Talk:Circuit identification code
Appearance
![]() | Telecommunications Unassessed | |||||||||
|
Requested move
![]() | It has been proposed in this section that Circuit identification code be renamed and moved to Circuit Identification Code. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. |
Circuit identification code -> Circuit Identification Code
Per WP:CAPS and WP:TITLE: this is a proper noun referring to a single specific field in a single standard. It does not refer to a general identification code for circuits. — Dgtsyb (talk) 22:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is not a proper name. There is not one single code called "Circuit Identification Code", but many. See a Googlebooks search on "circuit identification codes".
- Neither WP:CAPS nor WP:TITLE gives support to this RM.
- NoeticaTea? 00:53, 21 September 2011 (UTC)