Talk:PEGASUS (reconnaissance system)

On 25 October 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to PEGASUS Signal Intelligence Aircraft. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Requested move 25 October 2024

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 14:04, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PEGASUS (reconnaissance system) → PEGASUS Signal Intelligence Aircraft – The title was the German translation, but this new title better describes the topic Fabien Tremoulinas (talk) 12:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC) ==[reply]

https://defence-network.com/premiere-pegasus-signalaufklaerungsflugzeug/

Comment: Certainly not with uppercase for the words. I also don't see a clear justification for the all-caps "PEGASUS" in the cited sources. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article's lead sentence clearly indicates this is an acronym (of that annoying sort built partly out of multi-letter fragments instead of initial letters only). Whether that's supported in reliable source material is a separate question but "the cited sources" are not really relevant for that determination; rather, the available sources would be. Per MOS:ACRO, we would render this as PEGASUS in such a case because it is an acronym, even if sources often do not (acronyms/initialisms are a general exception to the default rule of MOS:CAPS, unless they have become re-assimilated into the language as words that speakers no longer interpret as acronyms, e.g. laser, radar, scuba). But if the "Persistent German Airborne Surveillance System" derivation turns out to be a fiction, then obviously this should move to having sentence-case "Pegasus" instead of "PEGASUS". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 21:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – That phrase does not appear in the article or its sources. The only basis I find online is this one sentence from Facebook and Instagram, with odd capitalization: "The first Bombardier Global 6000-derived Pegasus Signal Intelligence aircraft performed its first flight at Bombardier's plant." Dicklyon (talk) 17:23, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, since the proposed title isn't attested in the source material. It's also against MOS:CAPS, WP:NCCAPS, MOS:MILCAPS, WP:LOWERCASE. Even if the capitalization were fixed, we do not appear to have any need for a WP:NDESC descriptive phrase (being unattested, this one necessarily fails WP:NATURAL). It's not 100% certain to me that "(reconnaiassance aircraft)" wouldn't be better; that this subject has "systems" associated with it may be irrelevant, since this is probably true of all modern military aircraft. But that might be better as a separate RM after this one closes. And that should be speedily, since the nomination is invalid on its face for having zero source support and no policy-based rationale for the change, just a subjective opinion about "better". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 21:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.