Talk:MTR/Move discussion

message: This is the discussion of a failed requested move. Do not edit this page. enochlau (talk) 01:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What mean? How come it ain't a proper noun? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 18:14, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: MTR is a proper noun and it's operated by MTR Corporation Limited. As formerly the name is named as Mass Transit Railway, however this name (Mass Transit Railway) is no longer used after the privatisation of MTR Corporation. --Shinjiman ⇔ ♨ 18:23, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a request to move this page, and not the page on the Corporation. They are two different things altogether. MTR is an abbreviation, and is not a proper noun.--Huaiwei 18:25, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Yeah I just noticed this error moments ago, so pardon me for that.--Huaiwei 12:54, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

message: *Support: as above--Huaiwei 18:25, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Votes 

message: Verifications please?--Huaiwei 18:39, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't think it'd be its present official full name. — Instantnood 18:41, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. You just provided support to the fact that MTR is an abbreviation for Mass Transit Railway. You even have a Mass Transit Railway by-law  clearly indicating that "Corporation" = the MTR Corporation Limited while "railway" = the Mass Transit Railway.--Huaiwei 18:51, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Rebranding of the Corporation dosent mean the system itself is also renamed. The sources provided by instantnood above validates my point.--Huaiwei 18:51, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

text: You appear to have a key difficulty in differentiating between a corporation's name and that of the rail system. This article is clearly about the rail system, and its name is not neccesarily affected by the name change of the company.  gives no validation that MTR no longer stands for Mass Transit Railway, and even gives verification that it does so, for I clearly see "The principle business is to operate mass transit railway system".--Huaiwei 19:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The company, nor anybody else, is still calling the metro system with its former full name, except the by-law and the ordinance. Is your next target the HSBC? The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation still exists as a subsidiary of the group. What about the BAA plc, the BBC and the CNN? — Instantnood 19:09, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, lets show some level of acceptable maturity and look at this issue matter of factly. The ordinance, the by-laws, and even the corporate website clearly show that MTR still refers to the Mass Transit Railway. This is a fact all of you fail to show otherwise. Even if the general public refers to it popularly as MTR as claimed, it violates the naming convertion's guidelines on proper nouns, the same way SARS was recently moved to Severe acute respiratory syndrome for the exact same reason even thou most people would say SARS too. Secondly, HSBC, BAA, BBC and CNN are all not relevant here, simply because of them are legal names of 'corporations. The same thing for DBS Bank, PSA International, and so on, none of which are abbreviations since a rebranding exercise. Once again I ask: is this page about MTR Corporation Limited, or on the Mass Transit Railway system?--Huaiwei 19:30, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is BBC no longer called The British Broadcasting Corporation? Is CNN already the official whole name of the company (while its website says " © 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. ")? — Instantnood 19:37, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am sure I said they are legal names of corporations. So what if the BBC = British Broadcasting Corporation, and CNN = Cable News Network? Does that mean MTR no longer = Mass Transit Railway?--Huaiwei 19:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds a bit like double standard to me. BBC, CNN and DBS Bank, or The British Broadcasting Corporation, Cable News Network and Development Bank of Singapore, which are the legal names? — Instantnood 20:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Double standards? Actually, DBS does not stand for the Development Bank of Singapore, so I am wondering where your "double standards" stems from as well. If you wish to move the BBC and CNN, by all means. I was clearly questioning your comparison of MTR as a subway system with that of the names of corporations, because you also appear to have difficulties diffrentiating between the MTR and MTR Corporation. The later should not be moved because it is its corporatised name, but the former is still an abbreviation.--Huaiwei 12:41, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text:  I think you've just contradicted yourself, Huaiwei. If CNN's legal name is "Cable News Network", then why don't we move that then? Enochlau 23:23, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is anyone stopping you from moving it? Where is the contradiction you claim exists?--Huaiwei 12:41, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perhaps there's some logic to why BBC is at BBC and CNN is at CNN. But maybe everyone's just plain wrong. Enochlau 22:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (identity), Use the most specific terminology available is the most apporiate method to express this group, and also that If this is objectionable often a more general name is more neutral or more accurate. Like in the promotion posters  the term MTR is used instead of Mass Transit Railway and the trem MTR is more general than Mass Transit Railway. Additionally, according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), is to use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things. the trem MTR is only used in Hong Kong, unlike the term Mass Transit Railway, it is ambagious in other cities. --Shinjiman ⇔ ♨ 19:16, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Mass Transit Railway is quite obviously much more specific than MTR, the later of which could mean anything listed here. That you actually need a disambiguation page already tells you it is actually objectionable not to use the specific name, and to use the general name hence becomes less nuetral and more inaccurate. This convention you cite supports the page move, in actual fact. Next, the naming conventions to avoid abbreviations apparantly overules that for common names, as the example of SARS above shows. Your claim that "MTR" is only used in HK is not only disputed by MTR (disambiguation), a simply google search would have also demonstrated the inaccuracy of that claim. No other article presently shares Mass Transit Railway. Even if so, a disambiguation page would then solve the problem very easily the same way it works for this current article title.--Huaiwei 19:30, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer it to be MTR, or should it be MTR (Hong Kong)? The official website uses MTR not Mass Transit Railway. Once again, this is all personal views and I'm neutral. --Terence Ong |Talk 07:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Just over a day, at 18:06, 16 December 2005 :) A friendly local admin will come around and clean up the mess... can't be me though :P Enochlau 13:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion