Talk:Nuclear–cytoplasmic ratio
(Redirected from Talk:NC ratio)
Latest comment: 5 months ago by Adumbrativus in topic Requested move 19 January 2024
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move 19 January 2024
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 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 Nuclear–cytoplasmic ratio. (closed by non-admin page mover) Adumbrativus (talk) 09:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
NC ratio → Nuclear-cytoplasmic ratio – Alternative, unrestricted title. JohnCWiesenthal (talk) 05:19, 16 January 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). – robertsky (talk) 15:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 07:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- @JohnCWiesenthal: En dash or slash should be used instead of hyphen per MOS:ENBETWEEN. The existing redirect can be retargeted without special permissions. PleaseStand (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
- @PleaseStand: I'd agree that ENBETWEEN would call for a dash in "nucleus–cytoplasm ratio", since that means "nucleus-to-cytoplasm ratio". But this would imply "nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio". SilverLocust 💬 23:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
- @SilverLocust ENBETWEEN does say though that "The components may be nouns, adjectives, verbs, or any other independent part of speech." And I'm not sure that "nuclear-to-cytoplasmic [volume] ratio" is any less valid of a construction than, say, "observed-to-expected [events] ratio" or "wide-to-narrow [bar width] ratio". PleaseStand (talk) 02:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough. SilverLocust 💬 02:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
- @SilverLocust ENBETWEEN does say though that "The components may be nouns, adjectives, verbs, or any other independent part of speech." And I'm not sure that "nuclear-to-cytoplasmic [volume] ratio" is any less valid of a construction than, say, "observed-to-expected [events] ratio" or "wide-to-narrow [bar width] ratio". PleaseStand (talk) 02:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
- @PleaseStand: I'd agree that ENBETWEEN would call for a dash in "nucleus–cytoplasm ratio", since that means "nucleus-to-cytoplasm ratio". But this would imply "nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio". SilverLocust 💬 23:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
- @JohnCWiesenthal: En dash or slash should be used instead of hyphen per MOS:ENBETWEEN. The existing redirect can be retargeted without special permissions. PleaseStand (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Molecular Biology has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 07:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Note: WikiProject Medicine has been notified of this discussion. – robertsky (talk) 07:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support as it appears to be by far the common name. And yes, style it with en dash. Dicklyon (talk) 23:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- Support with EN dash, as the WP:NATURAL disambiguation of the move would be an improvement regardless of what experts expect the common name to be. Similarly, I would also support a move to Nucleus-to-cytoplasm ratio. ― Synpath 03:30, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- support per Synpath--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:40, 2 February 2024 (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.