Talk:Subsystem number

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please do not use acronyms without writing them out in the article.

Merge with SCCP

Cannot this page be merged with Signalling Connection Control Part? — Dgtsyb (talk) 01:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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: Not moved. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Subsystem number -> Subsystem Number

Per WP:CAPS and WP:TITLE: this is a proper noun referring to the single and specific information element of the international Signalling Connection Control Part standard. It does not refer to general numbers for subsystems. — Dgtsyb (talk) 22:58, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. As the article itself shows, this is not a proper name. There is not one single number called "Subsystem Number", but several. The very first sentence of the article:

Signalling Connection Control Part (SCCP) subsystem numbers are used to identify applications within network entities which use SCCP signalling.

This is supported by material from the first of the two external sources that are cited:

The following globally standardised subsystem numbers have been allocated for use by GSM: ...

Neither WP:CAPS nor WP:TITLE gives support to this RM.

Noetica^Tea? 00:44, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Not a proper name, subsystem number is just a concept. Stick with the MoS - no need for an exception here. Joja lozzo 02:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: "SCPP", I suppose, can remain upcased, since it's a protocol. But certainly not "subsystem number". Why would you upcase that? $Tony (talk)$ 04:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There is no unique subsystem number that may be referred to as the Subsystem Number. Nageh (talk) 23:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't support this move. "SCCP subsystem number" seems to be the same as "IP address". --Enric Naval (talk) 21:53, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.