This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Athletics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
sport of athletics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and join the
discussion.AthleticsWikipedia:WikiProject AthleticsTemplate:WikiProject AthleticsAthletics articles
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.
Oppose: It appears that the word "track" is not part of the trademark. In the cited sources, I have found mentions of "Tartan" as the brand name, but not "Tartan Track". The closest I found was "Tartan Turf", not "Tartan Track".
Example:
here, only the word "Tartan" is tagged with the "®" symbol.
Example quote: "
and Tartan Turf ('Turf', not 'Track') was selected for the playing field" and "Cost of the Tartan Turf, manufactured by 3M Co., will be about $500,000, the same price for Astro Turf, a product of Monsanto Corp." and "$400,000 for the Tartan Turf and $100,000 for site preparation" and "in the Tartan Turf surface over the sodded infield" and "by choosing Tartan Turf, Pittsburgh becomes ..." and "Tennessee and Wisconsin have Tartan Turf fields" and "preferred Tartan Turf because players ..." and "Tartan Turf is not as slippery in wet weather" and "the Tartan Turf field at the University of Tennessee" and "Tartan Turf gave a better surface for the bounce of the ball" and "Tartan Turf has better subsurface, also" and "the entire Tartan Turf installation".
A trademark is a subset of proper name. And a trademark is not genericized until a court of competent jurisdiction declares it so (and even that only applies within that particular jurisdiction). And Tartan Turf is a (3M) brand of artificial grass, not another name for Tartan Track. And that fact that varioius writers you've quote have abbreviated one or another of these product names to just "Tartan" is immaterial. —
SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 11:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment: Also striking my previous support, per Cinderella157 and Dicklyon. It doesn't seem to be a current trademark, and the "Turf" part of it is not capitalized in the sources that are cited in the article or in most other sources. —
BarrelProof (
talk)
17:53, 18 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment Now striking my previous support. While "Tartan" is clearly a trademark, the discussion so far indicates there is reason to question whether "Tartan Track" and "Tartan Turf" are also (or were) trademarked (ie not just "Tartan"). If these bigrams are/were indeed trademarked, then the MOS tells us these should be capitalised and I would support capitalisation accordingly with appropriate evidence to substantiate this. However, if they are not, then the general advice per
WP:NCCAPS and
MOS:CAPS applies. The evidence indicates that "track" and "turf" in these bigrams are not consistently capped in sources. Consequently, they should not be capped. Unless the trademark status can be resolved, neither "track" nor "turf" should be capitalised in these bigrams.
Cinderella157 (
talk)
09:28, 18 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The history publication I referenced is more than 20 years old. I suppose only "Tartan" is currently maintained as a trademark by the company that now owns the brand name. Presumably, the history document was accurate when it was written. —
BarrelProof (
talk)
07:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't see a good reason to presume that. It's just a corporate PR piece. Pretty much no other sources treat "Tartan Track" as a trademark. You see things like "TARTAN brand track aggregate" and such.
Dicklyon (
talk)
22:15, 17 August 2023 (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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Athletics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
sport of athletics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and join the
discussion.AthleticsWikipedia:WikiProject AthleticsTemplate:WikiProject AthleticsAthletics articles
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.
Oppose: It appears that the word "track" is not part of the trademark. In the cited sources, I have found mentions of "Tartan" as the brand name, but not "Tartan Track". The closest I found was "Tartan Turf", not "Tartan Track".
Example:
here, only the word "Tartan" is tagged with the "®" symbol.
Example quote: "
and Tartan Turf ('Turf', not 'Track') was selected for the playing field" and "Cost of the Tartan Turf, manufactured by 3M Co., will be about $500,000, the same price for Astro Turf, a product of Monsanto Corp." and "$400,000 for the Tartan Turf and $100,000 for site preparation" and "in the Tartan Turf surface over the sodded infield" and "by choosing Tartan Turf, Pittsburgh becomes ..." and "Tennessee and Wisconsin have Tartan Turf fields" and "preferred Tartan Turf because players ..." and "Tartan Turf is not as slippery in wet weather" and "the Tartan Turf field at the University of Tennessee" and "Tartan Turf gave a better surface for the bounce of the ball" and "Tartan Turf has better subsurface, also" and "the entire Tartan Turf installation".
A trademark is a subset of proper name. And a trademark is not genericized until a court of competent jurisdiction declares it so (and even that only applies within that particular jurisdiction). And Tartan Turf is a (3M) brand of artificial grass, not another name for Tartan Track. And that fact that varioius writers you've quote have abbreviated one or another of these product names to just "Tartan" is immaterial. —
SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 11:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment: Also striking my previous support, per Cinderella157 and Dicklyon. It doesn't seem to be a current trademark, and the "Turf" part of it is not capitalized in the sources that are cited in the article or in most other sources. —
BarrelProof (
talk)
17:53, 18 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment Now striking my previous support. While "Tartan" is clearly a trademark, the discussion so far indicates there is reason to question whether "Tartan Track" and "Tartan Turf" are also (or were) trademarked (ie not just "Tartan"). If these bigrams are/were indeed trademarked, then the MOS tells us these should be capitalised and I would support capitalisation accordingly with appropriate evidence to substantiate this. However, if they are not, then the general advice per
WP:NCCAPS and
MOS:CAPS applies. The evidence indicates that "track" and "turf" in these bigrams are not consistently capped in sources. Consequently, they should not be capped. Unless the trademark status can be resolved, neither "track" nor "turf" should be capitalised in these bigrams.
Cinderella157 (
talk)
09:28, 18 August 2023 (UTC)reply
The history publication I referenced is more than 20 years old. I suppose only "Tartan" is currently maintained as a trademark by the company that now owns the brand name. Presumably, the history document was accurate when it was written. —
BarrelProof (
talk)
07:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't see a good reason to presume that. It's just a corporate PR piece. Pretty much no other sources treat "Tartan Track" as a trademark. You see things like "TARTAN brand track aggregate" and such.
Dicklyon (
talk)
22:15, 17 August 2023 (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.