Talk:NLRB v. Noel Canning

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Proposed move to Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Canning[edit]

Per the manual of style, I propose a move to Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Canning. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:45, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why the abbreviation? ResultingConstant (talk) 21:50, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ResultingConstant: Because it's the Bluebook abbreviation, which is used almost exclusively in American law and is the Wikipedia standard for law article titles – please see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Legal#In_the_United_States. Thanks! Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 22:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

oppose This is a SCOTUS case, SCOTUS does not use bluebook, and either the abbreviated version we have now, or a fully spelled out version are much more common and readable. The proposed version has a grand total of 300 google hits. Our current version has 24k. The full version has 4k. ResultingConstant (talk) 02:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ResultingConstant: The trouble with counting Google hits is that Google counts Wikipedia and its mirrors a lot as well. I understand and respect your position, though. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 04:50, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]