Jump to content

Talk:Buffalo Head terrane

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

Requested move 14 December 2024

[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 discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 15:07, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


– In these, about half of sources don't treat "Terrane" as part of a proper name, but as a generic. So per MOS:CAPS we should use lowercase (Here are n-gram stats on a few that are common enough to show up). About a dozen other terrane titles are already lowercase. In the case of the Torlesse one, this book search shows that "composite" is also not part of the proper name. Dicklyon (talk) 00:42, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose as the two words together constitute a proper name. The first locality is a proper name, but so is the combination the "Terrane". My interest is in "Narooma Terrane" wehre the sources capitalised both parts of the name. For these geological items there may be variability in use by sources, but capitalising both parts is prefereable as together they consititue a proper noun naming the entity. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sources use lowercase terrane often enough on "the two words together" that per MOS:CAPS criterion of "consistently capitalized" we should not be treating it as a proper name. Plenty of books have "Narooma terrane". Dicklyon (talk) 16:40, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – unless sources consistently treat "[prefix] terrane" as a proper name, the "terrane" part of these names is generic and it should clearly be lowercase. —Joeyconnick (talk) 19:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. MOS:CAPS. Theparties (talk) 06:07, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS. For these geological items there may be variability in use by sources. A review of google scholar and google books for a sample of these articles confirms this. Accordingly, they should not be capped. Cinderella157 (talk) 03:02, 21 December 2024 (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.