Talk:Magnification

The term Macroscopia is used to describe the phenomenon so I suggest that we rename the article to it. The opposite article to the effect whatever that is should be renamed to Micrscopia. --David Hedlund (talk) 15:51, 13 October 2017 (CEST)

___________

hey there, thank you for the suggestion. Do you have a link to the term macroscopia? I would definitely directly mention the term and reference external information on this phenomena in the article if you can point me in the direction of some links. A redirect could also be added for people who might be searching for that term.

However, I would not rename it to that as the term would not be immediately understandable to the average person and I am striving to keep the language as simple and understandable as possible. It even says in the effect index intro:

"The descriptions strive to use language which is as simple and understandable as possible, this has been done in the hope of them eventually serving as a universal terminology set which allows people to discuss and describe their subjective experiences."

--Josikins (talk) 20:56, 13 October 2017 (CEST)

@Josikins: Just as an aside, Josie, you can use the ping template when replying to users. This enables them to receive a notification that you've replied. Example: {{ping|Username}} will be replaced with the text at the beginning of this sentence with "@Username" and a notification will be sent to their inbox.

Additionally, you can use a ":" mark to indent text so as to indicate you are replying to something directly. This is generally preferred in talk spaces as creating a separate section can give the impression that an entirely separate aspect of the article is being discussed.

FWIW, I agree that the article should retain the name "Magnification" for the reasons you described. --Clarity (talk) 21:18, 13 October 2017 (CEST)