Content deleted Content added
→"Quivira (typeface)" listed at Redirects for discussion: archived using OneClickArchiver) |
→Requested move 16 September 2021: archived using OneClickArchiver) Tag: Reverted |
||
Line 493:
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect [[:Quivira (typeface)]] and has thus listed it [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|for discussion]]. This discussion will occur at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 15#Quivira (typeface)]] until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> [[User:1234qwer1234qwer4|1234 kb of .rar files]] ([[User talk:1234qwer1234qwer4|is this dangerous?]]) 19:02, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
{{Clear}}
== Requested move 16 September 2021 ==
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|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: '''NOT MOVED''': The consensus is that the current name properly describes the contents of this article and is not ambiguous. <small>([[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions#Non-admin closure|non-admin closure]])</small> [[User:Spekkios|Spekkios]] ([[User talk:Spekkios|talk]]) 00:52, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
----
[[:Unicode]] → {{no redirect|Unicode Standard}} – The term "Unicode" is ambiguous, and may be used to refer to the Unicode Standard, the Unicode Consortium, Unicode characters, Unicode-encoded text, or any number of things related to the implementation of the Unicode Standard or the processing of Unicode text. The Unicode Consortium actively discourages the use of the term "Unicode" as an isolated noun ("Always use “Unicode” as an adjective followed by an appropriate noun. Do not use “Unicode” alone as a noun" [https://www.unicode.org/policies/logo_policy.html Unicode Consortium Name and Trademark Usage Policy]), and states that "The Unicode® Standard" should be used in preference to simply "Unicode" (of course we do not use ® on Wikipedia per [[MOS:TMRULES]]). The subject of this article is specifically the Unicode Standard (the opening sentence should be "'''The Unicode Standard''' is an information technology standard for ..."), and not the general concept of "Unicode", so the article should be moved to '''[[Unicode Standard]]''', with [[Unicode]] left as a redirect to avoid having to rename thousands of wikilinks. [[User:BabelStone|BabelStone]] ([[User talk:BabelStone|talk]]) 16:30, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
*Agree. [[User:Drmccreedy|DRMcCreedy]] ([[User talk:Drmccreedy|talk]]) 21:03, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
**[[WP:NOTAVOTE]]. [[User:Calidum|<span style="color:#01796F; font-family:serif">'''-- ''Calidum'''''</span>]] 15:41, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
*'''Oppose move.''' See [[WP:OFFICIALNAMES]]. We do not use a name simply because it is official, and the common name here is Unicode. '''[[User:Old Naval Rooftops|<span style="color:#002244">O.N.R.</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:Old Naval Rooftops|<span style="color:#002244">(talk)</span>]]</sup> 03:52, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
**This does not address the ambiguity issue. "Unicode" is commonly used to refer to the Unicode Consortium. Just one random example from a [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57848226 BBC article]: "Rachel Murphy and Amy Wiegand sent sample artwork to Unicode as part of their plea for a drone emoji", "Rachel Murphy thinks Unicode is wrong to not include a drone emoji", "Unicode rejected their proposal", etc. [[User:BabelStone|BabelStone]] ([[User talk:BabelStone|talk]]) 13:33, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
***The article refers to the consortium as "the Unicode Consortium" on first reference. [[User:Calidum|<span style="color:#01796F; font-family:serif">'''-- ''Calidum'''''</span>]] 15:40, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
***As Calidum says. And even in its isolated form here, there is no misunderstanding in what is intended: "sent to the Unicode Consortium". How could this be misread? This obviousness is present throughout the article. No ambivalence. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 11:39, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
*Generally '''oppose''' as per O.N.R. above. As far as I have ever seen, in general usage, "Unicode" as a bare noun is only used to refer to the standard. Even at UTC meetings with actual officers and members present, use of plain "Unicode" referred only to the standard, never the consortium, Unicode encoded text, characters, or anything else. However, I fully agree the article lede should begin with "The Unicode Standard" as the official name. [[User:Vanisaac|Van]][[User talk:Vanisaac|Isaac]], MPLL<sup> [[Special:Contributions/Vanisaac|cont]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-3.5ex"><small>[[WP:WPWR|WpWS]]</small></sub> 04:47, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
**The article title should match the bolded term in the lede, so if you accept that the lede should start with "The Unicode Standard" in bold then you really have to accept that the article title should also be "[The] Unicode Standard". [[User:BabelStone|BabelStone]] ([[User talk:BabelStone|talk]]) 13:33, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
***More the other way around: in general, the article title should reappear in bold in the [[WP:FIRSTSENTENCE|first sentence]]; an alternative name can be added in bold (as is the case today [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Unicode&diff=1044856772&oldid=1044753689&diffmode=source]). -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 12:44, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
*'''Oppose'''. We use common names, not official ones. [[User:Calidum|<span style="color:#01796F; font-family:serif">'''-- ''Calidum'''''</span>]] 15:40, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
*'''Support''' due to [[WP:PRECISE]], not due to official names. That rationale is badly flawed, yes, but the precision one is very relevant. [[User:Red Slash|<span style="color:#FF4131;">Red</span>]] [[User talk:Red Slash|<b><span style="color:#460121;">Slash</span></b>]] 19:08, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
* '''Oppose'''. First of all, possibble ambiguity is limited to "[the] Unicode Standard" and "Unicode Consortium"; other terms mentioned in the proposal (''Unicode characters, Unicode-encoded text, or any number of things ...'') do not appear as ambiguous terms. What is ambigu in "Unicode characters"? — instead it is fully self-explaining! When specification between ...Standard or ...Consortium characters be needed, one should do so in the text. Also, a name like "Unicode CLDR" is not shortened to "Unicode" ever, nor is any Unicode Technical Report name [https://www.unicode.org/reports/index.html#annexes], so these do not apply.
:Second, Unicode themselves uses plain "Unicode" for the Standard throughout and consistently: see [https://www.unicode.org/main.html main TOC], [https://www.unicode.org/glossary/#U Glossary]. Except for self-referring situations, this leaves no misunderstanding (when self-referring could be confusing, one writes like "The Unicode Standard is maintained by Unicode Consortium"). No problem here.
:On wikipedia: As others have noted, [[WP:OFFICIALNAMES]] applies. Also, per [[WP:DISAMBIGUATION]]: we can easily establish that "Unicode Standard" is the ''primary topic'' for "Unicode". From there, we can create article [[Unicode (disambiguation)]] (with two entrances then) and add hatnote {{tl|about}} to this article. Also, per [[WP:COMMONNAME]], current title is preferred and acceptable. -[[User:DePiep|DePiep]] ([[User talk:DePiep|talk]]) 12:08, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
* '''Oppose''' I disagree with {{tq|The subject of this article is specifically the Unicode Standard}} - it is about a broad concept of Unicode characters, Unicode-encoded text, Unicode input systems ... basically anything other than the organization called [[Unicode Consortium]]. I'm not opposed to a new [[History of the Unicode Standard]] article which focuses specifically on information about the development of versions of the Unicode Standard. [[User:力]] (power~enwiki, [[User talk:力|<span style="color:#FA0;font-family:courier">π</span>]], [[Special:Contributions/力|<span style="font-family:courier">ν</span>]]) 17:30, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' per DePiep and 力 (power~enwiki). Also, if we are to use it, I believe the Wikipedia [[MOS:CAPS|guidelines for capitalization]] would indicate that "standard" should be in lowercase (regardless of whether the consortium uses lowercase or not). Wikipedia avoids unnecessary use of uppercase. —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 00:21, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from [[Template:Archive bottom]] -->
</div><div style="clear:both;"></div>
| |||