Talk:'s Up

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 's Up article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

BBC: Sitcoms Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by BBC Sitcoms Task Force.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: British / Episode coverage Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Categorized article

The category of this article, which I have personally categorized is a bit generalized. If anyone could have a more specific categorization of this article, the changes would be most welcomed. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 19:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Furry"

Removed the link to furry fandom, as I'm pretty sure that Eddie thought "Furry Honey-Pot Adventure" was about hairy vulvae, not furries. Falkybassist (talk) 18:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move to 'S Up

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was move. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:41, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
's Up → 'S Up — There was no consensus to move 'S Out, so let's try if this has enough support. It makes no sense for the two similar titles to be spelt differently. The British Sitcom Guide uses a capital S for this title, although IMDb uses "'s Up" (they capitalize "'S Out", though, which makes no sense at all either way). As I pointed out in the earlier discussion, 'S Wonderful (which has a lot more available sources and a similar situation) is pretty consistently capitalized by sources. So, move this one to 'S Up? Jafeluv (talk) 17:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This does not require a move, only a removal of the {{lowercase}} template. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 18:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's no {{lowercase}} in the article. Jafeluv (talk) 18:41, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Right, because the first character is a ' not an s. – ukexpat (talk) 20:54, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Duplicate article

There is another article for this episode on Wikipedia: Bottoms_Up_(Bottom_episode). It should be merged with this one, but I don't know how to do that. Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.248.143.21 (talk) 13:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 August 2024

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (non-admin closure) Bobby Cohn (talk) 18:07, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'S Up → 's Up – There are no references in the article but both two external links (IMDb and BBC Two) use the lowercase "s", as well as Apple and Amazon. The lack of sources is probably worth sending to AfD, but that is a different issue. Gonnym (talk) 08:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Hard to see why that's capitalized. Maybe could just have been boldly moved? Dicklyon (talk) 01:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Episode title is a suffix for "Bottom's Up", not "Bottom'S Up". Mr Sitcom (talk) 08:02, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Seems like unnecessary capitalization there. Waqar💬 19:00, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning against!: The conclusion should probably also affect 'S Out (which had an RM in February 2010, just before the previous RM for this article). Note that IMDb uses "'S Out". Similar titles also include 'S Wonderful, 'S Marvelous, 'S Make It, 'Salem's Lot (a shortening of Jerusalem's Lot), 'Snaz (a shortening of "It's Nazareth"), 'Deed I Do, 'Em Are I, 'Mazing Man, 'Merican, 'Bout Soul, 'Cause You're My Boy, 'Cuz I Can (Pink song), 'Tain't What You Do (It's the Way That You Do It), 'Tage Mahal, 'Tis Pity She's a Whore, 'Til I Can Make It on My Own, 'Till I Collapse, 'Til Tuesday, 'Twas the Night (film), and lots of other 'Bout, 'Cause, 'Tis, 'Til, 'Till and 'Twas titles, all of which use a capital first letter. So at the current time, all similar titles that I can find have their first letter capitalized, and the renaming would introduce inconsistency. We seem to always capitalize the first letter of the title of a work, so I think we should treat the lowercase variant as a stylism. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My impression is that those are different, being genuine contractions that 'd be found in a dictionary, not just fragments like with the present case. Dicklyon (talk) 23:00, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the first four – 'S with Out, Wonderful, Marvelous and Make It, seem like very similar fragments as in this title. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
's true! We should have discussed that all as a batch. I wouldn't support this one while leaving the others, but I'll leave my support here with indication that I'd also downcase those other four. Dicklyon (talk) 01:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.