Talk:Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

Requested move 16 July 2021

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Elli (talk | contribs) 06:10, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America Act → INVEST in America Act – "real" short title, not the full backronym, is more recognizable and concise. News coverage gives this act as the "INVEST in America Act" or "Invest in America Act", not "Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America Act". 72.86.39.245 (talk) 17:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. SkyWarrior 03:38, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment Oppose I used the full name as it's similar to other transportation-related legislative items on here such as FAST Act, MAP-21, SAFETEA, and TEA-21. The full names are used versus their short names or more commonly used backronyms. – The Grid (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I see. However, unlike some of the articles you listed, I believe "INVEST in America" is used universally in coverage. It's not really the "full name", as that would be the act title, "An Act To authorize funds" etc. This is just one of the two short titles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.86.39.245 (talk) 20:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what you're trying to say. The "full name" which contains "An Act To authorize funds..." isn't used on these pages either. The expanded title has been preferred versus the short name as I referenced above. I provided similar transportation-related items because their short names are not used. Any source I have seen using "INVEST in America" also explains what the abbreviation means. – The Grid (talk) 22:48, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• Support "INVEST in America Act" indeed seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME based on coverage, additionally used by the US government itself. It's also way more WP:CONCISE. I don't see a real need for consistency with other transportation-related legislative articles, but even then, SAFE Port Act and RESTORE Act show that acronyms are already sometimes used. Lennart97 (talk) 11:17, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
• Support: WP:NCGAL states: Prefer titles that reflect the name commonly used in reliable sources. Generally, use the short title instead of the long title (for example, European Parliamentary Elections Act 1999 instead of An Act to amend the European Parliamentary Elections Act 1978 so as to alter the method used in Great Britain for electing Members of the European Parliament to make other amendments of enactments relating to the election of Members of the European Parliament and for connected purposes), unless the long title is much better known. However, a redirect from long to short titles should be created, and the long title should be included in the article. If anything, those other acts might need to be renamed.  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 16:19, 24 July 2021 (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.

"Infrastructure bill" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Infrastructure bill. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 25#Infrastructure bill until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)