Talk:Cad (disambiguation)

Untitled
The CAD page could be one of two things: 1) A redirect to Computer-aided design 2) A disambiguation page which lists all uses of CAD including Computer-aided design and Canadian dollar

Reasons to redirect to Computer-aided design

 * majory of CAD usage is Computer-aided design
 * On top of Computer-aided design, we could add the note:

Reasons for a disambiguation page

 * There are many uses of CAD including two popular uses (Computer-aided design and Canadian dollar)
 * does not currently work
 * Users expectind CAD to mean Canadian dollar will be confused when they get Computer-aided design

See Disambiguation for guidelines on what should be disambiguated.

Comments
How about moving this to CAD (disambiguation) and redirecting CAD to Computer-aided design. On top of Computer-aided design, we could add the note below:

-- User:Docu
 * Forget the part about the template, it's currently still suffering from a bug. -- User:Docu


 * Looks like a good idea, since the vast majory of CAD usage is Computer-aided design. Mikkalai 00:56, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Ok. I moved it. Maybe will work some day.-- User:Docu

Someone typing in "CAD" won't find CAD (disambiguation), therefore, I've re-redirected CAD to CAD (disambiguation). Edwardian 08:23, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

May 2006
I'm not sure if I understand the history of this redirect & dab page. Besides Computer-aided design, the only other thing commonly referred to as CAD is Canadian dollar, but there aren't any links here meaning that. So I'm restoring the redirect to Computer-aided design, OK? I've also updated the dablink/hatnote there. Ewlyahoocom 21:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation is more appropriate
Redirecting CAD to computer aided design is not correct. There are many meanings of CAD including two very common ones (computer aided design and canadian dollar). CAD should be a disambiguation page. Ewlyahoocom is incorrect -- the link Canadian dollar is there. Young7 12:51, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

2013
I'd agree that most users would come looking for "Computer Aided Design", but I came looking for "Charged Aerosol Detector"; that page should be added. 63.78.254.2 (talk) 19:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)anonchemist

Requested move 21 October 2016

 * 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: page moved. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000  ( talk,  contribs ) 14:46, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

CAD (disambiguation) → CAD – When accounting for long-term significance, I don't think Computer-aided design is the WP:PTOPIC for "CAD". Canadian dollar and Coronary artery disease are both |Computer-aided_design|Coronary_artery_disease strong contenders. SST flyer  05:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. Current topic is not the primary topic for CAD. Even in the US the Canadian dollar appears to be favored in search over the others. Nohomersryan (talk) 14:46, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support this move 2601:541:4305:C70:889F:3E50:C8BB:CBD4 (talk) 14:53, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. If this move request was made 15–20 years ago, I would have "opposed". Back when Doom was released, some people were creating custom stages using computer-aided design (CAD) programs, possibly enforcing the current situation. However, that isn't the case anymore. Steel1943  (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.

Requested move 31 October 2016

 * 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: page moved back with CAD once again redirecting to Computer-aided design. The next RM should wait a while longer. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000  ( talk,  contribs ) 23:30, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

CAD → CAD (disambiguation) – Moving the disambiguation page here was plainly a bad idea. The huge number of pages that had to be disambiguated after the move should have been a clue. CAD (computer-aided design) is used in every company in the world that designs anything from a pencil to a spacecraft. The acronym is well known and widely used outside of the design environment, perhaps even better known than its full name. The same cannot be said for coronary artery disease. The acronym there is probably only used much by health professionals. Pageviews of the article page are not evidence of use of the CAD acronym. As for Canadian dollar, I doubt that anyone has tried to find that page by typing "CAD". Did no one think to inform the Wikiprojects that have computer-aided design within their scope? They should have been informed, and if they had been I suspect a rather different result would have been arrived at to the discussion on a backwater disambiguation talk page. If this move is allowed to stand I predict that it won't be long before there are a heap more CAD links created that will need disambiguating all over again. SpinningSpark 23:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose per what I said above. CAD refers to too many things too prominently for there to be a primary topic. Nohomersryan (talk) 02:34, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Does it? Where's the evidence of "CAD" being common, as opposed to something that can sometimes be abbreviated to CAD in jargon. SpinningSpark 14:28, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Support Googling CAD design gets about 115 million hits, CAD Canadian gets about 54 million hits and CAD coronary gets about 31 million hits. GScholar: CAD design gets about 1.9 million hits, CAD Canadian gets about 91 thousand hits and CAD coronary gets about 195 thousand hits. Hence, computer-aided design looks like the main topic and the others can be put into a DAB page. --Mark viking (talk) 03:00, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. It's still too early to mothball computer-aided design. The other uses are creeping up on it, but they have a ways to go. — Gorthian (talk) 04:26, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Procedural close. Per WP:RMNOT: "Contesting a move request close – use the Wikipedia:Move review process." ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 09:35, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * But we aren't contesting the close, we are re-arguing the (poorly advertised) case. Per WP:MRNOT, move review "is not a forum to re-argue a closed discussion." Perhaps I am missing your point? --Mark viking (talk) 10:23, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. Changing to oppose. This was open for 8 days, so "poorly advertised" or not--nowhere is said requesters have to inform people beyond the dashboard--there was a consensus. Opening a RM less than a week (or the natural process of waiting months) can be seen as disruptive. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 11:08, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * We are not a bureaucracy either. A typical page move will have the interested wikiprojects on the page to be moved and will be informed, but here a redirect was deleted and the interested wikiprojects are at the target of the redirect and did not get informed. Wikiprojects are the place where informed opinions can be obtained and it is counterproductive that this did not happen.  So yes, this was poorly advertised.  And please don't start throwing around accusations of disruption.  It was disruptive to make this decision without the participation of the wikiprojects.  It was disruptive that the first we knew of this was when masses of disambiguation edits started appearing in our watchlists.  It was disruptive that hundreds of articles have now had pipes unnecessarily inserted into wikilinks.  I am not seeing any substantive argument in your oppose. "We have already discussed this once" is not really a valid rationale. SpinningSpark 14:28, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Here is where you can suggest improvements of the RM process and its "poor" soapboxing, not with us. Second, I oppose for the reasons stated above. I don't see how CADD is the primary topic for the term, other than being redirected in "hundreds" of pages (rather than simply using the correct name in the first place) is solely one indicative of primary relevance, not all. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 20:44, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You're the one who started a discussion of process on this page. Mark Viking provided some evidence of primacy above. Spinning<b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 21:44, 1 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose – too ambiguous. Dicklyon (talk) 04:02, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose - too late. No backlinks. No advantage now. - üser:Altenmann >t 05:25, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I do hope the closer discounts and ignores this argument. It is never too late on Wikipedia; anything can be reverted.  Besides, it is so common to refer to computer-aided design as CAD that new backlinks are bound to start appearing soon. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 13:48, 4 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Support per the two criteria in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Red <b style="color:#460121;">Slash</b> 17:02, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose RM typically runs for one week. I can't see how my RM would be considered "poorly advertised". If the RM closer did not update links after moving the disambiguation page to the base title, that has nothing to do with WP:PTOPIC. SST  flyer  03:22, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. Computer-aided design is actually called CAD in everyday speech in offices of all kinds all over the world. Mark Viking provides numbers. The old setup wasn't broken and there was no need to change it. Srnec (talk) 20:14, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose per my "support" comment in the previous move discussion. Steel1943  (talk) 03:09, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. CAD should be the computer-aided design topic rather than a DAB. Running down the DAB topics, CAD looks to be the primary topic. Millions suffer from coronary artery disease and millions use Canadian dollars, but CAD and its cousins such as CAD/CAM are the more common topics in everyday speech. Glrx (talk) 19:37, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. There is no reason to criticise anyone for the previous RM, it was properly handled, but clearly there are some people who missed it or feel differently, so it's right and proper to have a fresh discussion on it. And yes, per Mark Viking and Srnec, computer-aided design is a primary topic for CAD. There may even a case for saying the page should be at that title. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.

Another usage
The 'cad' as described here - as distinct from the bounder. 86.146.100.44 (talk) 13:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a dictionary <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 15:30, 12 June 2017 (UTC)