Talk:Sign o' the Times: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 04:43, 28 April 2016

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sign o' the Times 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

Archives: 1

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Albums C‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

R&B and Soul Music C‑class High‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles 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.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:Find sources notice

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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 per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sign o' the Times (album) → Sign "O" the Times (album) – The argument for moving this to the current title doesn't seem to make any sense. This album is almost always referred to with quotes on both sides and a capital "O". Wikipedia guidelines, therefore, indicate this should be at Sign "O" the Times (album). Rhindle The Red (talk) 12:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SPIN uses the current orthography, with a lowercase 'o' and a single apostrophe. Rolling Stone uses a lowercase 'o' but with the quotation marks. But the majority of sources cited in the article appear to use the proposed orthography (often with single-quotation marks instead of double, but they're equivalent from our perspective). I support the move absent evidence to the contrary. Powers ^T 15:32, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support because the official orthography is Sign “☮” the Times and a capital O is the closest symbol to the peace sign that can be used in a title. Also, double rather than single quotes are used. — O'Dea (talk) 22:43, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above.--GoP_T^C_{N 10:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)}[reply]
Support -- Discogs uses same. Quotes also on album sleeve, albeit an O instead of a peace sign. Dan56 (talk) 23:50, 14 May 2012 (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.

Requested move back

The following discussion is an archived 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: Moved. Nathan Johnson (talk) 20:17, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

– These articles were moved with little discussion, against the usual style and naming guidelines, and against the prevailing typography in sources, too. Here the "o'" is an abbreviation of "of" and should be treated as such, as in [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. Considering the number of possibilities of case, single-v-double, one-v-two quotes, the fact that about half of all books use the way that makes sense with respect to the meaning and normal title orthography is pretty clear evidence that it is not just acceptable, but widely preferred; the fact the WP has guidelines like MOS:CT and MOS:TM that suggest an English-like rendering with normal case makes it clear what WP prefers. Dicklyon (talk) 23:25, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support—Perfectly fine reasoning. Tony (talk) 23:54, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support both - a distinct improvement per 3 biographies on Google Books. Sign o' the Times (Prince album) would be even better, allowing Sign o' the Times to redirect to the long Sign of the Times disambiguation list. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just seen that dab page "A Sign of the Times a 1966 single by Petula Clark" has Sign of the Times no "A" on the cover artwork. Per Routledge and Billboard sources moved to Sign of the Times (Petula Clark song) and amended dab page. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. I forgot to look into the ambiguity; besides the Prince album, song, and film, there are all those others without the contraction. Should we modify the RM, wait till this settles, or what? Dicklyon (talk) 01:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's your RM, if you want to offer a second choice up to you. I support anyway. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:24, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let's save the ambiguity question for another day, and just fix the orthography in this one. Dicklyon (talk) 15:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per ngram[6]. Not sure why 100% wanted it moved to this title a year ago and 100% want it moved back today. Apteva (talk) 01:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If the "O" is intended as a sign, the current title conforms to the guidelines - non-standard grammar, but we don't correct that. Sign o' the Times is acceptable, as the album is as well known by this alternative name, but I would oppose a move to Sign o' the Times (Prince album) as there is natural disambiguation in the current title. Peter James (talk) 21:50, 29 May 2013 (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.

the album cover

hi. i came here wanting to know something about that photo on the cover; who made it, what the idea of it is, etc. i'm very surprised to find nothing. it's a strange and striking image; there should def. be a reference to it somewhere in the article. 63.142.146.194 (talk) 04:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 41: / Line 41: @@
 :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[WP:RM|requested move]].  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a [[WP:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section.</div><!-- Template:RM bottom -->
-== cover ==
+== the album cover ==
 hi. i came here wanting to know something about that photo on the cover; who made it, what the idea of it is, etc. i'm very surprised to find nothing. it's a strange and striking image; there should def. be a reference to it somewhere in the article. [[Special:Contributions/63.142.146.194|63.142.146.194]] ([[User talk:63.142.146.194|talk]]) 04:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)