Talk:Average directional movement index

Requested move

The request to rename this article to Average directional movement index has been carried out.

If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag.

Average Directional Movement Index → Average directional movement index – Nomination to rename the article title to lowercase consistent with MOS:CAPS. This is one article among many in Category:Technical indicators that were recently moved to lowercase. These moved have generated controversy (see Talk:Relative Strength Index#Requested move, Talk:True strength index#Requested move, as well as a pending ArbCom case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Article titles and capitalisation), and therefore should not have been made without prior discussion. In that spirit, I have restored this article to its original uppercase version, protected it to prevent further move-warring, and initiated this proposal to rename it to lowercase.

Here is my attempt at summarizing the arguments that have transpired on the other talk pages mentioned above.

Basic arguments in favor of uppercase:

Experts in the field assert that the invention of a technical indicator is a creative work that would fall under MOS:CT, and therefore its name would be a proper noun.
The field of technical analysis pre-dates the internet, and the majority of sources are not online.
The majority of reliable sources on technical analysis indicators use the names as proper nouns.

Basic arguments in favor of lowercase:

A technical indicator is not a creative work, therefore MOS:CT does not apply.
Reliable sources that can be found online don't use uppercase consistently.
Lowercase is consistent with MOS:CAPS.

Participants may feel free to adjust my summary of the arguments above if I missed anything. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:39, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Process objection – this is not a good time or a good process for dealing with this. The page was stable enough at lower case when Amatulic moved it back and protected it (a violation of WP:INVOLVED). He has also involved himself in an ongoing ArbCom case concerning MOS:CAPS and WP:TITLE and me and Tony, in which he seeks an exception for technical market indicators. It would be best to put things back for now and consider an RM after that case settles out. Dicklyon (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]