Talk:Deep Synoptic Array

biased, unencyclopedic

primary refs only, lede doesnt summarize body, and body misses info in lede like a history section etc. An entire section is bullet pointed and unrefernced - not encyclopedic. who are these authors? And an entire section is copied from the DSA website! Wuerzele (talk) 05:16, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Is there a copyright problem here? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:31, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

I believe that whatever the section was, it's been re-written, as has most of the article. LouScheffer (talk) 22:59, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Requested move 5 January 2026

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vestrian24Bio 08:26, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

---

DSA (radio telescope) → Deep Synoptic Array – Per WP:NATURAL (and two characters more WP:CONCISE). The target title already redirects to this topic. Note that the article was just moved from DSA-2000DSA-2000, and there is potential ambiguity with DSA-110 —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:54, 5 January 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 04:24, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Oppose, but not strongly. I think the current title of "DSA (radio telescope)" is better as it's more helpful to the reader. The title should describe the article. An average reader would have absolutely no clue what a "Deep Synoptic Array" is, or what it does, or even what field it is in. For example, it could easily be a term from machine intelligence research. Deep learning is a thing, it's based on arrays, and the whole idea of LLM is to create a synoptic view of its field. It would also make perfect sense in medicine, as an array of ultrasound sensors that creates a whole body image, as do MRI or CT scans. Even the word synoptic itself is not going to be helpful to most readers, according to google it's roughly the 300,000th most commonly used set of letters. As even fairly erudite readers know only some tens of thousands of words, many won't know it. And for young folks, or people whose English is weak, or English is a second language, the odds are even worse. (By contrast radio is 694th most common, and telescope number 9785. Much more likely to be known.) LouScheffer (talk) 12:33, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Although some people might not know that "Deep Synoptic Array" is a telescope and could hypothetically guess that it refers to something else, I don't think that phrase is really used much for other subjects (especially as a proper noun with every word capitalized). As far as I know, Wikipedia does not have a requirement that a title needs to be easily understandable to the general public of people who are not at all familiar with the subject of the article. Lots of articles have names that are not completely understandable to most people. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

The proposed accurate name is no more or no less confusing than Very Large Array, BICEP and Keck Array, or the dozens of other accepted array proper names at Category:Radio telescopes. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:27, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

• Support per nomination. The full name seems a much better encyclopedic descriptor, and the present title would still redirect here so as not to confuse readers. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:28, 7 January 2026 (UTC)
• Support per nom. More encyclopedic, less ambiguous (removes need for parenthetical disambiguator, which is always preferred) and is its official name. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:58, 10 January 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose per LouScheffer. Overall, it's much clearer what this article is about with the present title than with the proposed one, and "DSA" appears to be the WP:COMMONNAME too. If we don't keep it at this title, then it would be preferable overall to go back to the long-term DSA-2000 as well, since that is in widespread use too, which the proposed name isn't really.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:33, 12 January 2026 (UTC)
• Support - much clearer, WP:NATURAL disambiguation, etc. Red Slash 23:38, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Astronomy has been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 04:25, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

• Support per WP:Article titles#Avoid ambiguous abbreviations. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:50, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
• Support. Call it what it calls itself. The name on the top of the array's website is "Deep Synoptic Array". Papers published by the project are headed Deep Synoptic Array Science: and the list of contributors ends with "and The Deep Synoptic Array team". DSA is just a useful abbreviation for its name, just as we often say VLA rather than Very Large Array. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:18, 13 January 2026 (UTC)
• Support per WP:ACROTITLE and widespread use in the astronomical literature - papers (almost?) always call it Deep Synoptic Array on first mention, then define the acronym for use thereafter. The acronym is an abbreviation, not the name itself. Modest Genius ^talk 15:24, 19 January 2026 (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.

Disclosure of potential conflict of interest

I am Kiran Shila, author of one of the papers cited in the "Ambient temperature receiver" section... Activexray (talk) 06:24, 25 January 2026 (UTC)