Talk:Glock/GLOCK vs. Glock debate

Name capitalization - GLOCK vs. Glock
Summary arguments along with those who favor a given outcome are listed below. Complete discussions follow. Feel free to add your name to the lists and/or any comments to the discussion.

Those in favor of GLOCK (all caps)
Proponents of this approach assert that the GLOCK company spells their name in all caps and as such, Wikipedia should follow suit. They cite WP:IAR as policy and give articles such as iTunes, FireWire, GameCube, DreamWorks, and RealPlayer as examples. They assert that all caps enhances the GLOCK article(s), and that "Glock" is an incorrect use of the name. Proponents of this approach also believe that, as a project designed for research and study, Wikipedia is under obligation to provide correct and accurate information to its users.


 * 1) clem
 * 2) Wolfmankurd
 * 3) Gamer Junkie
 * 4) Haizum
 * 5) Randroide 10:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC) (see procon-ten)
 * 6) 70.161.25.43 (could be a dup)

Those in favor of Glock
Proponents of this approach assert that common use among reputable press organizations has historically been "Glock" (no caps), and that all caps "GLOCK" is a marketing device used by the Glock company. They cite WP:MOSTM as a guideline and give Unix discussion, Trademark name discussion, and common use as examples. They assert that common use is in line with opposition examples, and that Wikipedia should follow suit in the Glock case as well.''


 * 1) Golbez (unsigned comment)
 * 2) SodiumBenzoate
 * 3) Gene Nygaard
 * 4) Quuxplusone
 * 5) Nolefan32
 * 6) Xaosflux
 * 7) Alyeska
 * 8) 158.12.88.57 (could be a dup)
 * 9) DAGwyn
 * 10) Thernlund
 * 11) EdJohnston
 * 12) Raymond Arritt
 * 13) PubliusFL
 * 14) &mdash;Dgiest c
 * 15) Seed 2.0

Those who commented, but position not clear

 * Avriette
 * Kvuo

Caps glock?
Is the "GLOCK" name really justified here? Just because a company says some weird typeface is required doesn't make it so. Our article on Macy's is not Macy*s, even though that's what the signs say. Nintendo says the name of the GameCube should always be NINTENDO GAMECUBE but we (rightly) don't respect that.
 * I don't think capitalizing every letter is necessary. --SodiumBenzoate 22:33, 25 August 2005 (UTC)


 * to quote from official GLOCK homepage "Welcome to the official GLOCK Website" ( http://www.glock.at/ ) (clem 22:41, 25 August 2005 (UTC))


 * I think we are an encyclopedia, which means we present the true and correct information, especially over convenience. Holding the shift key for 3 seconds longer is worth it. Also, GLOCK says that glock or Glock is incorrect. - Wolfmankurd

P.S. Why are you named after a food preservative?


 * Holding the shift key isn't the problem. Catering to advertising gimmicks is.  It should be Glock. Gene Nygaard 11:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Furthermore, and most importantly, official Naming conventions (common names) policy is to name articles not on the basis of some "official" name, but rather on commonly used name in the English language. Gene Nygaard 11:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Nintendo Power magazine doesn't caps-lock "GameCube". --Damian Yerrick 04:45, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


 * honestly, I dont see where it came from, or why it's so important in this article either. I need to do more research. --Kvuo 04:57, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

The name is definitely "Glock," not "GLOCK" or "gLoCk" or "Glock(tm)," when writing in edited English. If it were an acronym, all-caps would be justified, but it's not. Glock, Luger, Colt, Uzi &mdash; all normal proper nouns in English. I'll note in passing that the official Glock website does use "GLOCK," but then its title reads "Welcome at GLOCK" and refers to "internet," so I don't think whoever was responsible for throwing it together can really be taken as an authority on usage. --Quuxplusone 01:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Sure, but is it really necessary to put that warning on the page of every GLOCK pistol? Avriette 05:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with "Glock". As has been noted, writing a word in all-caps denotes an acronym, which "Glock" is not and thus does not rate all-caps. As for the practice the Glock company uses on their website and in thier own marketing materials, that's actually a common practice used by many companies who wish to have their corporate name stand out as much as possible. Such a practice should not be taken to imply a "correct" or "official" spelling. Otherwise, would we adopt bolding, underlining or italicizing for company names where the company uses those practices in their own marketing materials? In the section on the Swedish pop band Abba, should we be reversing the first "B", as is the band's habit in all of their press materials? Insistance on always writing their name in all-caps is precisely why there's an urban legend that "Kiss" (as in the 70s rock band) is an acronym for "Knights in Satan's Service," while according to the band it stands for nothing at all. Nolefan32 07:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Now that Glock was fixed here, does anyone intend on combing through the individual pistol articles and fixing the spelling and page locations? Alyeska 00:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I just repalced out all the tempalets of Template:GLOCK pistols with Template:Glock pistols. — xaosflux  Talk  18:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I guess its time to start working on each article one at a time. Alyeska 23:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks like someone doesn't agree. Some Glock articles as well as the template have been switch back to "GLOCK".  I agree with "Glock", but I'm sort of new and have already screwed up once.  Don't want to charge ahead and change it back just yet.  Anyone?  Thernlund 22:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I went and did it. See the other caps topic at the bottom for more.  Thernlund 23:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * What? GLOCK is "GLOCK" not "Glock."  There is no "Glock." We type GameCube as "GameCube" and not "Gamecube," "Game-Cube," or "Game Cube" because it's GameCube.  Same with "PlayStation."  You want to change them all? Change it back to GLOCK and stop this nonsense. This project is about providing accurate and detailed information.  GLOCK isn't just some marketing gimmick, it's the actual name of the firearm: GLOCK 17, GLOCK 34, etc.  There is no such pistol as a Glock 17.  Changing the name is providing false and inaccurate information. Gamer Junkie 13:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Common use is Glock. Google for it.  I know what the first hit is, but it doesn't matter what the company says.  On Wikipedia is matters what common use is.  It is bewlidering to me how so many people can't grasp that.  I get it where the marketing is concerned.  But as far as Wikipedia, this whole issue was solved in the style manual before the debate began.  See the end of this talk page for more.  Thernlund (Talk 20:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No, you're missing the point. The name of the weapon is GLOCK, that's the official name of these firearms.  Having a legitimate and official article which has the weapons titled as "Glocks" is not only misleading but also inaccurate, even worse is that we would be doing this deliberately.  It's providing false information to Wikipedia's users and the Internet in general and has nothing to do with marketing. Gamer Junkie 21:10, 14 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Bah! This is what I'm talking about.  Common use is Glock.  I'm not missing the point.  I get the caps thing all over all of Glock's marketing material.  Wikipedia isn't a marketing tool.  It is to conform to the standard.  In the press and around the net, it is Glock.  Again, Google it.  And read this.  Please.  Then seek to change those things first.


 * Also, there is a blurb about the caps thing in the first part of the article and a reason for not using all caps. So it's not misleading.  Thernlund (Talk 00:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Where is this blurb? GLOCK 21, GLOCK 34, GLOCK 18, GLOCK 22, GLOCK 24, GLOCK 17, GLOCK 19. Each of the articles that I looked up contain no such blurb, and I'd imagine they aren't the only ones.  People rely on Wikipedia as a research and study tool, and this guideline is offering false information to those who would use it.  I know what common use is.  Naming conventions apply to common use and common recognition for Wikipedia's users so that something can be easily understood or located.  There is no actual difference in the terms "GLOCK" and "Glock," other than the former is accurate whilst the latter is not.  There is no need for naming conventions here.  The use of "GLOCK" doesn't serve to advertise or market the weapons any further than the words "PlayStation" and "GameCube" market video game consoles.  This is bureaucratic obstruction at its most typical on this project.  If you would like to talk policy, then I'll add WP:IAR, ignore rules that stand in the way of making Wikipedia a better and higher quality source of information for readers.  As the term "Glock" provides inaccurate information to the user, I move that this policy should overrule naming convention guidelines. Gamer Junkie 04:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * In the overview section of this article.
 * While Glock marketing materials spell the company name as if it were an acronym ("GLOCK"), newspapers in Austria, Germany and the United States forgo the capitalization of all letters in the interest of readability.
 * Not in the others I think. Maybe I'll add it.  Thernlund (Talk 22:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should just change it back to the proper terminology, or prepare to start on other articles like "DreamWorks" or "PlayStation," too. Gamer Junkie 02:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * A concensus should be discussed on those talk pages first, as was here. But I must admit that I would be unlikely to participate.  I generally stay to my areas of interest.  Thernlund (Talk 06:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * There doesn't appear to have been a formal vote on the matter here. When is this supposed to occur? Gamer Junkie 07:03, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * There wasn't. But by reading this page you will be able to see that although there was no vote, there's a general concensus.  I attempted to extract that from the dialog here and on other Glock atricles (if there were any) and put the distilled results in a section at the bottom of this talk page.  I do notice that I used the word "vote" though.  I'll change that now.


 * Look, I'm tired of discussing this with you because it's going no place. We don't agree.  Simple as that.  You reverted me on one of your pet articles.  Fine by me.  I made no attempt to redo it.  I may have been reverted in other cases too.  But I wouldn't know because unless the article itself is of interest to me I wouldn't have kept a watch on it.  Admittedly I probably shouldn't have even touched gamer articles anyway.  I can promise you I won't again.


 * The Glock article was the way it was long before I came along. My original intent, as evidenced by the "One way or the other" section I started below, was to simply make them all uniform.  I even started off on the GLOCK trail.  Then someone pointed out common use and I then read through other comments on this page which go back about a year and a half.  In all that time those were the only people who commented on the topic.  So it seemed that the concensus among those who gave a damn was clear.  As nobody else would take the step and I found myself with free time, I did.  Policies, guidelines, comments, all of it.  It all leaned towards Glock.  I made the Glock moves/changes (in two cases assisted by an admin) according to community concesus.  Anyone with feelings on it SHOULD weigh in on the subject.  PLEASE.  The more input the better.  But for now, it is what it is.Thernlund (Talk 07:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Since it has evaporated into the archives, it is worth pointing again to the Wikipedia's Unix article, which up front explains the distinction between Unix and UNIX (the latter is a trademark, and historically seems to have been an accidental assumption on somebody's part that it was an acronym). Common usage (in the US, at least) for gLoCk (except in contexts where trademark protection matters) is definitely "Glock", for example in newsstand gun magazines and in fiction.  After all, the company name comes from Gaston Glock, not from Gaston GLOCK. — DAGwyn 01:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

What is this "gLoCK" term? I've never seen this used. Gamer Junkie 02:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * He's using it facetiously to hint at the ridiculousness of using all CAPS. But I think you knew that.  Thernlund (Talk 04:05, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I didn't. Conveying and gauging humour through a computer monitor can be difficult, but maybe that's just me.  I hardly find it ridiculous, were there such a term (gLoCK) used for advertising, I would agree that such a term used solely for marketing sould not be featured on Wikipedia.  The fact that the firearms are technically named "GLOCK" and not "Glock" is where my problem with labelling the weapon as such lies. Gamer Junkie 06:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually I was following a previous poster's lead, using "gLoCk" since had I used either "Glock" or "GLOCK" it would have been prejudicial to the point I was making. — DAGwyn 01:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

While we're here, I decided to grab a list of other similarly named articles for you to check yourself. As this all revolves around just one area of interest, it took me less than three minutes to find these articles, and I'm sure there are a great many more in other topics:


 * SendStation Systems
 * Apple iTunes
 * ephPod
 * FireWire
 * RealPlayer
 * iPod
 * SigmaTel
 * WavPack
 * PlaysForSure
 * QuickTime
 * eWorld
 * PortalPlayer
 * RealNetworks

Including the aforementioned GameCube, PlayStation and DreamWorks articles, you can see that it's quite acceptable to use proper naming terminology. I've given you every reason in the world, from policy to a dozen articles, for returning the true title. What's holding us back here? Gamer Junkie 15:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Google News searches (because news sources tend to be more reputable than Joe Shmoe's website)...


 * For "sendstation " - Wiki article is common use correct. (Very few hits, but web search confirms.)
 * For "itunes" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "ephpod" - Wiki article is common use correct. (Very few hits, but web search confirms.)
 * For "firewire" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "realplayer" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "ipod" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "sigmatel" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "wavpack" - No hits, but web search does produce hits. Wiki article is judgement call.  Hits run 50/50.
 * For "playsforsure" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "quicktime" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "eworld" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "portalplayer" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "realnetworks" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "gamecube" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "playstation" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * For "dreamworks" - Wiki article is common use correct.
 * And finally...
 * For "glock" - Wiki article is common use correct (excluded the word "timo" to produce more relevant hits. Timo Glock, the race driver, has been making much news).


 * As you can see, even your examples are common use correct, as is this article. It should stay Glock. Thernlund (Talk 19:32, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * So basically we're just following what a bunch of newspaper articles choose to use now? Could it be that "Glock" is used instead of "GLOCK" because nobody knows any different and simply assumes that the former would be correct? That doesn't make them right, simply ill-informed. And we're supposed to deliberately follow them off the metaphorical cliff? That's smart. There're a hell of a lot of articles I've seen that use "Gamecube," "Playstation," "Itunes," etc and I'm sure you'd already know that. Just pointing out some result that shows up in an Internet search is ridiculous, there's just as likely another result using the proper or even a completely different term. In any case, the guns themselves are still NAMED in caps, not merely advertised that way.  Even if you keep this article as Glock, the individual gun articles must reflect there actual names, otherwise you might as well call them Gacks - just as wrong as Glock, afterall. Gamer Junkie 21:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * So you're telling me that every reputable gun magazine ON EARTH  is ill-informed? (Guns & Ammo search of several mags)  Whoa.  This dialog has taken a turn for the surreal.  Turns out those who know, all of them, actually don't!  Well I'm cancelling my subscriptions right away!  ;-D


 * Ok then. Searching the internet is ridiculous.  Although I won't completely concede that, I'll entertain it.  So I went out to the garage and dug out the old gun mags.  Yep.  Even in print.  Still "Glock".  As luck would have it I even found an old Wall Street Journal story (in actual print) about a guy that shot up a brokerage.  "Glock 17" .  (I'd provide a link to the online version, but WSJ Online is a pay site.)  (EDIT: the article said "9mm Glock" and was about Mark Barton. In my head "9mm Glock" translated to "Glock 17". May bad.)  Common use would seem to apply to the the individual guns articles too.  My position on the name of the gun is that it is not, in fact, "GLOCK".  It is "gee", "ell", "ohh", "see", "kay".  Glock stylizes that as all caps for trademark/marketing purposes.  Thernlund (Talk 21:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * This is pointless. I think we've discussed every possible reason and excuse for our preferences in terminology and it's not going anywhere. I don't think that you are wrong, but I don't think that I'm wrong, either.  You believe that the common-use guideline should be used here, and I believe that the WP:IAR policy should overrule said guideline in the interests of accuracy.  There's really only two options left now.  Firstly, I can revert your edits, and you, in turn, can then revert mine until somebody gets bored and leaves, although this would not serve the interests of Wikipedia or ourselves in the long run.  Secondly, we can organise an official vote on the matter, for a certain period of time, and votes are final.  Whichever terminology has garnered more votes by the end of that time becomes the official usage, no arguments.  Considering the current run-around nature of this debate, I see very little else in the way of options.  Do you agree with this proposal? Gamer Junkie 12:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't. A concensus has already been taken.  See above.  Wikipedia works via concensus, not vote.  You have expressed your opinion and I added it to the concensus accordingly.  The concensus is still in favor of Glock.  Concensus can, of course, change.  But we've been going about this now for four days and only one person has chimed in (in favor of "Glock", restating an opinion held before).  I even added a comment to ALL the Glock pistol talk pages pointing back here.  I have a hard time thinking that nobody is watching.  To be sure though, I have just added a Request for comment.  So, I'm of the opinion that until more people speak up and the concensus swings the other way, they should all stay Glock in accordance with concensus.   Thernlund (Talk 15:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

You make it difficult to keep this discussion civilised when you insist on sarcastic taunts, spelling words phonetically and adding snide, insulting comments like " ." Fine, we'll wait for further input, talking to you is beginning to grate on my better nature. Gamer Junkie 16:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * My apologies. That was certainly not my intent.  The phonetic thing was not a taunt.  It was to convey that I feel the name is how it's spoken, not writen.  And the wasn't meant to be a poke.  It was to convey me NOT getting angry because I felt that my saying "I don't" was a bit short and may have come off wrong.  Lastly, I think you may be refering to when I made metion of you not understanding "gLoCk".  The feeling was that you were making a sarcastic comment.  You corrected that, and I ackknowledged.  Again, I apologize for the misunderstanding.  However, for the record, my position on the debate has not changed.  Thernlund (Talk 16:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * As I mentioned earlier, it's not easy to grasp a particular point of humour or emotion that, whilst it may be obvious face-to-face or verbally, is far from clear when reading text on a monitor. If your meant nothing by it, then think nothing of it.  Regarding the debate, like I said, I'm happy to await further concensus. Gamer Junkie 16:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


 * In the latest Stephanie Plum book by Janet Evanovich, "Glock" is mentioned (with that capitalization). I can't recall ever seeing all-caps "GLOCK" used in general literature in any non-marketing context. — DAGwyn 01:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

GLOCK all caps is the correct spelling. Then again this is Wikipedia…

Caps GLOCK - one way or the other
Honestly, I don't care one way or the other. The majority of GLOCK atricles use the caps version of the name. As well, I can't find anything on GLOCK's website to suggest using mixed upper/lower. GLOCK prints it that way so purely from a cosmetic stand point, caps looks right. But I digress. I personally don't care that much so long as it's standardized. So until someone is willing to change ALL GLOCK references to Glock, I believe it should just stay caps. It should be one way or the other for continuity sake.

I changed a couple back to caps so they were the same as the majority. If someone is going to change them back, change them ALL.

I also added Fact to the GLOCK template. I can't find any reference pointing to where GLOCK mandates the use of caps. Near as I can tell it was just the way they did it without much thought.

I'm still trying to get up the nerve to change this article. Eventually. Thernlund 21:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Please don't! It looks fine the way it is, without using a lot of all-caps "GLOCK"s.  A similar debate recently occurred concerning the "Unix" article.  It was an even worse situation there, because the article specifically uses the trademark "UNIX" only when referring to products that have been officially "vetted" as conforming to the trademark holder's requirements, and uses "Unix-like" for similar, unvetted systems and "Unix" as the common-dialogue term.  Obviously Gaston Glock's name is not all capitals and is not an acronym, so there is no natural reason to be spelling it as "GLOCK"; presumably the capitalization is a trademark/legal issue, just as it is for "UNIX".  The most common usage when not referring to official corporate nomenclature is "Glock" (see the online sites in the "Glock ring", for example the Glock FAQ), and the article currently reflects that. — 158.12.88.57 23:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. So I guess you're going to chnage all the Glock articles?  Thernlund 08:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The main Glock article seems okay (unless somebody has come along and capitalized a lot more instances of GlOcK). What other articles are there? — DAGwyn 21:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * All of these. Thernlund 22:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You know, after some research, I think I'm going to change them all myself. I read the Unix discussion.  There was also a similar discussion about Time Magazine.  Pretty good arguments in favor of non-caps.  Not to mention the Style Manual pretty much lays it out on the topic of trademark names.  And 158 is right.  Common reference in published sourced is Glock, not GLOCK (Just like TIME vs. Time and UNIX vs. Unix).


 * I'll be posting a link in my edit summary back to this discussion. I'll also actively try to stay on top of keeping them changed.  (I wonder when someone will change the MySpace article)  Thernlund 22:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Well that went fast. Glock 17, Glock 21, and Glock 23 I couldn't move myself so I requested they be moved.  So there we go.  Thernlund 23:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * What on Earth did you people just do? It's not Glock, it's GLOCK. If title pages have to be standardized, that's fine, but 'GLOCK' is proper everywhere else. --Haizum   μολὼν λαβέ 22:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Aren't you listening? Read the two sections on this page concerning caps.  Then read the style manual.  Then Google for "glock" and see what you find.


 * If you can cite a reference as to Glock's official position on it, let's see it. Thernlund 22:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Now I'm stewing about that "What on earth.." comment. Good grief.  "You people" is me.  And the vote here as near as I can tell was "Glock" rather than "GLOCK".  I originally took the "GLOCK" position and changed a couple articles to match.  Then someone pointed out a) the style manual; and b) the standard usage of the term in the press.  Some research of my own changed my mind.  I was even more convinced after reading the Time and Unix talk pages.  So I changed the Glock pages and some references in other articles too.


 * Seriously, if you can point to one source from Glock that says the name is to be all caps, I want to see it. Because I searched long and hard and found nothing.  And besides that, it seems to me that regardless of what the company says, standard usage is "Glock".  I'm told Wikipedia isn't to bow to marketing gimmicks, yeah?  Thernlund 23:03, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Did you ever think to check the GLOCK website? GLOCK, GLOCK, GLOCK, GLOCK, everywhere you look. It's so pervasive they don't need to explain it. --Haizum   μολὼν λαβέ 00:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah. They need to explain it.  But I digress.  It wouldn't matter I think.  Common usage isn't GLOCK, it's Glock.  GLOCK is marketing which has no place here.  See this.  Thernlund 00:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Why? Why would you make me call GLOCK GesmbH and have them explain that it's GLOCK and not Glock? Why would you want to embarrass yourself like that? I don't know; but what I do know is GLOCK is correct. If people commonly use 'Glock' then it's commonly wrong usage, not common usage. If the media uses Glock...well, no one is expecting the media to know a thing about firearms. If it is for standardization, that's fine, but please don't act like it's really supposed to be 'Glock.' --Haizum   μολὼν λαβέ 00:44, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Here on Wikipedia, it is supposed to be Glock. Thernlund 00:50, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * ...all of a sudden. --Haizum   μολὼν λαβέ 00:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah. Well, I think it was always supposed to be that way here.  But up until now nobody was willing to take the initiative.  It is rather time consuming.  Thernlund 23:26, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Responses to RfC
I'm adding my vote for Glock, having seen the Request for comment. WP:MOSTM says "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment: avoid: REALTOR® instead, use: Realtor", I'm voting *not* to use all caps (i.e. keep Glock). Added my name to the vote summary above. EdJohnston 16:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC) Here in response to your RFC. The name should be "Glock" per WP:COMMONNAME. The way that Glock GmbH prefer it to be capitalized is irrelevant. This type of argument often arises on Wikipedia; e.g., there are some who insist that North Korea be referred to as the DPRK, but the policy here is to use the common name. (As an aside, I suspect that Glock themselves do not realize how weird the all-caps version appears to many native speakers of English, and they might well change it if they did.) Raymond Arritt 16:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC) Agree with above commenters. The Realtor example is perfectly on point. PubliusFL 00:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)