Talk:KM3NeT

Requested move 1

The following discussion is an archived 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. As the name of this entity is not an acronym, the use of "KM3NeT" would be for stylistic reasons only and not in line with WP:NC. JPG-GR (talk) 19:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The correct spelling is "KM3NeT" according to http://www.km3net.org/ and independent references in the litterature like http://arxiv.org/abs/0710.4158, page 2. Since "KM3NeT" is a proper noun, WP:NC allows multiple capital letters. Compare with the "C" in IceCube Neutrino Observatory. The move seems mostly uncontroversial to me. My initial move request, however, was ignored, so I am attempting a more formal move request. Teply (talk) 00:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That looks too ugly and awkward to support, especially because (a) if KM3 is abbreviation of cubic kilometer, it should be Km3, and (b) because better alternatives are used - more encyclopedic, closer to standard English usage, and not in such conflict with Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks). If we do not leave article where it is, I suggest KM3Net which is used by several sources (see here). This has the advantage of looking more like how people should pronounce it ("kay-emm-three-net") and therefore serves a sort of non-decorative purpose. On a personal level I strongly feel that we should enforce the guidelines of MoS:TM rigorously when faced with ridiculous, artifically concocted names like this. Llamasharmafarmerdrama (talk) 19:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, by MOS:TM, we use "IceCube" because it qualifies as CamelCase. "KM3NeT" is not CamelCase. Most people pronounce it as "kay-emm-three-net," which would suggest "KM3Net" (like the example of "SAT") by MOS:TM. On the other hand, the spelling "KM3Net" is so close to the original KM3NeT that we may as well use the official version. Either way, the page needs to be moved. Teply (talk) 03:31, 2 April 2008 (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.

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was moved to KM3Net based on common usage. Aervanath (talk) 16:00, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The previous request for move was rejected with the following explanation:

The result of the proposal was no move. As the name of this entity is not an acronym, the use of "KM3NeT" would be for stylistic reasons only and not in line with WP:NC. JPG-GR (talk) 19:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

But it is the acronim for cubic kilometer size (KM3) Neutrino Telescope (see the article). In my opinion, the article should be moved to it's correct spelling KM3NeT used by the official web site of the project. --V1adis1av (talk) 17:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Seems very reasonable proposal to me. KM3NeT is clearly the correct usage—G716 <^T·_C> 19:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We dont normally go with weird capitals just because the primary source does. I can see how its an acronym (sort of) but like was said in the last move request, "KM3" isnt the normal short way of writing square kilometer, its "Km3". The Google link shows a lot of third party sources which dont follow the capital T (7 of 11 altogether). (The capital T is the ugliest bit.) Km3Net, KM3net, Km3net, KM3Net. They all look better than what is being suggested. The last one, KM3Net is the one I support because it is the most common from the third parties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tigeron (talk • contribs) 21:54, 21 January 2009 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Archived the RM1/2

I thought these were disctracting so I've placed them in collapsed boxes to save space.Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 04:47, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move 3

After reading the previous discussing, I agree that his page should be moved to KM3NeT. The previous two requests had nearly no participation, nor does it seem like the physics project was involved in them. Primary source indicate the acronym is KM3NeT, and the across-wikipedia usage is also KM3NeT. Were the other article not a redirect, it would simply have been moved, but since you need adminS to perform the move, there's a lot of bureaucratic creep involved. Relisting for input by the physics project as well as the usual crowd at RM, which should yield a clear consensus this time around. Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 04:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one's objected, I'll move the article.--Aervanath (talk) 18:06, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

Dropping articles about KM3NeT as I find them: — Huntster (t @ c) 03:56, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.universetoday.com/91979/underwater-neutrino-detector-will-be-second-largest-structure-ever-built/