Talk:Thornbury branch line

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 9 February 2017[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move all per overwhelming consensus. Be patient; it will take me some time to perform all the actual moves. Feel free to help. — JFG talk 22:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC) — JFG talk 22:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

– Downcase Branch Line per common lowercase in edited sources (news and books). Dicklyon (talk) 00:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources that support the observation that "Branch Line" is not a part of any proper name for these lines[edit]

Survey[edit]

  • Support as nom – I have checked the sources carefully and found no evidence of proper names for any of these branch lines. Dicklyon (talk) 00:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support—thanks for the extensive surveying linked above. In my view, this should be an uncontroversial set of moves. Tony (talk) 07:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support – WP:NCCAPS instructs us not to capitalize such words in titles. {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 07:40, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - These are all Proper Noun Phrases and thus should be capitalised. Same old discussion in different venues. Suggest that it is well past time that we stopped prodding this particular WP:DEADHORSE. Mjroots (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – trivial MOS moves that really shouldn't be controversial. Laurdecl talk 05:07, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – These isn't any evidence that these are 'proper noun phrases', or indeed, evidence that 'proper noun phrase' is a proper noun phrase (in reference to Mjroots' annoying capitalisation of said phrase). In accordance with WP:NCCAPS, what's considered a proper name on Wikipedia is determined by surveys of reliable sources. Such surveys, provided above, show that these are not proper names. Furthermore, it is important to note that WP:TITLEFORMAT, which is a policy, tells us that Wikipedia is written in sentence case, meaning that evidence of the use of capitalisation in timetables or headings is not relevant. What matters is usage in a sentence, and Dicklyon's survey shows that the present capitalisation is not in accordance with usage in reliable sources. RGloucester — ☎ 19:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Note that "Branchline" like in the lead of the present Thornbury Branch Line is also very rare in sources, except for a brewing company. Dicklyon (talk) 01:32, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mj, re your 3 points:

  • These are all Proper Noun Phrases and thus should be capitalised. – If you can present a credible case that even one of these is a proper name, or is treated as proper name in sources, I will withdraw this multi RM and treat each one more carefully and individually.
  • Same old discussion in different venues. – RM is the venue you insisted on; this issue is in addition being discussed on the project talk page (the same page where you stated that you are ignoring that discussion).
  • Suggest that it is well past time that we stopped prodding this particular WP:DEADHORSE. – The gradual move toward reducing over-capitalization per WP:NCCAPS is not a dead horse, just an ongoing gnoming process. In particular, before your rant here, nobody has opposed downcasing any "X branch line" as far as I can recall.

Dicklyon (talk) 17:43, 9 February 2017 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Thornbury_branch_line&oldid=1202223303"