Talk:The Float @ Marina Bay

Floating Stadium or Floating Platform

The facility is more commonly refered to as the floating platform locally. In fact, I've never heard it being called a floating stadium. I think it is more appropriate to put it under the heading of "Marina Bay Floating Platform". --Pilotjj1 (talk) 12:59, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

The mighty minds street directory names it as the Marina Bay Outdoor Gallery and Floating Platform, The SLA StreetMap names it The Float @ Marina Bay. Not too sure what the URA calls it though. - oahiyeel ^talk 19:36, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 03:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

---

The Float at Marina Bay → The Float@Marina Bay —

• "The Float@Marina Bay" is the official name of the venue, according to StreetMap@Singapore (managed by the Singapore Land Authority) and the official website of the Singapore 2010 Youth Olympic Games. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 05:40, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
• But WP:MOSTM about the @ character. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:44, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: Hmmm. The use of the @ sign (tacky, ridiculous and a pathetic attempt to look "cool", in my view) seems to be quite prevalent in the naming of buildings in Singapore. See, for instance, "The Sail @ Marina Bay" (which should probably be "The Sail@Marina Bay") and "The Pinnacle@Duxton". The problem is that these buildings never appear in print as, for example, "The Pinnacle at Duxton", so I wonder if it is right to replace the @ with at. Also, it could be argued that WP:MOSTM does not apply since we are discussing the names of buildings, not trademarks. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 07:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
• Move - I think that this can be one of the exceptions to WP:MOSTM. I guess we should stick to the official name in this case, even though I do not disagree with Jacklee that the use of the @ sign is tacky, ridiculous and a pathetic attempt to look "cool". It's just another of Singapore's attempts to promote its "Uniquely Singapore" image. _LDS (talk) 07:41, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

• Haven't you heard? We're not "uniquely Singapore" any more. It's now all about you. :-) — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 13:44, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

• Support move Doesn't seem to me to be expressly forbidden by WP:MOSTM, and it makes sense. Propaniac (talk) 00:50, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move Kotniski (talk) 13:07, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

---

The Float@Marina Bay → The Float at Marina BayThe Float at Marina Bay — Proposing the previous move in April be reversed, per WP:MOSTM. The use of the at sign goes against the standard Wikipedia policy of following "standard English text formatting and capitalization rules, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting 'official' " ; hence why we use Macy's, Skate, Yellow Tail, Seven, Alien 3, and Toys "R" Us, rather than Macy*s, skate., [ yellow tail ], Se7en, Alien³ and Toys Я Us. City of Destruction 17:04, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

• Support per MOS:TM: "Avoid using special characters that ... simply substitute for English words (e.g., ♥ used for "love")." Station1 (talk) 21:45, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
• Comment - This move request has been open for 7 days, and I would ordinarily close it now and move the page, but the previous move was only a few months ago, and it would be good to get more input, in particular from those who supported the previous move. -GTBacchus^(talk) 15:25, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose for the reasons I stated above. MOS:TM is inapplicable as this is the name of a building, not a trademark. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 19:43, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose as WP:MOSTM doesn't apply in this case. It's not a trademark. The use of @ in article names isn't explictly forbidden, otherwise articles such as Rosetta@home would have been blocked from entering FA-status, which it has. ANGCHENRUI ^Talk♨ 10:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Why is it not a trademark? Station1 (talk) 07:12, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

A trademark "is a distinctive sign or indicator used by an individual, business organization, or other legal entity to identify that the products or services to consumers with which the trademark appears originate from a unique source, and to distinguish its products or services from those of other entities". This is the name of a building. What are the products or services that the "mark" is being used to distinguish? — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 09:46, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.