Talk:Boys like You (360 song)
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Requested move
[edit]- 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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. (non-admin closure) Wbm1058 (talk) 05:32, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
The request to rename this article to Boys like You (360 song) has been carried out. |
Boys Like You → Boys like You (360 song) – Not primary topic. I checked the stats, and the song by 360 is not more popular than the other song. And neither surpass each other's low historical significance. As for the title itself, "Boys Like You" would look like a "Subject (Boys) + Verb (Like) + Object (You)", meaning boys would like a girl (or a boy... homosexually). The lyrics treat "like" as a preposition, and "like" is just four-letter word. WP:NCCAPS should be effective for prepositions less than five letters. If NCCAPS can't be the only one, then I don't know what else. (WP:AT and MOS:CT are not enough.) Sources that use "Like" haven't told the audience the difference between "Like" as a verb and "like" as a preposition, especially when "Like"/"like" is sandwiched by "Boys" and "You". If the amount of sources using "Like" (instead of "like") is most or many, then we would like to question the reliability of those sources and the amount of them. To sum it up, this is no longer just an issue of capitalizing or de-capitalizing a four-letter preposition. Consensus would disagree or agree (see Talk:On a Night Like This and Talk:Love You like a Love Song). If capitalizing "Like" doesn't confuse you, and you would treat "Like" (NOT "like") as a preposition instead of a verb, don't hesitate to say it. George Ho (talk) 00:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support - indifferent to whether a verb or preposition (how will the reader know without including part of lyrics in article), move Boys Like You (disambiguation) to baseline. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support Boys Like You (360 song) is also fine by me, but the disambiguation page should be the primary landing spot. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
SupportHold up, I'm not sure the page views are indicating there is no primary a move to make a Dab page at this spot, if the page views are indicating a lack of primary topic. I can't access the grok stats at the moment, so I'll look at them again later. But:
- Oppose the change in capitalization - The current title is overwhelmingly preferred by the policy of using the most common name, and our writing guidelines specifically encourage editor discretion. The MOS is great for our writing style and when the official or common name might be unknown, but to argue that it should be used to take an official name with a specifically chosen title that is used by the absolutely overwhelming majority of reliable sources, including books, newspapers, and websites, as well as is the generally common name is fairly absurd. Our title guidelines and policies are unfortunately somewhat murky. But, what it comes down to can be gleaned from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization), which states that "an adherence to conventions widely used in the genre are critically important to credibility". If Billboard is using a style, and Rolling Stone or the New York Times or Spin or just the bulk of reliable sourcing in general largely use the official title, is it really common sense for us to be saying we shouldn't be following the sources here in order to somehow adhere to conventions and gain credibility? Basically, should we ever logically say "We are absolutely sure X is the title, but we are still going to call it x"? Wikipedia is a unique construct in that our work is so clearly tied and based off of reliable sourcing about the subject -- making us stand out and go against the grain here just doesn't make much sense.There's also just the general notion (which certainly should not be the deciding factor in finding consensus) that certain lowercase words just look weird in titles. Perhaps this may give some indication as to why "like" and other 3 or more letter words are very often capitalized in composition titles but words like "a", "to", or "and" often aren't.--Yaksar (let's chat) 06:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- In other words, you don't and wouldn't treat "Like" as a verb? --George Ho (talk) 08:34, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- I have no idea if there's supposed to be wordplay or anything going on with like, but its part of speech is unrelated to what I've posted.--Yaksar (let's chat) 08:58, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
- Support per MOS:CT, WP:NCCAPS, WP:Naming conventions (music)#Capitalization and WP:SONGDAB. If the lyrics treat it as a preposition, we should treat is as a preposition too, and we should follow therefore our own guidelines and use lowercase for "like" here (unless and until we agree to change the guidelines). Some people in recent move discussions have been consistently expressing dislike for lowercasing "like", but if they don't like the guideline, they should go discuss it on the guideline Talk page and get the guideline changed rather than just disagreeing with it in each article naming discussion where the question arises. —BarrelProof (talk) 00:11, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.