Talk:Purex (laundry detergent)

Requested move 21 January 2022

 * 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 as proposed. Purex to become a dab page. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Purex (laundry detergent) → Purex – Currently, is a redirect targeted at PUREX, an abbreviation for "plutonium uranium reduction extraction". As far as I know, that abbreviation is mostly used with all-uppercase letters rather than in mixed case, although mixed case is sometimes used for it. However, "Purex" is well known as a brand of laundry detergent, so I think the laundry detergent should be considered the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Purex". About half of the incoming links to "Purex" are errors. A web search for Purex mostly brings up the laundry detergent. There is also a brand of bathroom tissue mentioned in the Kruger Inc. article, but it doesn't seem as notable and the Kruger Inc. article barely mentions it. In terms of overall pageviews, the laundry detergent and the plutonium extraction process are about equally popular, but that mixes in the all-uppercase views, which is probably the vast majority for the plutonium extraction process. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 20:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Steel1943  (talk) 18:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I have never heard of the laundry detergent... PUREX is the de facto standard for nuclear reprocessing and loads of people won't be familiar with the capitalization... Hobbitschuster (talk) 22:52, 21 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Support Per WP:DIFFCAPS. PUREX can still remain where it is with a hatnote to differentiate between them.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 23:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:DIFFCAPS; we can easily correct lost readers through WP:TWODAB. BilledMammal (talk) 15:16, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose the abbreviation gets 1,235 views compared with 890 for the laundry detergent and 15[|Purex_(laundry_detergent)|Purex_(bathroom_tissue)] for Purex (bathroom tissue) and many readers won't capitalize so I'd instead make this title a DAB.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:46, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose per User:Hobbitschuster. The scientific meaning has the higher long-term notability, and might also be used in its non-all-caps form. 162 etc. (talk) 16:37, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I suspect most of the plutonium process readers would be using the uppercase form, but if we can't agree to make the laundry detergent primary, then the redirect should become a disambiguation page. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 18:20, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

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.
 * Oppose to redirect. It would be better to create a disambiguation page and add hatnotes to various Purex articles (PUREX acronym, Purex laundry detergent, Purex bathroom tissue, etc. iamdumdum (talk) 09:11, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak support, although I'd rather move DAB to base name.--Ortizesp (talk) 22:35, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: From the above comments, I suspect we're heading toward disambiguation of "". This discussion has been open for a while, and to me it seems ripe for closure. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 20:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes I think so.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 20:34, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. First of all the Purex process is commonly written without all caps, as you can see in this scholar search.  It has been evolving in recent decades to more allcaps use, but certainly is not consistently there.  I would move PUREX to be primarytopic for Purex, or make a disambig page perhaps.  Or leave it as primary redirect. Dicklyon (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * By the way, my father-in-law Larned B. Asprey was one of the inventors of Purex. Yes, I know, that's irrelevant.  Dicklyon (talk) 00:59, 5 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose and counter proposal. Per, the evidence is that PUREX should not be allcaps but is commonly written as "Purex" even though it is nominally an acronym. Things change etc per scuba, radar and sonar, which are all etymologically acronyms. However, per WP:AT, acronyms don't make the best article titles particularly if they are a bit esoteric. As noted, it is an abbreviation/acronym for "plutonium uranium reduction extraction" and appears to be the WP:COMMONNAME for the process. The article title should probably be a little more precise to indicate that it has nothing to do with the brand name (just to help those readers that really want to know about laundry detergent) but "Purex" (the process) is eminently more notable - as demonstrated in independent reliable sources.  It should be the primary title. To Purex (the brand), there are two articles that are about products and a third (about a product) which is a redirect to Kruger Inc..  The two articles are Purex (laundry detergent) and Purex Crystals. If we have to have a stand-alone article for the latter, it should be "Purex Complete Crystals [Fabric] Softener", since that is the product name.  The present article (Purex Crystals) clearly has problems (it is tagged) and the title is bit misleading. It should probably be merged with Purex (laundry detergent) but with a new title such as "Purex (laundry products)" or similar. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:58, 5 February 2022 (UTC)