This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
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 the page to
Conduit (convention), per the discussion below, which showed a consensus for moving the page. Although there was approximately equal support for retaining caps and for moving to lowercase, it was pointed out that this is indeed a trademark, so opting for lowercase here per
WP:MOS-TM; this form also makes the problem of
WP:DIFFCAPS moot. If a further move is desired, please initiate a new discussion.
Dekimasuよ! 22:35, 27 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Support
CONduit (convention). Capitalization seems distinctive and important enough to keep rather than being pure stylization. Agree with nom otherwise.
SnowFire (
talk) 19:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Support Conduit (convention) – per
MOS:TM and the fact that it appears as "Conduit" in reliable sources, such as ref 7 in the article.
Dicklyon (
talk) 02:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Support including a disambiguation but Oppose changing the capitalization to Conduit. The overwhelming majority of reliable sourcing and 100% of the official sourcing uses CONduit -- we have every indication that this is the full and legal name of the subject and not stylization. --
Yaksar(let's chat) 07:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
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 the page to
Conduit (convention), per the discussion below, which showed a consensus for moving the page. Although there was approximately equal support for retaining caps and for moving to lowercase, it was pointed out that this is indeed a trademark, so opting for lowercase here per
WP:MOS-TM; this form also makes the problem of
WP:DIFFCAPS moot. If a further move is desired, please initiate a new discussion.
Dekimasuよ! 22:35, 27 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Support
CONduit (convention). Capitalization seems distinctive and important enough to keep rather than being pure stylization. Agree with nom otherwise.
SnowFire (
talk) 19:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Support Conduit (convention) – per
MOS:TM and the fact that it appears as "Conduit" in reliable sources, such as ref 7 in the article.
Dicklyon (
talk) 02:18, 13 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Support including a disambiguation but Oppose changing the capitalization to Conduit. The overwhelming majority of reliable sourcing and 100% of the official sourcing uses CONduit -- we have every indication that this is the full and legal name of the subject and not stylization. --
Yaksar(let's chat) 07:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
