Talk:Karel's p28

From LifeWiki
Revision as of 10:12, 2 September 2018 by Apple Bottom (talk | contribs) (Apple Bottom moved page Talk:88P28 to Talk:Karel's p28: Proper name)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Notability tag

My reasons for adding the Notability tag to this page are basically the same as those described at Talk:38P7.2. Nathaniel 14:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

See Talk:38P7.2 for what I have to say on this.
~Sokwe 00:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
I changed my mind. This pattern isn't important, and all of the information on this page can be found in pattern Jason Summers' all-osc pattern collection. Other non-notable patterns are 46P22, 48P22, unix on 44P7.2, pentadecathlon on snacker, and pentadecathlon on 38P7.2.
~Sokwe 19:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Maybe we could have pages 'Period X Ocsillators' or something, where all oscillators of that period not important enough for their own page could have a section. Lewis Patterson 20:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
This could be done directly on the oscillator period category pages.
~Sokwe 22:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Revoke systematic names on LifeWiki?

I think that the oscillator in question is unique enough to warrant its own page. Arbitrary billiard tables, on the other hand, are not.

Anyway, I would prefer objects that meet the LifeWiki's notability guidelines to be given common names, because I think that the systematic names are unintuitive. (Admittedly, they tell you a lot more about the object than its common name!) I think that the systematic names could still be included in pattern catalogues, for example, but not in an encyclopedia.

I propose the name 'octosymmetric p28' to refer to this oscillator, and 'fused octosymmetric p28s' to refer to the compound oscillator based on this.

Any issues with this proposal?

--Calcyman 20:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I have had some trouble with naming objects due to the common naming systems for Life objects. This is usually because the population count is in the name, so objects that have since been updated to more compact forms do not share their name with their original forms. This makes it difficult when trying to balance the history of a pattern with its optimization (for example, see Talk:45P56). It is usually a trade-off between the length of the name and its meaning. For some patterns, an appropriately descriptive title might be too long. I am not so sure that names like 'octosymmetric p28' will work, because there may be other patterns of that symmetry type, but perhaps with an odd width as opposed to an even one (admittedly, I think this is the only known period 28 oscillator with this symmetry type). I do not have much on what patterns should be named otherwise (Karel's P28? - probably a bad idea... see Achim's oscillators).
~Sokwe 20:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Common name

Technically, couldn't this be named something like flower or something? Like spaceship and caterpillar, or even barberpole, this could just be named after what it looks like. Then its shape could be more memorable, definitely. It would be easier to remember, and make it more notable. Why not?