Talk:Phi X 174

Requested move 30 January 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Number 57 22:50, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

---

Phi X 174 → ΦX174ΦX174 – According to every scientific textbook and journal article out there, "ΦX174" is the name of the bacteriophage, not "Phi X 174." The Greek character should be used, and the spaces within the name should be removed. I did not find any discussion concerning the move of ΦX174 to Phi X 174. – CatPath (talk) 22:49, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

@70.51.200.135 and CatPath: This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:24, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

• Object to RMTR speedy move this uses a special character, so should have a full discussion. Phi is not an English or Latin letter. -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 04:21, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
• Comment This page was previously at Phi-X174 phage (diff) before it was moved to the current title. It's never been named ΦX174 (which is a redirect to this page). If that is the appropriate name based on the sources, I would support a move. However, it would require administrator intervention because ΦX174 is on the title blacklist. clpo13_(talk) 07:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)]
• From what I can found in Google-searching for images, the phi here is lowercase (φ, not Φ), but the X is uppercase. If this page is moved to φX174, the tag will be needed to stop Wikipedia from displaying the phi letter as uppercase in the page heading. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:18, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose proposed title. The formal scientific name of this virus is Enterobacteria phage phiX174 (see here). Non-Latin characters are not permitted in scientific names of viruses (see section 3.13 here). However, the formal scientific name is not very commonly used. If we're choosing something besides the scientific name as the title on the basis of WP:COMMONNAME, then bacteriophage φX174 should be considered as a title. This appears to be the name mostly commonly used in the literature, and including "bacteriophage" in the title gives additional context that makes it more WP:RECOGNIZABLE. Plantdrew (talk) 18:31, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

To clarify, I don't think the present title is appropriate either. I would support a move to either "Enterobacteria phage phiX174" or "bacteriophage φX174". I'm not sure how useful to readers it is to use a common name that continues a character that isn't easily typed. The scientific name is easier to type, but rarely used. Plantdrew (talk) 21:17, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose and agree with Plantdrew. Graham Beards (talk) 18:46, 31 January 2016 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.