Talk:Loser like Me (song)

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 moved. --BDD (talk) 05:50, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Loser Like Me → Loser like Me – "Like" is a preposition. 68.44.51.49 (talk) 11:33, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose. Spelled with a capital L in references. Apteva (talk) 17:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
• Support per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (music) (prepositions less than 5 letters should not be capitalized)- even though capitalizing all namespaces would be a better policy and could be enforced technically without recourse to RMs. --Richhoncho (talk) 13:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • The section Wikipedia:Naming conventions (music)#Capitalization needs to be deleted. It is not our job to make up names, but it is our job to accurately report names. We do not decide titles, we report titles. However, the rule for creating a title is not to not capitalize prepositions shorter than five letters, it is to not capitalize unimportant words such as short prepositions. Sometimes five letter prepositions are unimportant, and not capitalized, sometimes two letter prepositions are important, and are capitalized. Apteva (talk) 21:28, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

• Response. You are missing the point, the article namespace belongs to WP, whereas the stylisation belongs to the song. We are not "making up names." If you want to change the guidelines on capitalization you should take the argument there, if you do, let me know, more than happy to see loads of it deleted. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:29, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

• Support Sod the references. This is purely a style matter, where people often disagree what should or shouldn't bear capitals. Although it isn't often argued that 'like' should be downcased as a preposition, it clearly falls within the scope of that rule. Whether Wikipedia:Naming conventions (music)#Capitalization needs to be deleted is not a matter to be discussed at this RM. It's what the policy says, and I think that ought to be enough. -- Ohconfucius ^{ping / poke} 06:27, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

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.

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 altered. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — LlywelynII 13:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Loser like Me. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rollingstone.com/music/songreviews/loser-like-me-20110225

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Loser like Me. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ascap.com/ace/search.cfm?requesttimeout=300&mode=results&searchstr=882598453&search_in=i&search_type=exact&search_det=t%2Cs%2Cw%2Cp%2Cb%2Cv&results_pp=10&start=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120319170657/http://www.rianz.org.nz/rianz/chart.asp?chartNum=1771&chartKind=S to http://www.rianz.org.nz/rianz/chart.asp?chartNum=1771&chartKind=S

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 2 October 2020

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: Page Moved. Moved song to Loser like Me (song) and episode to Loser like Me (Glee episode). (non-admin closure) Vpab15 (talk) 17:48, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

---

• Loser like Me → Loser like Me (song)
• Loser Like Me (Glee) → Loser like Me (Glee episode)

– The episode has more pageviews than the song. As "Loser like Me (Glee)" is ambiguous, it should point out to the disambiguation page that should result.

Alternatively:

• Loser Like Me (Glee) → Loser like Me
• Loser like Me → Loser like Me (song)

If the episode is the primary topic, the titles should be reversed.

• Pageviews since 2015 [1] (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:15, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose renaming the Glee episode, but Support rename of song. Episode article should remain as is per MOS:TV which states: "If an article already exists with the name of an episode title or character, then the title of the article should contain the name of the episode or character followed by (SERIES NAME): Episode/Character name (SERIES NAME) (e.g. "Through the Looking Glass" (Lost) or Spike (Buffy the Vampire Slayer).” - SanAnMan (talk) 23:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support original proposal. To the above editor, it's always best to look at the actual source, which in this case is WP:NCTV. The guideline has this additional piece of text which is relevant here: Where the title is the same as an episode, character, or other element from the show,[c] disambiguate further using Article title (Show Title episode/character/element). "Loser Like Me" is both a song from the show and an episode title from the show, meaning that the disambiguation "Glee" is ambiguous here. This is exactly a situation which the guideline refers to. --Gonnym (talk) 23:58, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support (first proposal) both as per Gonnym. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:10, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support both the proposed moves, i.e: the first proposal. TheRedDomitor (talk) 13:47, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

---

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.