Talk:Lee conformal world in a tetrahedron

Thanks for creating this article, Justinkunimune. I didn’t realize it existed when you were trying to add it to List of map projections. This article needs to get moved to a different name.
 * “Lee Conformal Projection” violates the syntax rules and conventions for articles and for the projection articles; I’m surprised it passed review. All other projection articles use lower case for those parts of the title that are not proper nouns.
 * There is no such thing as some particular projection named “Lee conformal projection”. Lee devised and described dozens of conformal projections. This is only one. The best name for it is probably “Lee conformal world on a tetrahedron”, following J.P. Snyder’s description of the equatorial aspect of the same projection, which he called, “Lee conformal world in a triangle”. He used this convention for others as well, such as “Adams hemisphere-in-a-square projection”. Other authors have adopted these conventions, such as Fenna in A compendium of map projections.

Requested move 29 June 2017

 * 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. Andrewa (talk) 18:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Lee Conformal Projection → Lee conformal world in a tetrahedron – No map projection article capitalizes “projection” (see List of map projections), and “conformal” is also not a proper noun. Meanwhile Lee invented dozens of projections, as he describes in Conformal Projections Based on Elliptic Functions and other works. There is no literature that calls this particular one the “Lee conformal projection”. Following the convention of Snyder, which has been adopted by other authors, the new name should be as I propose.

Strebe (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Support per convincing rationale. Dicklyon (talk) 05:23, 2 July 2017 (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.