Talk:I Like It Like That

Requested multi-page move

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: no consensus to move the pages, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:12, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

– like is a verb, a conjunction, an adverb, a noun, an adjective, and a preposition. I Like It like That has two likes; like is treated both as a verb and as a preposition with just four letters. Per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS, a preposition less than five letter cannot be capitalized. The 2nd like is no exception; neither is I Like It like That unless sources discussing capitalization of like exist. (The 1st like is a verb, so capitalization is all right.) Although multiple requests in one discussion looks clunky at best, the similar titles with different disambiguators should not be treated differently from each other. I hope we are not discussing just one topic; instead, we should discuss all related titles. As for official uses, most (if not all) products use "I LIKE IT LIKE THAT" just in all caps. Compare this to other titles containing but, like "Nothing Broken but My Heart" and None but the Brave, which treat but as a preposition. Edit: If that's not enough, how about Love You like a Love Song? George Ho (talk) 07:00, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can't fault your logic, even though I Like It More Like That. Rothorpe (talk) 15:37, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose all, as it just looks weird. IMDB fully capitalizes the title. Amazon.com fully capitalizes the title. I can't find any source that doesn't fully capitalize this phrase in the names of works. bd2412 T 18:38, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

BD2412: That is their way of capitalizing it. Many sources use "Nothing Broken But My Heart", but consensus chose guidelines over sources, resulting "Nothing Broken but My Heart". I bet the same goes here. --George Ho (talk) 01:53, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weird, some sources do not capitalize "it": Associated Press via Boston Globe, this book, that book. Chicago Tribute uses "I like it Like That". Sources that commonly use the current capitalization are not grammar experts; neither are the sources I provided. --George Ho (talk) 02:42, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per BD2412. The guidelines at the manual of style do not take precedence over common name, and if we are creating our own titles separate from what most reliable sourcing uses than we are doing something against common sense.--Yaksar (let's chat) 23:59, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yaksar, what is unique about the capitalized 2nd-Like besides common usage? WP:AT is not a grammar expert or anything like that. --George Ho (talk) 02:13, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I would understand if this was to use words such as "to", "and", "of", "the", or "by", but the word "like" is a separate case. Snuggums (talk / edits) 03:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently added Talk:Love You like a Love Song#Requested move and piped it for better comparison. --George Ho (talk) 03:41, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No one is doubting that there are other pages where limited consensus (and I mean limited, especially in that case where the admin closed against the !votes of the majority of participants) matched what you are proposing. But the Manual of Style, in addition to being a guideline, takes care to note that editor discretion can be used in interpretation. The main purpose of the manual of style in general is to provide a consistent and understandable writing style throughout the encyclopedia, not to push through changes that are not necessarily logical on a case by case basis. A case in which the official name and the vast majority of reliable sources use a specific title and a proposal suggests that we should either invent or conform to a slim minority of coverage is one of those cases in which editor discretion is wise.--Yaksar (let's chat) 03:46, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do these "reliable" sources know about grammar? They chose to use Like twice because they love to (for liberal purposes), not because of grammar purposes. An official name, as I said, uses "I LIKE IT LIKE THAT", not "I Like It Like That". (Get it straight, no offense.) As for the MOS, you said the interpretation of the principle, but where does the MOS say that? Which MOS? I know briefly WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY and WP:policies and guidelines, but we should either abide to current rules of capitalization guidelines or propose changes to them. --George Ho (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Almost forgot: MOS:CAPS says, "Initial capitals or all capitals should not be used for emphasis." 2nd Like is currently emphasized, correct? Prove me wrong. --George Ho (talk) 04:10, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The name used on the cover of an album is not the same as an official name, it is often a stylized version. I would suggest checking copyright or licensing databases for official names (or if you want a much easier time, Amazon or iTunes).--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:26, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I checked copyright.gov; most use "I like it like that"; some use "I Like It Like That". I don't know which licensing databases, but I'm not using Amazon or iTunes as proof. --George Ho (talk) 05:16, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ones like Universal's database, for example, or whoever is the publisher of the song. I was hoping copyright.gov might also be a helpful way of determining issues like this, but they seem to have major problems with their capitalization in their files to the point where it doesn't really tell us anything -- for example we have cases that are obviously not the correct or official name like The Old man and the sea or Harry Potter & the socerer’s stone : for GameBoy Color.--Yaksar (let's chat) 05:20, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UMG, Fania, and Motown use "I Like It Like That". How they treat Like is irrelevant as long as WP:COMMONNAMES may override WP:NCCAPS? --George Ho (talk) 05:36, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think issues like this come up when we try to do things like decide certain guidelines are totally irrelevant or apply a one-size-fits-all method to determining guideline applications. There are cases when following certain guidelines to the letter makes sense, such as with articles with stylized NaMeS LIKe THIs and no clear indication of an official name, where reliable sources like the New York Times will choose a more standard name for readability and style issues. There are other times where a book may have a name in all caps like BOB GOES TO THE STORE and where there is not enough clear reliable sourcing to indicate the correct official capitalization -- in that case turning to the manual of style guidelines is best. But to use specific cases like these and try to expand them to blanket rules without editor discretion that would lead to cases where we would go against every clear indication of both the official name and the name used by the majority of reliable sources would not be a positive attitude.--Yaksar (let's chat) 05:44, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it just looks really weird. It looks like a mistake to have the same word with two different capitalizations within the same sentence. bd2412 T 12:15, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The second like is not emphasized. Yaksar has stated the case quite well. MarnetteD|Talk 04:31, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yaksar, MarnetteD, SNUGGUMS, Rothorpe, and BD2412, I found two or three sources using "I Like It like That": Chris Kenner song, The Miracles song, and Pete Rodriguez song (inaccessible though). --George Ho (talk) 06:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's definitely something, but it seems that with each search you used to find those pages for the one result using the lowercase title there are many times more using the official one.--Yaksar (let's chat) 06:45, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Wikipedia has a house style, as expressed by WP:MOSCT. If we don't like what our guidelines say to do, we should discuss them and change them, not just ignore them randomly whenever we Like to. WP:IDONTLIKEIT is an argument to avoid, and this is just a matter of styling, so we should just adapt the title to the house style and not worry too much about what the sources do on such a minor aspect. Those sources have their own house styles to worry about, and their styling is not so much a matter of concern here. —BarrelProof (talk) 09:14, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The two Likes balance each other. The title's appeal is in the difference in meaning between the identical verb and preposition. Rothorpe (talk) 13:22, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Policy discussion in progress

There is a policy discussion in progress at the Manual of Style which affects this page, suggesting that the capitalization of "like" should be removed. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — $Llywelyn II$ 11:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]