Talk:Tartan track

Requested move 11 August 2023

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: not moved. Consensus not to move as editors are not convinced that "Tartan Track" is a trademark and thus WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS are controlling. BilledMammal (talk) 11:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC) (closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 11:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

---

Tartan track → Tartan Track – Trademark, so it's a proper name.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 07:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose: It appears that the word "track" is not part of the trademark. In the cited sources, I have found mentions of "Tartan" as the brand name, but not "Tartan Track". The closest I found was "Tartan Turf", not "Tartan Track".
  • Example: here, only the word "Tartan" is tagged with the "®" symbol.
  • Example quote: "We worked together at 3M when they invented the Tartan track (lowercase 'track')".
  • Example quote: "A 189 foot 3M 'Tartan' (only that one word in quotes – no 'Track') synthetic LJ run-up was constructed here as a test in 1966".
  • Example quote: "I went to work with 3M and started the artificial football field business for them, and they also had a product called Tartan (only one word here – no 'Track'), which was a synthetic composition that replaced cinders and it was much faster than the old cinder track."
  • Example quotes: here – consistent lowercase of 'track'.
  • Example quote: "Winter's effort in having the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing's (3M Company) Tartan track (lowercase 'track') placed on SJSC's campus during the late 1960s".
  • Example quote: "the 400-yard Tartan track (lowercae 'track') carved out of a pine forest".
  • Example quote: "and Tartan Turf ('Turf', not 'Track') was selected for the playing field" and "Cost of the Tartan Turf, manufactured by 3M Co., will be about $500,000, the same price for Astro Turf, a product of Monsanto Corp." and "$400,000 for the Tartan Turf and $100,000 for site preparation" and "in the Tartan Turf surface over the sodded infield" and "by choosing Tartan Turf, Pittsburgh becomes ..." and "Tennessee and Wisconsin have Tartan Turf fields" and "preferred Tartan Turf because players ..." and "Tartan Turf is not as slippery in wet weather" and "the Tartan Turf field at the University of Tennessee" and "Tartan Turf gave a better surface for the bounce of the ball" and "Tartan Turf has better subsurface, also" and "the entire Tartan Turf installation".

Also, should a genericized trademark (like "aspirin") be capitalized?

• Example quote: "The first tartan athletic track (lowercase both words and 'athletic' inserted) in the Cavan-Monaghan area".

To be precise, a trademark is not the same thing as a proper name (although that's not relevant to the article title question).

Note that Tartan Turf is a redirect to Artificial turf. That should probably be retargeted or disambiguated.

—⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:21, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

A trademark is a subset of proper name. And a trademark is not genericized until a court of competent jurisdiction declares it so (and even that only applies within that particular jurisdiction). And Tartan Turf is a (3M) brand of artificial grass, not another name for Tartan Track. And that fact that varioius writers you've quote have abbreviated one or another of these product names to just "Tartan" is immaterial.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:11, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Support: Although the sources cited in the article provide no evidence that the two-word name "Tartan Track" is trademarked, the acknowledgements page of 3M's history publication does (page 236). (Interestingly, it does not list "Scotch Tape" and "Post-it Note" as trademarks – instead it lists only "Scotch" and "Post-it" as trademarks, and the publication does not capitalize "notes" and does not use the phrase "Scotch [t/T]ape", and similarly for the websites https://www.scotchbrand.com/3M/en_US/scotch-brand/ and https://www.post-it.com/3M/en_US/post-it/products/~/Post-it-Products/Notes/.) The explanation that Tartan Turf is a separate product is also helpful. I suggest continuing the proper name discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Trademarks#Trademarks vs. proper names. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:57, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Comment: Also striking my previous support, per Cinderella157 and Dicklyon. It doesn't seem to be a current trademark, and the "Turf" part of it is not capitalized in the sources that are cited in the article or in most other sources. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:53, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Support as trademark. Cinderella157 (talk) 08:33, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Comment Now striking my previous support. While "Tartan" is clearly a trademark, the discussion so far indicates there is reason to question whether "Tartan Track" and "Tartan Turf" are also (or were) trademarked (ie not just "Tartan"). If these bigrams are/were indeed trademarked, then the MOS tells us these should be capitalised and I would support capitalisation accordingly with appropriate evidence to substantiate this. However, if they are not, then the general advice per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS applies. The evidence indicates that "track" and "turf" in these bigrams are not consistently capped in sources. Consequently, they should not be capped. Unless the trademark status can be resolved, neither "track" nor "turf" should be capitalised in these bigrams. Cinderella157 (talk) 09:28, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose – there's only slim evidence that this is a trademark; it's not known to TESS, but Tartan is. See this history, and this confirmation that APS now owns the Tartan brand, too. Also, the article is a mess, with the AstroTurf confusion. Maybe someone can work on fixing it and the name will become more clear. Dicklyon (talk) 05:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

The history publication I referenced is more than 20 years old. I suppose only "Tartan" is currently maintained as a trademark by the company that now owns the brand name. Presumably, the history document was accurate when it was written. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 07:05, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

I don't see a good reason to presume that. It's just a corporate PR piece. Pretty much no other sources treat "Tartan Track" as a trademark. You see things like "TARTAN brand track aggregate" and such. Dicklyon (talk) 22:15, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Not an important point, but my presumption is based on the list of trademarks on page 236, not just the body of the document. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Brands has been notified of this discussion. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 07:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Athletics has been notified of this discussion. — DaxServer (t · m · e · c) 07:41, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Oppose per rationale of Cinderella157~TPW 13:42, 24 August 2023 (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.