Talk:Repairable component

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Rename article to something like: "Repairable (military term)" ...?[edit]

Repairable → Repairable (military term) — As it stands this article is entirely about the military use of this term, but it is often commonly used outside this context, so I propose the current content be moved to an article explicitly stating the military context with which it is concerned. Wikiscient (talk) 00:35, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There's no other article called "Repairable" or even "Repair" at Wikipedia. There's no ambiguity and no need for a disambiguator. There's also already a link to Wiktionary for those seeking other non-encyclopedic meanings. — AjaxSmack 04:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Having looked at some of the articles that link to this article, I agree that renaming it is not the best way to improve the article right now.

Those articles all seem to have to do with "operations research" (which apparently "originated in military efforts before World War II, and since then its techniques have grown to concern problems in a variety of industries"). The best thing to do would be to make this article also less particularly phrased in terms of military logistics but more in terms of "operations research" in general.

(I put the wiktionary link in there when I wrote the above, but the definition there is too general ("able to be repaired") to be useful in any way here).

Wikiscient (talk) 17:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per AjaxSmack: There's no other article about "repairable" so there's no need for disambiguation. But do I understand correctly that the nominator has withdrawn, because I think in that case we can close discussion? Propaniac (talk) 18:33, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have withdrawn the request and my support for it. WP:RMCI does not seem entirely clear to me right now as to how to "properly" do that, so I am just informally removing the movereq-tag and making this comment about it. Wikiscient (talk) 19:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]