Talk:Fillet (redaction)
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Requested move 21 November 2015
[edit]- 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: no consensus mainly due to a lack of participation. Feel free to re-nom this any time you want and, if you do so, you might want to drop some notes at relevant wikiprojects to try and got more participation next time. Proposed title created as a redirect. Jenks24 (talk) 13:59, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Fillet (redaction) → Filleting (obfuscation) – Not a single source in the article proves that this technique has been observed or actually is called "fillet". I don't have authoritative literature by the hand to prove it either, but it seems to exist. However, WP:COMMONTITLE should be the verb's gerund here: "filleting" rather than "fillet". Found a single source that supports my expectation: [1]. Finally, the disambiguator "obfuscation" is closer to descibing what filleting actually represents. I'm fine with any reasonable outcome, though, if others have access to more relevant literature. PanchoS (talk) 23:27, 21 November 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 06:17, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
- Oppose as a rather obscure, uncommon (and maybe unused) disambiguator. However, if the term may be useful for searches, I have no opposition to it being created as a redirect to the current title. Steel1943 (talk) 03:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- As I said, I'm open for other reasonable proposals regarding the disambiguator, though "redaction" doesn't seem all too descriptive nor concise, as "filleting" in this sense isn't exclusively used in redaction.
IMHO not really debatable is however, that the main term needs to be "Filleting", a gerund (= verbal noun) describing the technique, rather than "fillet" (either an infinitive, then unencyclopedic; or a possible term for the result of the technique, then both unmentioned and unsourced). PanchoS (talk) 20:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
- As I said, I'm open for other reasonable proposals regarding the disambiguator, though "redaction" doesn't seem all too descriptive nor concise, as "filleting" in this sense isn't exclusively used in redaction.
- 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.