Talk:Product structure modeling

Industrial design Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Industrial design, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Industrial design on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Industrial designWikipedia:WikiProject Industrial designTemplate:WikiProject Industrial designIndustrial design
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

It has been proposed in this section that Product structure modeling be renamed and moved to Product structure modelling.

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.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Product Structure Modeling → Product structure modelling –

Per WP:CAPS and WP:TITLE: this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. In addition, WP:MOS says that a compound item should not be upper-cased just because it is abbreviated with caps. Matches the formatting of related article titles. Tony (talk) 13:46, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Per WP:ENGVAR, there is no reason to change modeling to modelling. Some standardized rigour (talk) 07:41, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support moving to Product structure modeling per WP:CAPS and WP:ENGVAR (ghastly as it looks with only one l). Jenks24 (talk) 02:11, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]