Jump to content

Talk:CALYX

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

Requested move 4 April 2015

[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. We do allow company names to be all upper case, for example IBM and SAP SE. Editors here don't agree on whether the capitalization is a strong enough signal of difference to remove the need for disambiguation. The mentions of MOS:CAPS in the discussion weren't fully persuasive -- you need to spell out the details. It seems that Calyx (magazine) lost the argument for upper case since it's from the same publisher. EdJohnston (talk) 17:58, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]


CALYXCalyx (company) – this does not appear to be an acronym, so MOS:TM/MOS:CAPS, this should not be capitalized. The current title should redirect to the disambiguation page calyx --Relisted. Steel1943 (talk) 21:21, 11 May 2015 (UTC) -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 03:12, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that is necessary since the only other company I can find is Calyx & Corolla, a florist delivery company that has no article. if there are more notable companies named Calyx they are not listed here.--67.68.161.242 (talk) 04:14, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may be confused with Calix which does list other companies.--67.68.161.242 (talk) 04:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't use capitals either, it isn't an acronym. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The website and other sources discussing the topic show capital letters are indeed used, so it's perfectly acceptable as natural disambiguation.Cúchullain t/c 02:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It fails MOS:CAPS and MOS:TM -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 03:24, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But not WP:NATURALDIS, which, unlike MOS:CAPS and MOS:TM, is a policy. "If it exists, choose an alternative name that the subject is also commonly called in English reliable sources..."--Cúchullain t/c 12:08, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Does WP:naturaldabs state that it overrules both WP:CAPS and the MOS:CAPS and if not why should that be favoured over the other two.--70.27.228.231 (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2015 (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.