Talk:LOHAS Park

Move to Lohas Park

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was Not moved. Evidence it's an acronym, and therefore MOS prescribes all-caps. DMacks (talk) 02:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

LOHAS Park → Lohas Park — Accorading WP:MOS-CL, LOHAS is no acronym. --Flamelai (talk) 07:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC) LOHAS Park Station → Lohas Park Station

• Oppose. Everything on the developer's website indicates the name is a brand-name incorporating an acronym, and that 'LOHAS' is meant to be capitalised. Ohconfucius (talk) 09:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Comment Can you explain why you don't think it's an acronym giving that our own article gives a reliable source that states it's an acronym and so, apparently, does the developers website? Dpmuk (talk) 09:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose. The article clearly states that it is indeeed an acronym, and the photos in the LOHAS Park Station article show that this matches the style used on station signage. --DAJF (talk) 13:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

• Comment see here and this one. --Flamelai (talk) 15:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Do you mean the bit where it says "However, write acronyms and initialisms in all capitals."? LOHAS is an acronym. --DAJF (talk) 16:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
• Oppose - according to the relevant article, LOHAS is an acronym. 81.110.104.91 (talk) 16:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on LOHAS Park. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080421121554/http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=48&art_id=56455&sid=16188755&con_type=3&d_str=20071108&sear_year=2007 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=48&art_id=56455&sid=16188755&con_type=3&d_str=20071108&sear_year=2007
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080421121549/http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=1&art_id=55906&sid=16035229&con_type=1&d_str=20071030&sear_year=2007 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=1&art_id=55906&sid=16035229&con_type=1&d_str=20071030&sear_year=2007

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:13, 14 December 2017 (UTC)