Talk:Battle for Baby 700

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Battle for Baby 700 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

Military history: South Pacific / Ottoman / World War I

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific military history task force
	Ottoman military history task force
	World War I task force

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Capitalisation of "battle" in "battle for Baby 700"

I had edited the lead sentence to down-case "battle" with the edit summary: ce case per MOS:CAPS - not consistently capped in sources. The edit was reverted by RandomCanadian here with the edit summary: rv per WP:BRD - there is no consensus about this; and it's quite possible the sources cited in the article actually do use this in a capitalised fashion: without access to them, one must WP:AGF that the editors who wrote this (and they seem to have done a competent job) have followed the sources they consulted. RandomCanadian was already made aware of the guidance at MOS:CAPS and of these searches,ngram search, Google Scholar search and JSTOR which return no hits at all for the article title (here). The principle source used for the article is the Australian official history, which is available online with a link from this article. The chapter dealing with the battle here returns no hits for this article's title. Incidentally, a search of the AWM site (where the official history resides online) gives no hits that actually use this article's title (see here). The AWM is the repository of Australian military history. The next most used source in the article (Hart 2011) is also accessible online at archive.org here. A search of that site returns no hits for this article's title in Hart but does give hits in seven books for the article's title here - all in lowercase. There is no evidence IAW MOS:CAPS to capitalise "battle" nor is there any reasonable reason to expect that such evidence might exist. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:33, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Use lower-case per MOS:CAPS, as sources do not consistently capitalize this as a proper name. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 01:18, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see lower case "battle" for this in books, uniformly. Not clear what RandomCanadian is thinking/seeing here. Dicklyon (talk) 21:07, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]