Talk:Import–export (logic)

Philosophy Low‑importance

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 16 August 2021[edit]

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.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Import–export (logic). It seems there is strong agreement on all of the following points: 1) this topic is not primary for "Import-Export" or similar formulations. 2) RS usage does not compel us to capitalize "Export". 3) an en-dash is the most appropriate separator for the title terms. (non-admin closure) Colin M (talk) 22:07, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Import-Export (logic) → ? – The primary topic here is something on Import and export or Exim Bank. This logical term is notable, but I don't see Import-Export as a common name for it in a source review, and am not sure what the common name is. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 18:14, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure Import-Export is the only term for it aside from a few minor variations (e.g. "IE", "Import/Export"). Botterweg14 (talk) 19:49, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~Move to Import-export (logic)~~. Without disambiguation, the term is primarily a concept of international trade. Per MOS:HYPHENCAPS and MOS:TITLECAPS, the 'E' should be lowercased. (I notice lowercased "import-export" in a section heading of this cited source.) I also wonder if the hyphen should be an en dash or a slash. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:37, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and moved it. I've retained the caps since it's a proper name and the dash since that's how I usually see it printed, but I don't have strong feelings about that. Botterweg14 (talk) 23:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a proper name. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Import–export (logic) (with an en dash, per discussion below). Hyphen version struck through above. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:10, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support ~~Import-export (logic)~~ Import–export (logic) - also not seeing it as a proper name. I was able to pull up the first three sources (Sider, Egre/Rott, Gillies) and the 1st and 3rd of those use lowercase, with the 2nd using one instance of each. The page should not have been moved prior to closure of this discussion, but it's a small difference regardless. ASUKITE 20:48, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Any thoughts on Import–export (logic) or Import/export (logic)? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:47, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, I always have trouble noticing dash types and italics. this section of the manual of style says we should not use a hyphen. I would support Import–export (logic). Redirecting Import-Export (logic) there will cover the hyphen. MOS:SLASH says to avoid slashes joining two words, but doesn't mention article titles specifically. I've always preferred dashes as slashes serve a different purpose outside mainspace but I'm not opposed to them. ASUKITE 00:08, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.