Talk:Korolyov cross

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

Requested move[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was No move Parsecboy (talk) 13:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Korolyov crossKorolyov Cross — "Cross" is a proper noun in this context, so should be capitalised. — GW 20:42, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Oppose. This goes against my understanding of our capitalization conventions of noun phrases that contain proper nouns but are not themselves proper nouns. To tell whether it's a proper noun, ask: can I use an article with it? E.g. which of the following two sentences is grammatically correct: (a) I saw a Korolyov cross yesterday. (b) I saw Korolyov Cross yesterday. I'm pretty sure (a) is right and (b) is wrong, so I don't think we should change the capitalization. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:09, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The explanation given below does not address the question. See Noun#Proper nouns and common nouns for the distinction here. Yes, this is the name used for this phenomenon, but it seems to be a common noun, not a proper name. Chick Bowen 03:24, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. "Cross" is not a proper noun in this context. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:16, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the phrase "Korolyov cross" does not appear itself to be a proper noun and thus "cross" should not be capitalised per WP:CAPS.

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

Can you explain why you feel this is a proper noun? Isn't it a common name for the phenomenon that merely contains a proper noun? Compare St. Elmo's fire: Elmo is capitalized because it's part of the name of the guy the phenomenon is named after, but fire is not, since it just describes what the phenomenon looks like, just like "cross" does here. Chick Bowen 00:36, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was presented as a name during the Soyuz TMA-12 launch coverage. --GW 00:52, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.