Conversation:

I think in Italy he was actually baptised Cristoforo Colombo, not Christopher. The name Christopher doesn't exist in Italy, so it almost definitely would not have been his actual name. I'm pretty sure that modern Italians call him Cristoforo, so I guess when he was born they would have as well.

I'm hoping this can be changed before the entry is edited...

Niwt

Hmm - I've just done more googles on it since I wrote my last post, and there seem to be so many different names around I've just gone and got myself confused - but at least mention the name Cristoforo? Please?

Ah googling... today's encyclopedia, eh?

Well, it's out of my hands now. I believe that's the translation. But it's certainly fun to pronounce. Say it with me - Cristoforo... Cristoforo.

Hmmm, well maybe the Eds will change something. Or maybe not.

It is quite cool to pronounce, except I can't roll my Rs!

I believe they check the forums under the entry when it goes on the front page. At least, I know they used to. They're pretty stressed and busy after Petunia. You might should leave a comment at <./>Feedback-Editorial</.>.

Yes, I know that the conversation forum for an entry used to be a good place to post a change while it was being edited. However, that was way back in 2001, and things have probably changed. I honestly don't know if I should bother going to Editorial Feedback. Do you think it is worth it?

Is it worth it? It's not a major point, but I think it needs clarification.

I would just like to make sure that it doesn't say he was baptised "Christopher", as that is basically impossible as the Italians didn't/don't use that name. However, I don't know whether the alternative would be Cristoforo or Cristobel, so I can't comment if I'm not sure of the facts! (Then again, I guess no one is.)

How about this?

We ask the eds to add a footnote saying that no-one is quite sure of what he was baptized as... yadda yadda yadda

If, indeed, that is correct.

That's an excellent correction, but, as you said, is it correct that nobody knows what he was baptised as? I guess it would be. It was ages ago.

It's your decision though

It's your entry

Well, if no-one knows what he was baptised as, is it not incorrect for the entry to state what he was baptised as?

Go for it.

But how do we know that no-one knows what he was baptised as?

I'm just going by you.

But if we're not sure, it really shouldn't be there anyway.

I guess I'd better say something at Ed Feed.

Well, you've made the point yourself, Niwt - the conversations have always been viewed as an extension of the entry anyway

Pah...

Yeah, pah...