Talk:Quark Mine

I know this is unofficial terminology, but where does the "quark" part come from? - Gargomon251 (talk) 21:08, February 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * A "quark" is the concept of the particles that make up protons, neutrons, and electrons. Ergo, the smallest possible thing in existence, I think. Teamrocketspy621 (talk) 21:28, February 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hardly a concept. Cool stuff, guys.  Miles ( talk)   21:47, February 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not QUITE what I was asking. Why did they call it "quark" mine? What does this object have to do with quarks? If anything, I'd say the green "electrical" burst looks more like plasma or something. - Gargomon251 (talk) 21:51, February 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Because it was the first thing that popped into my head when I was thinking about what to call it. Toomai Glittershine [[Image:Toomai.png|20px]] eXemplary Logic  The Stats Guy  The Table Designer  21:56, February 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * ...So you just named it a random word? :( - Gargomon251 (talk) 22:08, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Id call it an motion sensor bomb..but that has already been used ;) --KoRoBeNiKi (talk) 22:40, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

Recent move
I'd like to know why this was moved to a lowercase title. Toomai Glittershine  eXemplary Logic  The Stats Guy  The Table Designer  02:24, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's proper. Quark is the object's first name, and mine is last. Both names don't need to be capitalized at all, really, but "mine" is not of significance this object is not a person.  BNK [ E 02:27, June 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * For proper nouns, all of the constituents are supposed to be capitalised (unless it's a word of little significance, such as a preposition or article). Smiddle君怒る? 19:41, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
 * The "mine" part isn't proper. I propose we move this back to Quark Mine.  blue  ninjakoopa  16:38, 22 December 2012 (EST)
 * Uh... it's already at Quark Mine? Air   Conditioner  AC.png *cue dramatic music* 17:04, 22 December 2012 (EST)
 * I meant Quark mine, with a lower-case 'm'. My bad.  blue  ninjakoopa  18:00, 22 December 2012 (EST)
 * Do you understand the concept of a proper noun? Toomai Glittershine [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Sharp 19:01, 22 December 2012 (EST)
 * As a matter of fact I do, Einstein. I know that "Quark Mine" is not a proper noun; A proper noun would be something like a name (Mars, Chevrolet, Fox McCloud are examples). "Quark mine" is a common noun.  blue  ninjakoopa  20:16, 22 December 2012 (EST)
 * How is "Quark Mine" any different than "Super Mushroom" and "Golden Hammer"? Toomai Glittershine [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Riotous 21:35, 22 December 2012 (EST)
 * It's unofficial lingo/conjectural, like the "thorn helix."  blue  ninjakoopa  21:46, 22 December 2012 (EST)
 * So...you claim unoffical lingo isn't allowed to be given proper noun status? Toomai Glittershine [[Image:Toomai.png|20px|link=User:Toomai/Bin|???]] The Obfuscating 21:49, 22 December 2012 (EST)
 * Well, if we are to give proper noun status to Quark Mine, we'd have to do so to others which I wouldn't object, but we've already done so many moves where the second word in the title of an object is changed to begin with a lower-case letter in accordance to the general titling rule. I'd be more supportive of this status if the unofficial lingo objects like the Quark Mine and Thorn helix were usable items, but alas they are purely environmental. I think it's also a general rule that conjectural titles be kept unproper since no official source has named them.  blue  ninjakoopa  23:08, 22 December 2012 (EST)