Shouldn't unnamed objects have names? Seriously. Pseudo-random combinations of bland numbers tell almost nothing about its structure.
(P. S. This one should be named "Long Beacon", in my opinion, as it has a beacon as a rotor and a, well, long stator that stabilizes itself.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrConway'sInvisibleDog (talk • contribs)
Enumeration system clarification
"18" Is the population of the oscillator
"P2" is the period
Using apgcodes as LifeWiki titles
With the recent creation of xs15_3lkia4z32, I was wondering if this page could be similarly renamed to the pattern's apgcode. In my opinion, this has two advantages over the present name:
- The pentadecathlon.com archives aren't very popular nowadays and don't have most of the patterns discovered in the current decade, such as the loafer.
- Mark Niemiec's webpage has similar systematic names, using a different numbering scheme to disambiguate patterns (although not this one in particular).
On the new name of the page
@User:Entity Valkyrie, why do you think that 18P2.caabaiczw32 is a better name than xp2_caabaiczw32? You could have at least left a message before moving the page—I was allowing an informed decision to be formed on what to call this object, not inviting the unexplained moving of a page according to one user's idea of what name to use.
If you had run this name by me before moving the page, I would have explained why I don't think that 18P2.caabaiczw32 is a very good choice of name: this is the first time I saw a pattern named with a pentadecathlon ID and apgcode mashup, and a novel naming system should only really be developed when the old ones completely fail. So, I would appreciate it if you could explain why you don't support my proposal of the name xp2_caabaiczw32 for this page. For now, I will be moving this page back to its old name of 18P2.471. Gameoflifeboy 01:49, 26 December 2018 (UTC)