Talk:NEXUS

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

Rephrase to remove advertisement-like tone[edit]

I rephrased pretty much the whole document to make it read less like a government brochure advertising NEXUS, and more like a Wikipedia article (at the suggestion of the previous editor). I tried to avoid any obvious Americanisms (is 'traveler' acceptable in Canada, or only 'traveller'?), and to say the same thing but in fewer words and with less government jargon ('marine mode', anyone?).

69.149.116.144 23:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is Nexus really a government project or is it actually a commercial project? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.195.30 (talk) 03:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its a government program. - 2 ... says you, says me 05:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to start a section detailing the down side to a "trusted traveler" program to include examples of travelers feeling that they are above to need to be inspected at the border as well as drug seizures that come out of the nexus lane. Any help with links to articles to this effect would be greatly appreciated. Just post them here if you would, and when enough have been gathered, I'll add the section to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.147.251 (talk) 21:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please define 'WHTI complient'[edit]

It shows up in the body text. Thanks.Pjwst6 (talk) 16:43, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking news[edit]

I'm just turning in for the night (I'm on UTC), but U.S. revokes all Nexus cards from Canadian permanent residents with citizenship in restricted countries: CBSA may be worth mentioning. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:22, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on NEXUS (frequent traveler program). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:45, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 April 2019[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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved. See clear general agreement that the present qualifier is either incorrect or unnecessary disambiguation, so it should be either altered or eliminated. Don't see consensus as to which, so this article will be moved to NEXUS with no qualifier. In accord with the closing instructions, "If anyone objects to the closer's choice, they may make another move request immediately, hopefully to its final resting place." Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed.  put'r there  15:19, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NEXUS (frequent traveler program) → Nexus (border control program) – Per MOS:ALLCAPS / MOS:TM / WP:TITLETM, ordinary English formatting should be used rather than promotional all-caps styling. The name is obviously intended to be pronounced as a word, and no unabbreviated form of an initialism is evident. I notice only two independent (i.e., non-government) sources that are cited either in the article or here on the talk page: this and this. Both of them use "Nexus", not "NEXUS". Also, it is a government-operated border control program, not a frequent flyer club. The program is based on filling out an application, passing a background check, and paying a fee – not how frequently someone travels. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)--Relisting. -- Dane talk 05:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I also find the phrase "border control program" to be a much more clear description than "traveler program". (And "traveler" might tend to be spelled as "traveller" in Canadian English, as noted in both the Canadian English and American and British English spelling differences articles.) —BarrelProof (talk) 22:20, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't give any credence to that category name. These programs are described using a number of different ways. That said, I still oppose the original move request, but would not object to NEXUS (border program)... dropping "control" satisfies my concern about interpretation above, and is more CONCISE. -- Netoholic @ 06:31, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think of NEXUS (border entry program)? —BarrelProof (talk) 01:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not as concise compared to NEXUS (border program) or NEXUS (customs program). -- Netoholic @ 02:06, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • What about plain NEXUS, per WP:SMALLDETAILS? This topic absolutely smokes the other two capitalized entries on Nexus (disambiguation). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:15, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    NEXUS seems to be an orphan initialism and, its a small minority, but there are probably enough secondary sources which use "Nexus" rather than "NEXUS" that I think disambiguation is overall a benefit for readers/searchers. -- Netoholic @ 13:43, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I surveyed the top 50 Google News results for nexus canada, and found that 20 were NEXUS, 9 were Nexus, and 21 were unrelated uses of the word nexus (of varying capitalizations), so I think the all caps version is more common. In any case, the current NEXUS (parenthetical disambiguator) is completely unnecessarily; the title should either be NEXUS or Nexus (parenthetical disambiguator). When deciding between the two, as numbers are on the side of NEXUS and it gets rid of a disambiguator, I tend to favor that. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:43, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    If we stay with all-caps, then I support using simply NEXUS, as the primary topic for that form. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:31, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support NEXUS per the above research by User:King of Hearts. We'd certainly want to use the widely commonly used name in actual reliable sources over one that is known to be incorrect and used by a slim number of less reliable ones.--Yaksar (let's chat) 02:08, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are two other uses of NEXUS listed on the dab page, so I think NEXUS should continue to redirected to the dab page Nexus. No opinion on the disambiguator used. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:39, 7 May 2019 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:NEXUS&oldid=1198699581"