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: page moved to Picton–Battersby line. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Picton to Battersby Line → Picton to Battersby linePicton to Battersby line – Downcase per WP:NCCAPS; sources mostly do not cap it. Optionally, say if you prefer to use symmetric dashed version (Picton–Battersby line) rather than "to" between place names. Dicklyon (talk) 16:25, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence in sources

• news
• books

Please examine the searches, see if there is a common name, whether the dashed version is preferred, and whether caps are preferred.It is my impression that there is no proper name here and that the dashed, hyphened, or "and" symmetric form is more common (and more logical and more consistent with other such lines). Dicklyon (talk) 16:25, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - let me be the first to agree. I do not have a strong opinion on the actual layout, but if pushed, would prefer the dash. The joy of all things (talk) 16:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per WP:NCCAPS, MOS:CAPS. When usage is broadly mixed in sources, we use lower case; the general-audience sources prefer lower-case anyway. Prefer Picton–Battersby line per WP:CONCISE (that also avoids any future dispute with someone who wants to hyphenate even more than MoS does and use "Picton-to-Battersby line").  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  21:32, 1 February 2017 (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.