Talk:Monkey testing

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: Moved. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 22:47, 20 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Monkey test → Monkey testing – Since this article has been rewritten, it is appropriate to change the name from Monkey test, which is a noun specifying a kind of test, to Monkey testing, representing a testing technique. The new name also more accurately reflects the nature of the article. Aaroniidx (talk) 01:59, 22 April 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 09:14, 30 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Support - The page name should reflect the page's content, which covers the technique. Meatsgains (talk) 03:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)Reply
• oppose this is not about testing using monkeys, and even "monkey test" should not be used. Both of those should redirect to animal testing on non-human primates where real live monkeys are used in tests for monkey testing -- 70.51.46.195 (talk) 06:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Comment if moved it should be monkey testing (computing); if not, it should move to monkey test (computing) -- 70.51.46.195 (talk) 06:18, 1 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
• Support - "Monkey testing" is used in cited sources. Thanks for the rewrite. ~Kvng (talk) 13:29, 3 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
• Support It should definitely be "testing" instead of "test". Whether this should be disambiguated from Animal testing on non-human primates by a disambiguation page instead of a hatnote, is a separate question, which should be handled in a separate move request. —Ruud 14:24, 3 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Any additional comments:

• If the content is being merged to the fuzz testing article, why are we discussing this? Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:31, 3 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Good point. I suggest participants in this discussion weigh in on the merge discussion. ~Kvng (talk) 16:45, 3 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

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.