Talk:Principle of coordination
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move 5 November 2021
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. (non-admin closure) Simplexity22 (talk) 20:10, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
- Principle of Coordination → Principle of coordination
- Principle of Homonymy → Principle of homonymy
- Principle of Priority → Principle of priority
- Principle of Typification → Principle of typification
- Principle of Ubiquity → Principle of ubiquity
– Except for these five, all "Principle of" titles on Wikipedia use lowercased principle descriptions. I don't see why these should be exceptions, as Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization. I also notice that the one source cited in the Principle of Ubiquity article uses lowercase for it. The first two of these articles don't cite any sources (except one dead link). In the Priority article, this cited source uses lowercase, and I haven't yet found the term used very clearly in the other sources cited there. The Typification article cites one source, but it has some kind of access restriction. — BarrelProof (talk) 00:06, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: I've alerted WikiProject Biology. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 01:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support - We use lowercase for the "Law of foo" articles. I see this also as falling into the "theory of foo" category, which is specifically stated in the MOS to be lowercase. Primergrey (talk) 03:34, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support - Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:45, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support none appear to be proper nouns, all are generic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support - MOS:SCIMATH applies for most and where it doesn't directly, it does by analogy. Further, there appears to be no evidence that might otherwise cause us to consider capitalising them. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:02, 7 November 2021 (UTC)