Talk:Andrey Rublev

Controversies

In the past Verdasco kind of complaint about Rublev. Now there was some kind of incident with Renzo Olivo at 2015 Hoff Open. Are they notable enough to be mentioned in the article? --Kompik (talk) 08:53, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Joao Sousa in an interview also mentioned his inadequate behaviour at the Davis Cup, but I think being a bit cheeky is normal for his age.--Tomcat (7) 10:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the Hoff Open, I think it is good to wait until ATP responses, because I watched the match and neither saw nor heared any "threats". --Tomcat (7) 10:25, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Name

It should be written "Rublyov", not "Rublev"; Russian "ё" stands for /yo/. But if this is a matter of convention, then just ignore this. :) -- KWiki (talk) 14:52, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Secondary Residence in Miami?

No idea if there is any truth to this:

https://playersbio.com/andrey-rublev/Lena Key (talk) 22:09, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 27 July 2026

Andrey Rublev → Andrey Rublev (tennis player) – "Andrey Rublev" is ambiguous, as it is also a valid transliteration of the name of the 15th-century Russian icon painter Andrei Rublev. ~2026-41877-69 (talk) 23:12, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

• Comment. Although valid, we have an interesting situation where pretty much all the results for "Andrey Rublev" are for the tennis player while all the results for "Andrei Rublev" are for the icon painter or film (i.e. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC). Maybe someone can analyze this further (e.g. check Ngrams), but we do have a hatnote. Mellk (talk) 23:18, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose – I don’t see the justification behind why retaining the current article title would be considered confusing. As Mellk pointed out, most English-language results (ergo, the transliteration issue we’re discussing) spell the two Rublevs’ shared given name differently enough as to delineate them. There is also no one concrete rendering of the historical Rublev’s name, with a number of sources now choosing "Rublyov" for both the painter, and the eponymous film of considerable renown.

Rovingrobert (talk) 05:26, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Oppose. IMO the hatnote is sufficient enough, especially considering how the translation of their names impacts which one comes up. QWisps (talk) 05:45, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Oppose agree with above comments. I don't see where a move is justified this case. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:08, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

• Strong support. It is confusing because, off the top of my head, I could not tell you what is the norm for spelling the icon painter's name. Why would I, since both forms are perfectly valid? The fact that different forms predominate for one or the other is a fluke. For example, see Andrey Rublev: The Artist and His World. The different spellings do not in any way delineate or differentiate. Srnec (talk) 13:46, 28 July 2026 (UTC)
• Move Query Why are you also not proposing we move "Andrei Rublev" to "Andrei Rublev (artist)" so as not to confuse the painter with the famous tennis player? I'll let that talk page know about it. Fyunck(click) (talk) 17:47, 28 July 2026 (UTC)
• Comment (tennis) is the preferred disambiguation tag, per WP:NCSP. 162 etc. (talk) 20:25, 28 July 2026 (UTC)
• Support famous icon painter is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC per long-term significance and educational value. Transliteration of Andrei/Andrey is a Wikipedia editor choice, not an actual difference. Both spellings are valid and used in RSs. Walrasiad (talk) 20:49, 28 July 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose - per Rovingrobert and also believe hatnote is sufficient. Don't see an issue here.--Wolbo (talk) 22:59, 28 July 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose for all the reasons already stated and the old adage of "if it ain't broke then don't fix it." This has been like it for a long time with seemingly no wave of confusion. The hatnote is totally sufficient to redirect anyone looking for the painter who, I for one, had never heard of until this discussion began. Shrug02 (talk) 00:27, 29 July 2026 (UTC)