Talk:Electric light

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. Some neutrals but no support. (closed by non-admin page mover) CNC (talk) 23:13, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Electric light → Light bulbLight bulb – Given that the widely-accepted technical terms lamp and electric lamp have (like luminaire) been deemed insufficiently common by the Wikipedia community for use as article titles, I propose that:

• the electric light article be moved/renamed such that its title becomes either light bulb (which appears to be more common than the shortened lightbulb), and
• the related terms lamp, light, and light source (as well as the explicitly electric versions of these terms) be listed in that article as terms that can refer to a light fixture or one of its light-emitting components (i.e., are not true synonyms for light bulb).

The term electric light is recognizable (e.g., as a kind of "artificial" or anthropic light) and concise, but does not satisfy the other criteria for good article titles:

• Unnatural – Consider a light fixture that contains multiple light bulbs. If someone asks you to "switch off the light", you probably wouldn't ask which of its light bulbs they're referring to. Some light fixtures have multiple circuits to enable separate switching of their light bulbs, but it typically wouldn't make sense to say "switch off the electric light" if electric light is defined to only mean light bulb.
• Imprecise – The term light is ambiguous in that it can refer to visible radiation, a light bulb, or a light fixture. The term electric light is more specific but can still refer to visible radiation (generated using electricity), a light bulb, or a light fixture.
• Inconsistent – The existing article titles electric light and light fixture are poorly coordinated. One problem with electric light is that the aforementioned imprecision results in overlapping scope for the two pages. Another issue is its different pattern/structure, namely light fixture (light-emitting fixture) versus electric light (electrically-powered light).

In contrast, light bulb would satisfy all of the criteria. I produced the user essay at Jrtuenge/Move electric light to more fully document my rationale; it provides additional explanation and justification for this potentially-controversial requested move. Jrtuenge (talk) 19:06, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose "Light bulb" unnecessarily narrows the scope. Light bulbs are a subset of electric lights, but all electric lights are not light bulbs. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:52, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

  As I had indicated above and in my essay, I agree that a light bulb is one kind of electric light, and that (therefore) not all electric lights are light bulbs... I hope you'll reconsider, given that:

  1. This article currently doesn't treat a light bulb as a kind of electric light -- it simply treats them as synonyms (even though they aren't simple synonyms).

  2. This article currently doesn't treat a light fixture as a kind of electric light. The scope of this article appropriately excludes light fixtures. However, both articles should clarify that a light fixture is a kind of electric light (e.g., see Appendices A and B of my essay).

  3. The title of this article (electric light) fails to clearly distinguish it from the light fixture article. In contrast, light bulb is clearly distinct from light fixture.

  4. As noted in my essay (and its Appendix B), light bulbs can be any shape (including tubular) and aren't limited to incandescent technology.

  Could you please clarify what scope you believe would be inappropriately excluded by changing the title to light bulb? Examples would be helpful. Jrtuenge (talk) 16:26, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. Jrtuenge reached out to me to have a fresh look at this proposal. Unfortunately, I don't like "Light bulb" as a destination for this article. The reason is—as Zxcvbnm points out—"light bulb" only refers to the bulbous shaped lamps, which is a narrow subset of all electric lamps. I could get behind "Electric lamp" as a target, but that was voted down in 2023. I worked commercial maintenance for several years, replacing lamps of all types. And now I'm an electrical engineer and lighting designer. So that's how I know that what most people call a light bulb is technically a lamp, and that bulbs are a subset, as are tubes, parabolic reflectors, strips, etc. — voidxor 18:53, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

  I hope you'll reconsider. My lighting career is measured in decades, so I too use the terms lamp and luminaire in lieu of light bulb and light fixture. But this is really about choosing the lesser of evils -- light bulb versus electric light. As I had noted in my essay, specifically its appendices:

  1. Double-ended tubular lamps (e.g., fluorescent) are categorized as light bulbs by nearly all major retailers (e.g., Ace Hardware, Grainger, Home Depot, Lowe's, Target, Walmart, Wayfair).

  2. The American Heritage Dictionary, the Britannica Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and Wiktionary all say light bulbs can be tubular and/or fluorescent.

  And FWIW (sample size = 2), I just asked the assistant and the receptionist (independently) at the doctor's office what they'd call the light-emitting devices in the 2x4 troffers overhead, and they both said "light bulbs" right away. In any case, thanks for taking time to consider and vote! Jrtuenge (talk) 20:53, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

  ...and to clarify: the lamps in the troffers were linear/tubular. Jrtuenge (talk) 21:02, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

  Please stop pressing editors to "please reconsider" every time you disagree with their opinion; it's undue leverage, and might discourage others from chiming in. Like your career experience, my Wikipedia experience is measured in decades. We find consensus based on facts, not based on who presses the hardest. I have the same facts that you have, am also in the United States, and also shop at those retailers (which are geared toward the ignorant masses, believe me). The fact remains that "light bulb" is not correct in such a broad context, because it refers to a specific context (which we may also need to refer to at some point). The codes (e.g. NEC, IECC) and standards (e.g. IES) are a better source than hardware stores' lighting aisles (basically primary sources versus tertiary sources). Your original research isn't the answer. We also can't ignore the worldview nor other dialects. I would very much like to hear from some editors outside the US. — voidxor 21:24, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

  Note also that I linked the Commons category from the External Links section. It was already located at "Electric lamps", and already carried the following note: A lamp is this part of a light fixture (lighting device or luminaire) that produces the light, e.g. a light bulb. Colloquially, however, the word lamp is often used for the entire lighting fixture (pars pro toto), including in terms like table lamp, porch lamp, hanging lamp, wall lamp, floor lamp and numerous others; and in their components’ names such as lamp shade or lamp cord. — voidxor 21:30, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

  I disagree with your proposal to defer to codes and standards. We follow WP:COMMONNAME, and do not automatically defer to official names. I agree that we need to consider differences in English usage worldwide. --Srleffler (talk) 07:10, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  We use the most common name, unless that name is wrong. That's even written into WP:COMMONNAME where it states, "Ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined in reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources." — voidxor 19:41, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  I don't think we're going to find a perfect solution here -- but that doesn't mean we shouldn't seek the best available one, or settle for the current one. Jrtuenge (talk) 20:10, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  Agreed. I didn't say anything about needing a perfect solution, though. You've proposed moving the article to the most common name (at least among non-professionals in the United States). I'm arguing that there's more to it than that because "light bulb" takes it a step too far into factually incorrect territory. — voidxor 20:29, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  My argument has been (as explained here and in my essay), and remains, that electric light is worse than light bulb in terms of factual correctness. Jrtuenge (talk) 21:27, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose - The article starts with An electric light, lamp, or light bulb which seems to be a good description of the topic but not appropriate for a title so we've shortened it. Electric light a reasonable title and the new proposed change is not a clear improvement because there are both advantages and disadvantages to the proposed change. If there is nothing clearly better on the table, we stay with what we have and put our efforts where we can make significant improvements. ~Kvng (talk) 21:41, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

  I disagree, but still appreciate your input -- thanks for giving this a look. Jrtuenge (talk) 00:10, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

After further discussion, I am no longer opposed to this proposal. I'm not !voting to support because I still don't think there is a lot to be gained by moving. ~Kvng (talk) 20:02, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping an open mind, @Kvng, and understood regarding your present neutrality. I don't see any perfect options here, either, but it seems clear to me (and everyone I've asked in person) that light bulb is the lesser of evils -- and not by a small margin. Jrtuenge (talk) 20:53, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

• I am open to this proposal. The naming of this article has been discussed (and changed) many times. In the past (years ago) it was not yet clear whether common usage of the term "light bulb" would expand to include non-incandescent types. I think there is a good case to be made that it has. The key question to consider here is whether "light bulb" is an appropriate common name for the topic of this article. More broadly, we should think about the scope of what we want to cover in this article. A wafer light is an electric light, but is not a light bulb. I'm not sure if technical usage would call it a "lamp" or not. Do we want to include or exclude those from the scope of this article? Similarly it's becoming more common for table and floor lamps to have integrated LEDs that are not replaceable. Would we want to include hardwired LEDs in fixtures in the scope of this article or exclude them? If we want to include these non-replaceable elements in the scope, we probably don't want to change to "light bulb". If it makes sense to focus the article only on replaceable elements, "Light bulb" might be appropriate.--Srleffler (talk) 07:00, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  Great. I think we should maintain the current scope, as I understand it, which focuses on field-replaceable light-emitting components of light fixtures. I'd include LED light engines, but exclude subcomponents of such things (e.g., LED arrays/modules, LED packages, LED dies). Thanks for the thoughtful input! Jrtuenge (talk) 18:13, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  If we're including LED light engines, then that strays even further away from "light bulb", to my point. I think we're all in agreement that the scope here is pretty broad. — voidxor 19:48, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  An LED light engine basically only differs in that it doesn't have an ANSI-standard base. I think most non-professionals, when pressed (e.g., see my linear/tubular fluorescent sample above), would still call it a light bulb. Jrtuenge (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  I know. But we can't simply go with what's most common if it's also incorrect. See my quote of WP:COMMONNAME above. — voidxor 20:29, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  We can use terms that are somewhat "incorrect" if that's what people generally say and we don't have a good enough, natural enough alternative. WP:COMMONNAME says that innaccurate names "are often avoided", but they are not always avoided. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:49, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  If there wasn't a good alternative, I'd agree with you. The fact is that "electric light" should be well understood by all English speakers. As Kvng stated, it's the status quo and I don't see a benefit to changing it to something that is less correct, more narrow in scope, and possibly somewhat a function of ENGVAR. The OP and another editor pointed out that we must go with what's the most common, per WP:COMMONNAME. But that misses the fact that even WP:COMMONNAME cautions against using an incorrect name that is most common, unless as you state, there is no good alternative, which is not the case here. — voidxor 21:06, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  An electric light is typically understood to be a light fixture, as I showed in my essay and its appendices. Jrtuenge (talk) 21:39, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

• I have a bit of a problem applying the term "bulb" to an LED. In their most basic form, an LED is not a bulb. A bulb has a glass enclosure around it. LEDs are sometimes used without putting them in bulbs. It might have been OK to ignore LEDs 30 years ago because nobody was using them for lighting back then, but now they're the dominant form of lighting in many environments (although typically enclosed in bulbs when used for that purpose). Moreover, "electric light" can refer to the light itself rather than the device that is producing it. Electric light is the light that is emitted by devices that use electricity to generate light. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:23, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

  I initially had the same reservation regarding bulb. The key is to distinguish between a bulb and a light bulb; the two are sometimes treated as simple synonyms (i.e., bulb as shorthand for light bulb), but I think most people picture a complete field-replaceable unit (e.g., including screw base) when they hear/read/think light bulb.

  I discuss article scope and LED hierarchy/typology in my response to Srleffler above; my understanding is that scope here includes LED lamps (integrated or non-integrated) but for example excludes LED luminaires.

  As for electric light as electrically-produced visible radiation, I'm in complete agreement (as noted in my essay). Thanks for helping to think this through! Jrtuenge (talk) 18:28, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

• Comment, I almost feel like the light bulb is significant on it's own to have it's own page. It's clearly a notable type of electric light.--Ortizesp (talk) 14:39, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

  Yep, see Incandescent light bulb ~Kvng (talk) 15:28, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

  @Ortizesp and @Kvng the title of the article for incandescent light bulb would be shortened to light bulb if the two terms were equivalent. Incandescent light bulbs are just one kind of light bulb, the more prevalent type now being LED light bulbs.

  As I had noted in my essay (specifically its appendices) and in my response to voidxor above:

  1. Nearly all major retailers (e.g., Ace Hardware, Grainger, Home Depot, Lowe's, Target, Walmart, Wayfair) use the term light bulb (rather than electric light) to also cover other shapes (e.g., tubular) and technologies like fluorescent and LED.

  2. The American Heritage Dictionary, the Britannica Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and Wiktionary all say light bulbs can be tubular and aren't necessarily incandescent.

  Jrtuenge (talk) 17:51, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

  I don't think it makes sense to have a separate Light bulb article for bulb-shaped lights that are not necessarily incandescent. That would be a 3-level hierarchy of coverage (Electric light -> Light bulb -> Incandescent light bulb) and readers' brains would explode for no good reason. ~Kvng (talk) 18:25, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

  Agreed -- to be clear, that isn't what I've been proposing. I'm instead proposing that we change electric light to light bulb, as explained in my requested move (above) and in my essay linked from it. Jrtuenge (talk) 19:42, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

  The idea is to have an article for replaceable lighting elements, regardless of shape or technology. Jrtuenge is asserting, with some justification, that "light bulb" is the common name for that. The proposed article would replace Electric light, and would have almost the same content. The advantage is that the scope of the article would be clearer: light fixtures and non-replaceable light sources would be excluded. The title "Electric light" is ambiguous about whether these should be included or excluded.--Srleffler (talk) 05:54, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

  The scope you describe would include non-compact fluorescent lamps (fluorescent tubes). Do people really call these light bulbs? ~Kvng (talk) 15:28, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

  Yes. Please see the many examples of such use of the term light bulb by retailers and dictionaries that I had linked in my previous response above. Notably, I have found no such use of the term electric light. Jrtuenge (talk) 15:47, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I have struck my oppose above. It looks like fluorescent tubes are often called tubular light bulbs. ~Kvng (talk) 20:02, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose There are electric lights (of different shapes and sizes) that do not look like what one would call a light bulb, such as Compact fluorescent lamp, Arc lamp, and Gas-discharge lamp. GTrang (talk) 22:24, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for taking a look at this, but as I had noted in my essay (specifically its appendices) and in my responses to Voidxor and Kvng above:

  1. Nearly all major retailers (e.g., Ace Hardware, Grainger, Home Depot, Lowe's, Target, Walmart, Wayfair) use the term light bulb to also cover other shapes (e.g., tubular) and technologies like fluorescent and HID and LED.

  2. The American Heritage Dictionary, the Britannica Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and Wiktionary all say light bulbs aren't necessarily bulbous (e.g., can be tubular) and aren't necessarily incandescent.

  In contrast, I found no such use of the term electric light in reference to these products -- it's instead used in reference to the light fixtures they're installed in. Jrtuenge (talk) 23:04, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose per above. There are electric lights which work without light bulbs, so the article would lose precision if the move went ahead, and overall this title encompasses the subject covered much better than the proposed light bulb.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:40, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

  I think I might see the problem. Do you believe a light fixture is a type of electric light? You didn't provide any examples, so it isn't clear what you mean, but I'm guessing you're referring to light fixtures like these, which have no replaceable light-emitting components:

  • IKEA BRUNBÅGE LED work lamp (desk lamp)
  • Lithonia CPX LED panel (troffer)

  If so, it seems the problem here is one of ambiguous article scope -- which is exactly what I'm trying to address via the requested move/retitle.

  To be clear, my understanding is that this article is intended to cover light-emitting devices that are field-replaceable components of light fixtures; such components are commonly termed lamps (among lighting professionals) or light bulbs (e.g., among retailers and in dictionaries as noted in my response above to GTrang), which is why these two terms are listed as synonyms at the top of the article. Jrtuenge (talk) 15:46, 14 January 2026 (UTC)