Talk:Swinging light test
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Move to international (instead of American) title
- 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 to Swinging light test; WP:COMMONALITY arguments are persuasive. Now, according to MOS:HYPHEN, this should be Swinging-light test but I'm reluctant to move to a form that was not mentioned in the discussion and, on a quick skim, is rare in sources. No such user (talk) 09:31, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Swinging-flashlight test → Swinging light test – I think that we should use the international name for this subject rather than the American name, as it's an international subject. Dr. Vogel (talk) 00:10, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
- Weak oppose: WP:ENGVAR allows some degree of nation-specific language flavour. No Wikipedia guideline was cited to justify the move. The article about this type of light is at the title Flashlight. — BarrelProof (talk) 06:19, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
- "Swinging flashlight" is the common name ("swinging flashlight" on PubMed has 69 results [1], "swinging light" has 5 [2]), secondly I don't see indications that international institutions recommend one over the other. – Thjarkur (talk) 08:48, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support As an American physician, I would recognize "swinging light test" readily; I also would agree that localisms ("flashlight", "torch") don't stand up to much scrutiny. To common usage as measured in Pubmed, "swinging torch test" retrieves 0 results, "swinging flashlight test" retrieves 63, and "swinging light test" retrieves 5. I don't find the numerical results to provide a compelling rationale to support "flashlight" and would endorse "light" as an easily understood and more inclusive term in this context. — soupvector (talk) 23:39, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support per MOS:COMMONALITY:
For an international encyclopedia, using vocabulary common to all varieties of English is preferable. Use universally accepted terms rather than those less widely distributed, especially in titles.
TompaDompa (talk) 15:36, 10 November 2020 (UTC) - Support per MOS:COMMONALITY per TompaDompa. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 17:33, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose per pubmed stats cited above. Dicklyon (talk) 04:01, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support for clarity. The test works as well no matter whether the light used can formally be called a flashlight. BD2412 T 04:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
- 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.