Talk:Psicose

Requested move 30 August 2019

 * 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: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 03:57, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Psicose → Allulose – Most commonly used name today Medgirl131 08:56, 30 August 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 16:29, 7 September 2019 (UTC)  --Relisting.  &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 21:51, 14 September 2019 (UTC) PAGE ]]) 18:10, 30 August 2019 (UTC) PAGE ]]) 18:10, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Ahecht ([[User talk:Ahecht|TALK
 * A google search for Psicose returns 1.4 million results, compared to only 100,000 for allulose. --Ahecht ([[User talk:Ahecht|TALK
 * Psicose is apparently the Portuguese word for "psychosis", which could inflate its google numbers. When I do a google search for the term, the second results is Psychosis, and the third result is some kind of Portuguese mental health website. Colin M (talk) 00:55, 7 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Leaning oppose. I did google scholar searches for English papers since 2018. I got 260 results for Allulose and 877 results for Psicose. I'm not seeing any evidence that Allulose is the new WP:COMMONNAME. (Yes, even when filtering by English results, there were still a few false positives for the Portuguese word, but they were pretty rare. I skimmed the first 100 Google Scholar results and saw only 5 false positives.) Colin M (talk) 00:57, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose on insufficient evidence that allulose is more common. PubChem lists both (14 uses of "psicose", one for "allulose") and the PubMed search results are about equal for the two terms: 281 hits for psicose with 16 reviews and 305 with 18 reviews for allulose, with some overlaps. Doesn't impress as a convincing reason to change. --Zefr (talk) 22:25, 14 September 2019 (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.

Discovery
Psicose is known/synthesized at least since 1935. See: Steiger, Marguerite; Reichstein, T., Helvetica Chimica Acta (1935), 18, 790-9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.91.129.4 (talk) 11:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Psicose vs Allulose
I have no idea which one is the more common name, but it seems weird to have the article named psicose, then consistently refer to its subject as "allulose" throughout. Krychek (talk) 14:15, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I noticed that too, especially since the word "psicose" is nowhere used in the article at all, just D-Psicose, which is confusing to a lay reader... Looks like there was some discussion a while ago. Fredlesaltique (talk) 06:51, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I have never seen the word Psicose before. It seems all food labels are using the term Allulose. Gorgos19 (talk) 12:43, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 16 March 2021

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. After much-extended time for discussion, there is no consensus for a move at this time. BD2412 T 04:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Psicose → Allulose – Reasoning:

1. Allulose is a synonym (see Merriam Webster)

2. Both allulose and D-psicose are used in recent scientific literature (see Google Scholar)

3. Allulose is more common in non-scientific literature (see Google results, United States FDA, EU approval application) so better fits article title criteria of being recognizable and natural.

Fredlesaltique (talk) 05:27, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Pinging editors involved in last discussion, , and Fredlesaltique (talk) 01:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose Most recent sources prefer psicose to allulose, per Google Ngrams, and it's been that way since the 1970s. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 15:19, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think the Ngram data by itself is a good basis for deciding a name change. It's simplified, and doesn't distinguish between academic and non-academic sources (this article explains what I mean). My original point was that allulose is more common in general use, but the Ngram data won't show that. Fredlesaltique (talk) 02:44, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Note that Fredlesaltique's examples of preference for "allulose" include the FDA and the European Commission's food safety division — i.e., official government regulatory bodies. It's also used widely in consumer products on the market. These considerations seem pretty compelling reasosn to use "allulose" as the primary article name. Mikalra (talk) 17:05, 6 April 2021 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dietary effect section
This section is very badly written. It spends 90% on methodology description, and includes only one very technical sentence describing the results. I think it should be rewritten or removed, but I'm not competent to improve it.

77.252.46.234 (talk) 15:04, 1 December 2021 (UTC)