Talk:Terminal area chart

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Requested move

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. See WP:CAPS. JPG-GR (talk) 17:37, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These are always capitalized. See Terminal Aeronautical Chart. Also known as "Terminal Aeronautical Chart", but the more common name is "Terminal Area Chart". 199.125.109.104 (talk) 23:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from RM - 199.125.109.104 (talk) 23:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move back to capitilized proper noun as this is the most common usage. — Dhaluza (talk) 00:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Queried: terminal area charts do not look like what is to be treated as a proper-name.Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - In my time in the military, I worked at a map warehouse for a short time, and recall dealing with TACs; I'm no expert, but I do think it should be moved back to caps. Parsecboy (talk) 13:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Do a simple Google search. It is usually treated as a proper noun and capitalized. WP is supposed to follow outside convention, not the other way around. Dhaluza (talk) 23:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I'll take that as a support vote. 199.125.109.104 (talk) 23:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See alsoVFR Terminal Area Chart. 199.125.109.104 (talk) 00:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Sectional chart also needs to be moved back to Sectional Chart. It was incorrectly moved 02:31, 13 December 2006 by User:Lupinelawyer (moved Sectional Chart to Sectional chart: standardized capitalization of nouns) 199.125.109.104 (talk) 00:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support IIRC it's the way it should be, though it's been a while since I've been in a cockpit. 70.55.84.42 (talk) 03:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Airforce may write it with capitals, to make terminal area charts look more important, but it is not a proper-name or a tradename. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:21, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This move violates WP:CAPS. It doesn't make sense to move the page without changing WP:CAPS first. Sam Staton (talk) 13:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a proper noun. You can add it as an example to WP:Caps if you like. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 19:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's more than one terminal area chart, so it's not a proper noun according to my dictionary (OED): "a noun that designates an individual person, place, organization, animal, ship, etc., and is usually written with an initial capital letter". Sam Staton (talk) 19:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's more than one Sam, or Nancy, or Susan. That doesn't make them not proper nouns. Each TAC is very much a proper noun. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 20:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed this capitalization convention is also used at Globally Unique Identifier (GUID, also not a proper noun), although Graphical user interface (GUI) uses lower case. Not sure if the GUID page is "wrong"? ... Sam Staton (talk) 20:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check common usage. Both seem to be split down the middle Globally Unique Identifier/Graphical User Interface and globally unique identifier/graphical user interface. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 20:58, 7 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.