could have annoyed so much to justify spending the time to create User:SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay. --DanKohn 08:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Unicode is great; I agree with you there, and the Unicode article does a good job of explaining why. But this Michael Everson article simply doesn't explain what's important about him. It says he was born in Norristown, it says he's a Buddhist, it says he likes the works of Tolkien... but it doesn't mention any of the rest of why you say he's great: on what "tougher issues" is he "continually consulted"? What "whole Klingon thing"? Why is his work particularly "fascinating"? Please edit the article to remove the unimportant personal details and highlight exactly why you respect the man so much, so that other people can learn to have the same appreciation for him! - Brian Kendig 18:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Co-operation
Let's go through it with the aim of removing the "autobiography" notice on the top. Cheers. – Kaihsu 21:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Cleaning up and moving forward
The article having survived its second VfD, I have decided to clean up the talk page by moving all of the previous discussion about whether the page should be here at all to an archive, for simplicity's sake. I see that SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay, who proposed the second VfD is now editing the article, and asking me questions directly in the edit summaries. I therefore consider it pretty fair game to take continued interest in the contents of this page, particularly as SayWhatYouMean doesn't appear to actually know anything about me or about the work I do; he has from the very beginning said that all I do is "make Unicode fonts", which isn't true, and indeed is not why I am "notable". Brian Kendig asked similar questions, and by the gods, I'm going to feel perfectly free to answer them. But first I will note two things. It is not against the rules for the subject of an article to edit the article.
- From Wikipedia:Autobiography
- "It is difficult to write neutrally about yourself. Therefore, it is considered proper on Wikipedia to let others do the writing. Instead, contribute material or make suggestions on the article's talk page and let independent editors write it into the article itself. However, in clear-cut cases, it is permissible to edit pages connected to yourself. [My italics.] So, you can revert vandalism; but of course it has to be simple, obvious vandalism, and not just a content dispute. Similarly, you should feel free to correct mistaken or out-of-date facts about yourself, such as marital status, current employer, place of birth, and so on. However, be prepared that if the fact has different interpretations, others will edit it."
- From Biographies of living persons
- "In some cases the subject may become involved in an article. They may edit it themselves or have a representative of theirs edit it. They may contact Wikipedians either through the article's talk page or via email. Or, they may provide information through press releases, a personal website or blog, or an autobiography. When information supplied by the subject conflicts with unsourced statements in the article, the unsourced statements should be removed. Information supplied by the subject may be added to the article if:
- It is relevant to the person's notability;
- It is not contentious;
- It is not unduly self-serving;
- It does not involve claims about third parties, or about events not directly related to the subject;
- There is no reasonable doubt that it was written by the subject.
So, now. We've got people agreeing that the article should be here. We have concerns about verifiability and neutrality. Let's improve the article and get Brian and SayWhatYouMean the answers to their questions. The current spate of edits hasn't been very balanced. I don't mind Elves, but I suspect the insertion of them into the article was driven by whimsy (to ba charitable) rather than by the thought that it might improve the article. Evertype 21:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- In light of recent discussions, I am going to remove the "autobiography" notice on the top. Let's now focus on the substantive, not the procedural (which has been dealt with already). – Kaihsu 22:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
- I just wanted to say that the article has improved immensely today; recent edits have tightened the article's focus, removing irrelevant detail and making it clear why the rest is relevant. Reading the article now, I can see why the subject is not just another linguist and font designer, and in fact is noteworthy in his field. It's become an article worth keeping. - Brian Kendig 03:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Actually, Everson, the inclusion of the Elves part gives your bio a bit of a thesis since in your "early life" you get started with Tolkien then you're on a project to include Tolkien typefaces. And actually, I'm a bit confused here, dwarvish and elfish are languages, they're just fictional ones. --SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay 16:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Quenya and Sindarin are languages. Tengwar and Cirth are not languages, they are scripts. I corrected your error. The text "two other conscripts under consideration are Tengwar and Cirth, scripts used by Tolkien's fictional Elves and Dwarves respectively." [...]
- [Actually, I found out a whole lot about Tegwar and Cirith in just a few minutes of research. They're both used by both races. I'm suprised you didn't know that.... LOL. -- SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay 18:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)]
- You wish. Of course I knew. But the Tengwar are chiefly used by the Elves and the Cirth are chiefly used by the Dwarves. It seems to me that the words "races of' in one of your latest edits is superfluous. And could you please nest replies on the Talk page? It makes it easier for the reader. Better still, don't insert things into people's posts. Evertype 20:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- [Actually, I found out a whole lot about Tegwar and Cirith in just a few minutes of research. They're both used by both races. I'm suprised you didn't know that.... LOL. -- SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay 18:53, 26 July 2006 (UTC)]
- [...] is more accurate than what you have restored, and the text should be reverted for accuracy. In my view, the description of Tolkien's novels as "fantasy novels" to be dismissive in any context (not just the context of this page). They are "heroic romances". I should also mention that "childhood interest" is not an accurate description either as I was not a "child" when I encountered Tolkien.
- [Oh god, who cares! --SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay 18:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)]
- Apparently accuracy is appreciated on the Wikipedia. And verifiability. Well, I know when I started reading Tolkien and you don't, so it's not unreasonable for me to inform you that your insertion was inaccurate. Evertype 20:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- [Oh god, who cares! --SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay 18:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)]
- However this bears on your other summary deletions regarding relevant biographical data, but I shall raise this issue on another occasion. Evertype 17:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- (Please do not vandalize what people say on the Talk page. as you did with your inaccurate "sour grapes" edit. Thank you.) Evertype 20:16, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Furthermore, I'm going to have to give you a big fat *nobody cares* with the "whimsy" of the edits. They've been collaborated, checked and balanced. Bad faith/good faith that's your personal opinion and it's all cited, so quit trying to revert it back into your autobiography. --SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay 16:27, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Do try to be civil. I did not suggest that Elves be removed. Regarding the number of authors/editors of the standard, I changed "one of the twelve" to "one of the" because this number is not constant. It was 12 for Unicode 3.0. It was 13 for Unicode 4.0. Unicode 5.0 is about to come out. Saying "one of the editors" is surely sufficient. I know that it is your view that I try to aggrandize my importance with regard to the the other authors, which is why you maintain that the number is relevant. This is your presumption, and has nothing to do with my motivations. Your recent edit "one of the twelve primary" is infelicitous. The Unicode Standard 4.0 used the word "principal" which has a different connotation. Evertype 17:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Fine, we'll go with "one of the editors". --SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay 20:12, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I believe it's useful to give a scope to the number. He's one of the editors of the Unicode standard... how is a reader to know how many editors are there? Two? Two hundred? Two thousand? How large is the group of which he is a member? - Brian Kendig 20:03, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
"Probably the world's leading expert"
"Michael Everson (born January 9, 1963) has been described by Rick McGowan, the vice president of the Unicode Consortium, as "probably the world's leading expert in the computer encoding of scripts""
Statements like these are simply unecessary and uninformative. Please, stop it with the vanity. Zombies 17:24, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Evertype is fighting that one. I actually agree entirely with you that it doesn't belong. If you want, please remove it. I won't because Everson thinks i'm just being "mean". I think this whole article shouldn't exist. i'm the one who was going for the second AfD. If you think its vain and uninformative now, you should have seen it a week ago --SayWhatYouMeanAndMeanWhatYouSay 17:46, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
In my opinion, the "world's leading expert" quote is very good for this article, because it shows that an important person (the vice president of the Unicode Consortium) has high regard for Everson in his field of work. It's not mere vanity; it provides context and credence to the rest of the article - it would be as if Steve Jobs, for example, said that so-and-so is a leading expert in interface design; right there it gives you a clear picture of the person's relevance. If you can think of any better way to open this article while conveying the sense that Everson is a leader in his community, go ahead and edit. - Brian Kendig 19:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)