Talk:Sam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Disambiguation This page is part of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Contents

[edit] Etyomology

The article only mentions the possible origin "his name is God". Searching around, I've found quite a few variations (none of which, by the way, are "his name is God"). "Asked of God", "priest of God", "heard by God" or "son of God" are all found at [1]. "Name of God" is found at [2] and [3], the latter of which also has "God has heard". Should some mention be made of the alternative derivations? — Asbestos | Talk 10:48, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

My name is samuel and I was always told it meant "called by God" based on the story of Samuel (Bible) in the Old Testament. But I don't think it's that important. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rebent (talk • contribs) 23:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Sam and Simon...

Is Sam a short form for Simon too? I'm not American so I don't know if it really is... But I've heard several times that Sam can be a short form of Samuel and Simon too :\ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.54.215.207 (talk)

Never heard that before -Rebent 23:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fictional Characters?

The list of fictional characters who go by Sam is ridiculous. A couple of animated characters on Nickelodeon? Honestly... I don't know if I consider it completely useless or just terribly incomplete (I'm leaning toward the former). It would more accurately be a list of popular children's characters named Sam, but that would perhaps make for a better article than disambiguous subject, albeit still rather pointless. I also question why TV shows are so prevalent as forms of fiction, while movies and books are mentioned only once, with Samwise Gamgee. What about Sam-I-Am in Dr. Suess's Green Eggs And Ham or the title character of the movie I Am Sam?

Furthermore, why not mention Sam's Club?

Comments?

This is a user-edited encyclopedia. You are a user. Please edit this encyclopedia and add this content. Val42 05:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


Okay, fine. I vote it gets deleted. It's completely useless.

[edit] Sam as a given name is not unisex

The shortened version can obviously be applied to Samantha. However the name Sam as a given name is not a non-gender specific name. The name would originate from Samuel the origin would be Hebrew. The shortened version as a given name has origins as a traditional farmers son in England. This is an age-old name. It can be considered similar to George; a girl may often have her name shortened to the shorter version of the full name, but it would highly unlikely that they would have the male given name as their first name. Londo06 00:19, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Read through somewhere else with the name Julian as a similar case in point. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 04:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SAM = Self Aware Machine

SAM can also mean, Self Aware Machine; as described in the book, S.A.M., by Ozy Alvarado. For more information on the book, go to www.selfawaremachine.com. 72.185.85.216 19:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sam (lotr)

what about sam for lord of the rings :\? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.16.48 (talk) 08:08, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

It's under Samwise — Val42 03:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SAM vs Sam

SchmuckyTheCat reverted my splitting of the three-letter acronyms from the names with the comment, "Reverted to revision 161173321 by LesnailLesnail; dab pages are case insensitive. using TW". Would you please direct me to the appropriate Wikipedia policy, and why it doesn't apply to ADA and Ada. — Val42 03:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Primarily a male given name

I dispute the claim that "Sam" is primarily a male name, it does not jive with my experience and there is no citation presented to back up this claim. When I removed this claim it was reverted. Now I understand that when you are reverted here you should come to the talk page, so here I am. User:CorleoneSerpicoMontana gave no reason for the revert, so it is hard to know what argument I should be discussing here.

I will wait for other opinions for a while before taking any further action, but my reading of Wikipedia:Verifiability seems to make it clear that if an uncited claim is disputed that it can be removed and should not be returned without a reliable source. Sam Barsoom (talk) 01:21, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I would imagine you would need a citation the other way. While Sam can be a shortened version of Samantha, the same can be said for Samuel and any number of other names. Sam as a given name is male, ie given at birth, christened, etc. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 01:55, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not making any claim, so I don't need a citation. I am removing a claim that does not have a citation. I personally know two girls named Sam(given name, not an abbreviation). While it may have historically been so, I don't think this is true today. But what you think, and what I think does not matter, what matters it what a reliable source says. I am not making the claim it is unisex so I don't need a citation. You are making the claim it is primarily male so you do need a citation.

Wikipedia:Verifiability says "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material", with that in mind I am going to remove the un-sourced claim and I ask you to please find a reliable source for the claim before you return it. Sam Barsoom (talk) 02:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

While I am not claiming it is a unisex name, there are many sources that list it as such[4]. Sam Barsoom (talk) 02:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Current statement is fine. Sam is a boys christian name, it can be an informal name for a girl. The opening statement covers this. Londo06 (talk) 08:05, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it is contrary to policy to insist that this claim be there once disputed and without providing a source. However I am in no position to enforce the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy, and I will not be baited into edit warring. The fact is the the name "Sam" is almost always an abbreviation of a male or female name. If this was a fact you should be able to find a source instead of just insisting on your opinion. Sam Barsoom (talk) 16:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
The name Sam as a name one may be christened with is male, as an abbreviated name it can be both male or female. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 17:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I agree that Sam is primarily a male given-name. However, since this fact is in dispute, it is up to those making the assertion to provide supporting reference(s). These references could be provided in the body of the article, to support an opening paragraph, but no such references are provided. I've removed the assertion. — Val42 (talk) 04:34, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
That it is not is also an assertion, if someone wants to reference the fact for that they can site and source that. Londo06 (talk) 14:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
I removed any assertions except that it is a "given name". Since you objected to this, I have also removed "given". The only assertion now given is that it is a "name". If you assert that this is also an unsupported assertion, then I will remove "name". — Val42 (talk) 16:59, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Since there was a revert of my edit claiming that my edit was original research, I have removed all assertions about "Sam". There is now no research in the statement "Sam may refer to:", original or otherwise. If we want to dispute that "may" is a weasel word, then I think that we'll need to bring in a third party, because such usage is standard practice on Wikipedia disambiguation articles. If there are any other disputes about these four words, please bring them here. — Val42 (talk) 22:49, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps this may be a useful point to try and build from; Julian as a starting point. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 01:44, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I asked at the Wikipedia Reference Desk for an outside opinion. I do not know this person, but I think that the response below is a result of that request. Do you want to ask for another outside opinion, or would you like to fix the problem? Another option that I can think of is to resume the edit war. — Val42 (talk) 04:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Reading through it looks like the article has been fixed. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 04:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

That's strange that you say that. I just checked the page and the first sentence is exactly what is was when it sparked the controversy. If you consider this fixed, then I suggest that you read this entire section of discussion again. — Val42 (talk) 03:44, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I like the way the page is now, listing the male and female meanings. It no longer makes any claims as to which is more common. I think it is an improvement on how I found it. Thanks folks for working on this in my absence. Sam Barsoom (talk) 19:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
This edit also sits well with me, it lists both gender meanings, recognising a male can be named Sam, but that a female can only be informally named Sam.CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 00:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Popping in to supply a reference for those wanting to verify that Sam has (and of course, can) be used as a female given name and isn't limited to being a dim of Samantha (or Samara or Samuela etc). The US Census Genealogy tables are always a good start. Follow the links through to here and plug Sam into your browser's 'find' box. It's in there along with instances of James, Glenn, Henry and Albert. If still in doubt, you could take it up with Tiger Woods •Florrie•leave a note• 02:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

In light of this new information, I'm going to use this census data as a reference and edit this page accordingly. — Val42 (talk) 18:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
If you are to do that you should follow that up with Arthur, Peter, David, James, etc. I would have no problem with the phrase almost universally added to page. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 18:27, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I've made the change. I'll start a new topic below to discuss the formatting so that it won't get lost in this discussion.
However, CorleoneSerpicoMontana, I fail to understand what you are saying above. Look over the page, as I've edited it, and let me know if you think that it should be changed. Remember, formatting will be covered in a new topic. — Val42 (talk) 18:43, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm saying whilst it is the prerogative of the parents to call their child what they like, eg females were named Arthur, Peter, David, James, etc from the details in that census. Whilst those references have merit Sam as a birth, given, christian, fore, first, etc name is 'almost universally' male. Informally it is of course the shortened version of a multitude of world female names. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 18:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I agree that using "Sam" as a male name is by-far the greater use of that name. But the statistics that I added from the U.S. Census Bureau allow the reader to come to that conclusion. Unless we can find a reference from a reliable source, we don't need to make that conclusion for the reader any more. — Val42 (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Attempted to add some clarity to the article. re while it can be a female given name, so can Roger, David, Arthur, etc. Left the female given name in as there are facts that prove that parents in the US have named their daughters with a male given name. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 21:42, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, besides goofing up the formatting, you are pushing a certain point of view. Let's let the statistics speak for themselves. — Val42 (talk) 21:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
After reading through what has become a very long talk page and gone through a couple of edits, this one appears to be better, however there was an older edit that went down fine with me.Alexsanderson83 (talk) 18:02, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Outside view

Having found this discussion, I see little attempt at actually finding sources. Here's a smattering I found: [5], [6], [7], [8] and [9]. I don't know if these will support any particular version, but I hope they will help settle the dispute. I agree with those here requiring sources, of course. Verifiability is non-negotiable.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Current Edit

given name, with dimunitives listed. That is the only way it can go if you want to use the term diminutive. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 08:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Agree Sam is only a male christian or forename, but it is the diminutive for the female forename Samantha. Londo06 (talk) 09:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Sam is primarily a male given name. It's not "Sam may refer to" a given name...check out other name entries on wikipedia...a name is what "Sam" is, first and foremost. I don't think people are looking for the Society of America Magicians, or whatever...they want to know the origin and history of Sam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.148.156 (talk) 07:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Jax —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.8.148.156

I don't object to what you are saying. I'm agreeing with another editor who brought up that saying "primarily a male given name" needs a reference. Since the editor has affirmed this in the Outside view section (above), there have been no attempts to even provide references for this statement. If you want this back on, you'll need to provide a reference from a reliable source. — Val42 (talk) 16:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Reverted recent vandalism to the page, after reading through the talk page and the edit history it looks like the page has been a target for quite some time. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 07:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

So, you think that "Samantha" is a male name? See discussion under "Primarily a male given name", "Outside view" and "Current edit" for why this change was made. — Val42 (talk) 18:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Reverted previous edit as it removed detail. Looking through a user had an issue with Samantha, but it looks like a dead issue as it stated that it was a female name.Londo06 (talk) 13:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
You have just admitted that "Samantha" is a female name. Then tell me why you repeatedly reclassify it as a male name. — Val42 (talk) 18:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I've made changes according to U.S. Census Bureau statistics. If you have a disagreement over the format, then let's discuss it in the new topic below.

[edit] Format and statistics

I have added the information based on U.S. Census Bureau statistics from link given above. I don't think that there can be any disagreement about the U.S. Census Bureau being a reliable source or the actual statistics (though I couldn't find a year). I listed them in order by decreasing percentages. If I've made minor errors, please correct them. But I think that any major changes should be discussed here first; I don't want to have another edit war started. — Val42 (talk) 18:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pushing of marginal material

There is a major issue here with a user pushing ideas that would fall under Wikipedia:No original research and Neutral point of view. This assertion has been given credit, but it is being pushed as the norm. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 23:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree. That is why I'm surprised that you would condemn what you are doing while continuing to do it. I have requested assistance at Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance) to avoid another edit war over this issue. — Val42 (talk) 17:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Keep it simple

I supplied the link to the 1990 census data simply as a source to confirm that Sam can and is used as a female given name, not only as a dim. (Btw, a dim is not defined as a 'shortened' version of a name, it is a familiar (pet) or shortened version. ie, Georgette is a diminutive feminine form of George but it is longer than the name from which it is derived.) I don't see a need to list every single instance of each name of which Sam may be a dim, especially if there is no article to relate the name back to.

Not surprisingly, this version of the disambig was far simpler, imo. Although I'd probably change The diminutive of to A diminutive of.

Possibly there are cultural perspectives at issue here. It is far more common in the US to find what may traditionally be a dim endowed as a given name. Bill, Pam etc. It is also far more common to find the lines between a traditional masculine name and feminine name blurred.

Acknowledgement that Sam, while traditionally a masculine name, is also used as a feminine name should be a reasonable compromise without having to quantify the numbers or for any individual male Sam to fear an erosion of their masculinity.

I initially only came here to add a TV character name to the page. Might just do that now and slink back to rugby league. •Florrie•leave a note• 01:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I have removed "diminutive" because of what you pointed out. I have also requested assistance at Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance) to avoid another edit war over this issue. — Val42 (talk) 17:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
It does appear a bit odd with the last couple of edits to have the stats up front. I think the problem with Sam as a female given name has been fixed; yes it can be it is far from the norm, etc. I would go back to an older edit and have the stats below, although their worth can be questioned for Sam as a female name as Arthur seems just as likely to be a female name as Sam is.Alexsanderson83 (talk) 18:06, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Eliminate conjecture

The claim that 'Sam' is a shortened version of the names given below it is unsourced, and is pure conjecture. (We don't know who uses what nicknames). However the Census Bureau does record the gender that goes with each name. How about the following new version, where the names are in strict percentage order, so we are not interpreting anything. We are merely giving the census data. We have to leave out Samson and Samwise since they are not included in the census listings (i.e. they are not among the 1219 most common men's names or the 4275 most common women's names)

Male given names:
Samuel (0.306%)
Sam (0.092%)
Sammy (0.025%)
Sammie (0.012%)
Samual (0.004%)
Female given names:
Samantha (0.124%)
Samatha (0.006%)
Sammie (0.005%)
Sam (0.002%)
Samara (0.002%)
Samira (0.002%)
Sammy (0.001%)
Samella (0.001%)
Samuel (0.001%)

I'm proposing as a possible solution to the recent edit war. EdJohnston (talk) 18:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I would go along with this except that Samson and Samwise should be listed. Samson is prominent to have its own article. Samwise, while a disambiguation article (that could potentially be merged here), Samwise Gamgee is called "Sam" in the movie trilogy "The Lord of the Rings". (It has been too long since I've read the books, but the same is probably true there too.) — Val42 (talk) 18:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
What about Sami, Samir, etc. Surely the yearless US figures should not end up as the up front details stating what Sam is. Alexsanderson83 (talk) 19:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
The U.S. Census Bureau is a reference that we can use so that we are not doing original research. If we can find references for these names or there are articles for these names, then we should add them. — Val42 (talk) 19:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I implemented the above suggestion. I event took into consideration Alexsanderson83's concern that the reference not "state what Sam is" (paraphrase) by using "may be". — Val42 (talk) 19:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I like it. I am glad that my comments led to a more informative and accurate version of the page. It seems to me that the best outcome of a content dispute is the improvement of the article, so I am a happy Sam. Sam Barsoom (talk) 20:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Sam as a common usage male given, first, fore, christian, etc name is the only irrefutable direct claim on the name, the others can only claim it as a diminutive, informal, etc. Whilst we recognise that a female can be christened Sam, she could also have James, Arthur, Rudy, etc on a birth certificate. I believe the edit is moving sideways as much as it is forwards. I would move for a return to a cleaner edit that moved the referenced percentages down the page. I would also press other users to look through other names for a way to move forwards. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Census percentages

Just a passing comment from somebody not involved with the above discussions - is it possible to make it clear that the percentage figures apply to the United States only after all this is Wikipedia not American-Wikipedia. MilborneOne (talk) 21:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. Sam Barsoom (talk) 21:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I've made this edit. — Val42 (talk) 22:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks MilborneOne (talk) 22:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) For the comments elsewhere that the data is 'yearless', the source and methodology is all listed at the site if you care to look, and, as I mentioned earlier, it is from the 1990 census. It should be understood that the information was collected from a sample only - 6.3 million records - not all records. [10] •Florrie•leave a note• 02:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I would have these stats further down, echoing the above this is not American-Wikipedia. CorleoneSerpicoMontana (talk) 03:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I personally don't see a need for them to be on the page at all. The link was simply provided as a source to support the fact that Sam, while not traditional, can be, and is by use, a name for a female. •Florrie•leave a note• 03:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion

Remove any mention of gender (which seems to be the biggest bone of contention)...

  • Other uses:

etc etc

and forget about gender and statistics. See the disambig page for Cameron as one example of a name which can be either female or male. •Florrie•leave a note• 03:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

  • While this cleaner version has its merits I believe Sam has its place, if not at the top, at least near the top is Sam as a male given name, and that it can be a female given name further down, but only in the same way that Arthur, James, Rudy, etc. The diminutive element is key as it shows that both male and female names have valid claims on the informal name Sam.Alexsanderson83 (talk) 08:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • The version now on the page is fully sourced. If you want to add additional facts about how the name is used, I believe those facts should have sources. It seems you want to announce 'norms' in how the name should be used, but I don't see where you are finding those norms. (Rules about what is 'really' a man's name, or how diminutives are used, for example). EdJohnston (talk) 00:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The above suggestion would be a nice, clean version that I would agree to. In fact, I did something very similar to this earlier. But certain editors insisted on stating unequivocally that "Sam" is a male name and only a male name. Even when "Samantha" was part of the list, the whole list was declared male names. I asked twice for outside opinions at the Village Pump, and both times they said that stating that it is a male name requires references. In fact, I was brought into this edit war in the first place because an editor requested references that "Sam" is exclusively a male name. Since adding the statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau, the article has been the most stable it has been in a while. So, since the above suggestion has caused significant problems in the past, I prefer stability over conciseness in this article. — Val42 (talk) 06:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Social Accounting Matrix

In economics and national accounting a "SAM" is the abbreviation for "Social accounting matrix", so please add that to the list of abbreviations. A quick reference would be the Office for National Statistics (UK) [report], but most economics and financial policy work using national accounts will reference SAM's. (Econfusion (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC))