Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of arequested move.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not movedNW(Talk)00:43, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Run batted in →Runs batted in — This is never referred to as Run batted in. It is actually known as Runs batted in. Seehere,here,and here (see the runs batted in part). I have never seen it noted as Run batted in on any other major website besides Wikipedia. Thanks.Guy546^(Talk)23:27, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Have you considered, apart from what you have seen, flipping through these723,000 ghits and these1,300 gbook hits? Or looking at the reference to "run batted in" in the official rules of baseball?--Epeefleche (talk)08:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment:WP:SINGULAR says article titles should be singular except those "always in a plural form in English (e.g. scissors or trousers)". I might argue that "virtually always" is a better standard, but strictly according to this, one would have to oppose this move, no? –CWenger (talk)02:22, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The only reason runs (plural) batted in is common is it's an item often discussed in multiples. But it's still perfectly appropriate to say "Albert Pujols went 3-4 on Tuesday with a run batted in."Staxringold_talk^contribs13:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Stax. If I get called up to the majors for a cup of coffee and go one for ten and happen to record one RBI before my demotion, would you say I had one runs batted in for my career? – Muboshgu (talk)13:42, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - maybe just a pile-on vote, but I agree that "run batted in" is a commonly used phrase, albeit awkward to type [[Run batted in|Runs batted in]] (RBIs).Neonblak^talk -14:45, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per wp:singular. It is often plural because there is often more than one, but it isn't always the case. per what Muboshgu has said. -DJSasso (talk)14:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose perWP:SINGULAR and above commenters, especially Staxringold's note that when one has only one, it's still "one run batted in". -Dewelar (talk)15:03, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I might add, that while nom asserts above that it is "never referred to as run batted in", his very first "see here" example doesprecisely that, in its first sentence.--Epeefleche (talk)15:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - per Stax, Muboshgu andWP:SINGULAR.Rlendog (talk)16:29, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Stax. Good faith mom, but mistaken in its assertion.oknazevad (talk)17:45, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn - with the overwhelming consensus, I have decided to withdraw this requested move request.Guy546^(Talk)21:07, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - 1 RBI is Run Batted In. 2 or more RBIs are Runs Batted In. The reason why it is usually referred to in the plural is because batters usually get more than one during a season. --Jojhutton (talk)18:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of arequested move.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Discrepancies?

"RBI" listed atRedirects for discussion