Talk:RP

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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 02:06, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Rp → RP – Almost all topics here can be referred to as "RP." I used the same reasoning to have CF moved from Cf earlier this year. GilaMonster536 (talk) 21:41, 12 August 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 00:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

• Support - this makes sense as most of the use of RP in the dab would be refereing acronyms, instead of something else. TiggerJay (talk) 04:13, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

* Support because it gives consistency with almost all other 2-letter plain title disambiguation pages, which have both letters capitalized. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 02:21, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Actually I'm not sure whether to support or oppose because there are some 2-letter disambiguation pages without (disambiguation) that only have the first letter capitalized, such as Ze and Si. The latter has its own introductory line aside from the basic "__ may refer to", too, and for good reason. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 02:27, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Those two are interesting examples. Ze and Si exist, but I would suggest their usage is a bit different. While Si is a dab page, SI is a primary redirect, so Si serves as a natural disambiguator. When it comes to Ze there are far more articles that use "Ze" as the first part of the article title, as opposed to an acronym such as Zero emissions. By contrast, RP has mostly article titles where RP would be an acronym. TiggerJay (talk) 03:59, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

I can find more 2-letter disambiguation pages like this if any of you would like that. Thanks, 1isall (talk/contribs) 03:51, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose The majority of the entries on this page are not commonly referred to as "RP", and to add them to this page would be a stretch. Of the very few that are, rupee is not capitalized and referred to as "Rp". Without proof that there are many legitimate "RP" entries here, I see nothing wrong with the status-quo. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:06, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

  Actually an astonishing number (19) of them do use RP either as their abbreviation in the lead or in the logo, and additionally 6 or so that have RPsomething like RP-1 as their abbreviation or "RP" for "Rating Pending" in ESRB. Now to the degree in which it would be considered a commonname for titling purposes, few would (if any) would qualify. However, I think within their own industry, RP is quite often used for these, such as Repurchase agreement is commonly referred to as RP by those in that industry, or Retinitis pigmentosa as RP in the medical community. These are all referenced in the LEAD, and there are many more. I think that within their fields it would be like questioning the need for reliable sources for "in" before we considered if it was commonname for inch within the measurement trades/realms. TiggerJay (talk) 04:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

• Support per WP:DABNAME, which favors all caps for terms that aren't words but instead usually abbreviations. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:53, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
• Support per nom and per WP:DABNAME, which (as mentioned above by User:Mdewman6) "favors all caps for terms that aren't words but instead usually abbreviations". Like, unless it's being pronounced as a word, the standard is for initialism-esque dab pages to be in all-caps. Paintspot Infez (talk) 20:56, 24 August 2025 (UTC)