Talk:Moe (band)

A sea of Red

It seems to me that there are a lot of dead wiki links in the main article, a sea of red if you will. I think i am going to go through and unlink a lot of those words. I will give it a few days to see if anyone posts any objections. Thanks.--Gephart 08:39, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Is their banter at shows quote-worthy?

For those that don't know, this band is known widely for allowing the recording of their live shows much like the Grateful Dead and Phish did. One of the staples of the group is their humourous banter and musings in between songs. My thoughts are to make a Wikiquote page for the band and adding quotes from the members from shows. I collect a lot of shows, so I would add to this often. Since the shows are widely availible from http://www.etree.org , one would be able to cite and shows the link to the particular show that a comment was made. Would this be a fruitful or fruitless effort? Would it be deemed acceptable on Wikiquote? -- Moeron 11:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

• I started a page anyway ;) --Moeron 15:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Good Article nomination has failed

The Good article nomination for Moe (band) has failed, for the following reason:

The prose is far from good - a history section written in the present tense is much more akin to a fan page than an encyclopaedia article. Worldtraveller 17:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed its nomination again - prose like (for more information, check out the Generations section under the jam bands wikipedia entry) is really not encyclopaedic at all, and there's a lot like that. There are also a lot of grammatical and spelling errors, and a general lack of encyclopaedic tone. It really needs a lot of work on the prose - please compare with examples of featured and good articles. Worldtraveller 20:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I found the one spelling error in the piece and will look for grammatical errors. I have looked at other good articles on bands or musicians such as the Grateful Dead and Cat Stevens. Should the Future Plans section be nixed as not encyclopaedia? *shrug* --Moeron 03:21, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Helping where I can. The grammar is a mess. I guess that's why this is an on-going communal process.Silver Dollar 19:56, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization/Punctuation?

A stylistic question: shouldn't "moe." still be capitalized as "Moe." when it is the first word of a sentence?

For example, here is an article (from a college paper, granted) that capitalizes the word at the start of a sentence: [1]. There is also a precedent with Al-Qaeda, which has a capital "Al-" at the beginning of a sentence but retains its lowercase "al-" when in the middle of a sentence. My understanding is that the fact that a person or band chooses not to use a capital letter at the beginning of a proper noun doesn't trump the basic rules of English capitalization. Any objections to changing this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill shannon (talk • contribs) 20:47, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Punctuation, not capitalization

The band is not "Moe" or even affiliated with any act by that name.

"moe." is the proper name of the band. The punctuation comes from when they changed their band name from "Five Guys Named Moe" to "moe". Places would still bill them according to their old name, so they would claim that they were "moe, period" ("moe."). This became a bit of an "inside joke" with the band and fans, which they turned into the de facto name of the band.

The use of the name at the beginning of a sentence does not require capitalization. This would follow the same suit (in reverse) as the requirement to capitalize proper names when used in the middle of a sentence.

e.g.: "moe. are a band from Buffalo, New York." or "moe. are the perennial headliners at the moe.down concert festival."

Please see the k.d. lang page for an example of another artist whose name is styled the same way. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 14:24, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Dr Stan's Prescription Vol. 1 and 2

Can someone who knows wiki's javascript better then me (read: anyone) add the two Dr Stan albums to the reference box on the bottom of their page. I can't figure out how. Also can someone look and see if the two pages for those albums still need the stub tag or are they complete enough. If not please complete. Cysinger (talk) 02:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Articles

I thought these would be better here - WikiProject musicians policy is that external links to news articles and other such things should be used in the article as references or not put up. Addionne (talk) 19:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

• Taking chances is part of moe. by Will Stewart of the Ann Arbor News, January 29, 2006
• moe.'s Voyage To The Bottom of Sound by Jack Krolick of Jambase.com, February 3, 2006.
• moe. & Bisco Storm the Windy City by Brian Heisler of Jambase.com, February 16, 2006.
• Q&A with Al Schnier of moe. by Taylor Hill of thecornernews.com, February 15, 2006.
• Caught in a Jam by Clayton Collins of The Christian Science Monitor, September 9, 2005.
• Taking on Topper by Jambands.com & fans, November 11, 2005.
• Glide's 3rd Annual Best of 2005: From The Artists Perspective by Rob Derhak, Glide Magazine.com, December 20, 2005.
• moe. to Host Autism Benefit by the band, moe.org, December 29, 2005.
• Mighty, Mighty moe. Plays Asheville Shows by Jedd Ferris of Citizen-Times, December 23, 2005.
• Genres Unlimited by Marc Shapiro of Diamondbackonline.com, July 14, 2005.
• moe. at Lakewood Theater, Matt Weitz, Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News, February 24, 2006.
• Al Schnier and Chuck Garvey Interview with Brian D. Holland, for Modern Guitars Magazine, May 16, 2007.
• Throwing Stones with Rob Derhak by Tim Newby of honesttune.com February 2, 2008.

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Moe (band). Born2cycle (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 1

Moe. → Moe (band) — Per WP:Article titles and WP:Trademarks, we generally normalize the way the names of bands (and other brand names) are written to match standard English style. Powers ^T 20:27, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

• Per Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules, "moe." is acceptable, though "moe. (band)" would be a reasonable alternative. The problem is this: If there were a band named "Moe", what would their page title be? 99.41.56.10 (talk) 23:57, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
  • In that case, we would have to disambiguate further, by genre or nationality. Powers ^T 12:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose everything that Powers has proposed. This is totally unnecessary and goes against what should be Wikipedia's cardinal rule when it comes to band names: if there is good reason to suspect that the band name is capitalized/punctuated/etc. a certain way (and there absolutely is in this case - give me time and I'll show you), respect the artist's wishes above any tally of support from outside secondary sources. This is basic stuff for an encyclopedia: primary sources come before secondary. And these arguments against so-called "decorative", "stylistic" choices are usually misapplied - in this case the "decorative marks" in question are essential to the band's identity. Wikkitywack (talk) 21:31, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Actually, secondary sources come before primary ones in this encyclopedia. See Wikipedia:RS#Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. Our usual practice cases such as this can be seen in examples such as P!nk, KoЯn, KISS and more. See WP:MOSTM for more on how this works. We make exceptions in some cases, such as bell hooks, but that's rather uncommon. -GTBacchus^(talk) 17:17, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
      • From the current MOS: "Some individuals do not want their personal names capitalized. In such cases, Wikipedia articles may use lower case variants of personal names if they have regular and established use in reliable third-party sources (for example, k.d. lang)". As the band choosing to format its name in lowercase and with the fullstop is just as much an artistic decision as that of Ms. lang or Ms. hooks, I believe the same principle applies. Allmusic refers to them as moe., as do the artists themselves (an instance where a primary source is, in fact, usable, contrary to what seems to be your over-simplified understanding of the relevent policy). Badger Drink (talk) 18:59, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
        • Thank you; k.d. lang is the other example I couldn't remember. I understand your argument, but the fact remains that there is a strong consensus on the English Wikipedia to eschew special formatting and stylizations for band names. Do you disagree?

          In this case, the use of the full-stop in the article text impairs readability, and is unacceptable, in my view. If we're to treat this band the way we treat all other bands, then this move will go through.

          By the way, my understanding of the primary source is not over-simplified, and there's no reason to make that assumption. You can ask what my understanding is. I never claimed that primary sources are not usable. I never will make that claim, because it's stupid and wrong. Secondary sources are our main source of information, and primary sources can also be used, subject to certain guidelines.

          It's better if you don't talk about me - I won't talk about you, okay? -GTBacchus^(talk) 20:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

          • Forgive me if I incorrectly interpreted "actually, secondary sources come before primary ones in this encyclopedia" to mean that you were saying that secondary sources trumped primary sources 100% of the time, or that it was an over-simplified presentation of the actual WP:RS text. On track, I don't think that the full-stop (or, as it's called on this side of the proverbial pond, "period") at the end of the word "moe." impairs readibility any moreso than the period at the end of the sentence "we are having a discussion about moe." or the periods at the end of people named k.d., J.T., J.R., or J.R.R.; nor does it impair readibility any moreso than the period in the middle of "freecreditreport.com", or the periods in the beginning of .NET Framework or .com (or the various sundry punctuation marks in, for instance, C++, C#, Help! et al). As a sidenote and mea culpa, I did mischaracterize the list of other bands you provided, as only one (Korn) falls afoul of the MOS reccomendations that article names be able to be easily inputted via a standard 101/104-key U.S. keyboard - perhaps the others you mentioned should be revisited as well. Badger Drink (talk) 01:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
            • I don't always express myself as clearly as I'd like. I don't think of anything on Wikipedia in terms of trumps, or anything like that, but I didn't make that clear in my previous comments. I guess my point about readability is this: All those other periods (I'm in Texas, but I often use "full-stop" online, because it doesn't also mean a lot of other things)... Anyway, all those periods you mention come in expected places. We're used to seeing periods after people's initials, and in such constructions as ".com". Initials and websites are like that, and that's part of the assumptions we bring to written text. Readers expect periods to be used for certain things, and marking the end of a spelled out name is not one of those.

              When I'm reading sentences about this band that use the punctuation, it's a bit jarring to see a period in a place where it would normally indicate the end of a sentence. I end up going back and rereading sentences because I'm forced to parse them twice, and that's what I mean when I say it impairs readability.

              Am I making sense here? Is the distinction I'm drawing a meaningful one? I'm thinking of readers out there who are very accustomed to standard written English, and who aren't necessarily up on conventions used by a jam band they may never have heard of. -GTBacchus^(talk) 08:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

• Support. Standard English format should apply, without the decorative full-stop. --DAJF (talk) 04:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

• Support per nom. And remove the period/full stop from the article text as well. This is not fanpedia. — AjaxSmack 02:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. AllMusic lists it as moe., with the fullstop and in lowercase. "moe. (band)" could work, but anything else is contrary to the band's chosen stylization, and hence does not accurately refer to the band. The Article Title guideline is concerned with characters that cannot easily be typed from a standard 104-key English keyboard, of which "moe." contains none. Badger Drink (talk) 18:59, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
  • What is your opinion of all the band articles on Wikipedia where we don't use the artists' preferred formatting? -GTBacchus^(talk) 20:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Somewhere between WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS and, in the case of Korn, apples and oranges. If I was going to rule by fiat, we'd have "P!nk", "KISS", and "Korn", under those titles, but down here in the real wiki-world, I simply do not have the spiritual mojo required to initiate and participate in discussions over bands whose oeuvre I could, to be perfectly frank, not give less of a shit about, on a project that's frankly (let's be honest now) a "buyer's market" when it comes to finding small niggles to bicker over. Contrary to how it may seem onwiki, I am not a very argumentative person by nature, and am loathe to invest myself in the process any more than I deem necessary. In the case of KISS, I could see how it may be distracting to use that capitalization within inline text (it just begs for a "® brand" at the end of each occurance, as in "KISS® brand ____"), and P!nk sorta treads dangerously close to a 14 year old girl's MySpace, but KoЯn is basically fine inline, and moe. is absolutely in no way worse than the examples I provided in my above reply. So I guess I draw the line at kissing too much pink? Cheers - Badger Drink (talk) 01:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
      • Yeah, to me as a reader, seeing "moe." inline, and not at the end of a sentence, is jarring. I recognize proper nouns by the fact that they're capitalized, and I recognize periods when they're used in standard ways, such as all your examples above. I recognize ends of sentences by seeing periods that aren't part of an acronym, or a foo.com name, or some other standard use.

        I think it's very likely that other readers are like myself in this way, and they're who I'm thinking of. -GTBacchus^(talk) 08:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

      • In addition, replying to the OTHERCRAPEXISTS point, I'm not citing anything as precedent. I'm simply noting the strong and broad consensus that I've observed: I think the community is strongly in favor of the way we've been handling it. I say that based on observation in a lot of these discussions. I'm not creating these views that I'm expressing, but rather trying to relate and represent what I've seen over the years. -GTBacchus^(talk) 08:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
    • I want to add that Wikipedia is a general reference. It isn't a fan site or even a music encyclopedia (cf. Allmusic). As a general reference, it should preserve general rules of language as much as possible to aid readers who are not familiar with topics. of crs many fun! styles® o' writin' exist but whether its moe. koЯn p!nk or whatever :), we should try to make the text as accessible as possible to a general readership. — AjaxSmack 18:37, 18 September 2010 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Reinstate the consensus title per above section

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. No support to overturn to previous consensus decision. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:35, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

---

Moe. (band) → Moe (band) – There was a clear consensus above for the title "Moe (band)", and it is there the article should stay until a new consensus is formed. The consensus title of "Moe (band)" is correct per MOS:TM. Powers ^T 20:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

• Comment isn't it a speedy rename, considering the new move ignored a preexisting consensus? 70.24.248.23 (talk)
  • Perhaps, but it's been almost six months since the unilateral move. Had I noticed it immediately, I likely would have tried to find an admin. Powers ^T 14:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
• Comment - for some reason (I've no idea what) the bot isn't listing this properly at WP:RM (it appears down the bottom under "time could not be ascertained).--Kotniski (talk) 09:01, 6 December 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Moe (band). 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111027002505/http://www.bonnaroo.com/artists/2011.aspx to http://www.bonnaroo.com/artists/2011.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060713153552/http://www.moelinks.com/faq/3.html to http://www.moelinks.com/faq/3.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326105231/http://www.phantasytour.com/moe/articles.cgi?newsID=557 to http://www.phantasytour.com/moe/articles.cgi?newsID=557

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) 08:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Moe (band). 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 archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071107221200/http://www.relix.com/Features/Show_Reviews/Tea_Leaf_Green_%26_U-Melt_200704252251.html to http://www.relix.com/Features/Show_Reviews/Tea_Leaf_Green_%26_U-Melt_200704252251.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060804011625/http://alschnier.com/ to http://www.alschnier.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060222024218/http://www.moe.org/snoedown2.htm to http://www.moe.org/snoedown2.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060630101953/http://www.moe.org/diary/archives/2006/03/post_placid_upd.html to http://www.moe.org/diary/archives/2006/03/post_placid_upd.html

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) 10:51, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 20 June 2018

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: Procedural close for canvassing. This move request is voided, and therefore can be re-requested at any time with no prejudice. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 13:24, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

---

Moe (band) → moe. (band) – the band is known as "moe.", not "Moe". Please see the Wikipedia article on "k.d. lang" for reference 208.44.170.115 (talk) 14:36, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). 208.44.170.115 (talk) 14:44, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

The band's official name is "moe.". The "full-stop" (or "period") is included in the name, as well as the name being in all lowercase. The article even uses the proper name (moe.) every time the band is referenced (throughout the page). Just as k.d. lang has a page which uses her preferred spelling/style, Wikipedia should use the same rule for "moe.". Further examples would include bill bissett and danah boyd. Since they also are listed with their preferred styles why shouldn't Wikipedia accommodate a band's preferred nomenclature. After all, they are listed by every external source as "moe.". 208.44.170.115 (talk) 15:16, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose move per WP:NCCAPS et al. I see k.d. lang as the exception, not the rule. ONR (talk) 15:25, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

  You see k.d. lang as the exception? What about bill bissett, whom I've also referenced? ...or danah boyd? Are they exceptions, too? It seems more and more likely that using preferred nomenclature is the rule, not the exception. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 16:00, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Mass canvassing by this IP - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 18:24, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• Further: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Trademarks#Indicating_stylizations, such as deadmau5. You seem to be violating the same rules you want to uphold. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:MOSTMRULES, WP:PROMO and User:Old Naval Rooftops. —  AjaxSmack  15:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

  You didn't read the bottom of WP:MOSTMRULES, where is specifically states that in the case of a band's name "...an exception may apply." 208.44.170.115 (talk) 16:05, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

  I did and have read it. The passage "...an exception may apply." refers to capitalised T in the. I am also aware of the few exceptions such as k.d. lang, but these are counter to policy. —  AjaxSmack  16:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• Support move due to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks#Indicating_stylizations clearly showing the case to list the article under the correct name "moe.". The example cited is 'Moe (band) → moe. (band) – the band is known as "moe.", not "Moe". Please see the Wikipedia article on "k.d. lang" for reference 208.44.170.115 (talk) 14:36, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
• This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:48, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
• @208.44.170.115: Allow this move, or treat it as stylization? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
• I believe the precedent is Talk:Gangsta (manga)#Requested move 20 February 2016 rather than any of the above-linked names by the OP, and that precedent was to remove the full stop and to add the parenthetical disambiguator. --Izno (talk) 17:27, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose per MOS and 3rd party sources. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:31, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose, per MOS:TM, WP:NCCAPS, MOS:CAPS, and previous precedents like the Gangsta. → Gangsta (manga) move. If the independent reliable sources really do render it "moe." with near uniformity, the way "iPod" and "Deadmau5" are treated (virtually no one writes "Ipod" or "Deadmaus"), then I could lean the other way. However, we should be extra-super-skeptical about names the stylizations of which end in ".", because it makes it difficult to write clearly about them. I would want to see overwhelming preference for this in RS, and that's extremely unlikely. PS: The nominator asked me to comment here (likely expecting a !vote in the other direction). I checked contribution history to see how many others were canvassed, and it seems to be about 20 so far.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:31, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I am looking for unbiased opinions such as yours. You are correct in your assumption that independent reliable sources really do render it "moe." with near uniformity and no one writes "Moe" when talking about the band. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 19:50, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• Comment: it is not misspelled, and correct throughout the article. Why move? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:41, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

It is misspelled. The band's name is "moe.", not "Moe". when referred to in any source, the band is listed as "moe.". So, according to the rules the page should be changed to reflect the name of the band. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 19:50, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• Comment The proposer's rational for their canvassing. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:01, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
• Comment The rules clearly state that the band should be listed as moe., not any other way. MOS: Indicating Stylizations. Please take a look. It cites deadmau5, and clearly translates to other artists who are only known in this manner (such as k.d. lang). Has anyone who has written an "oppose" statement stopped to read that rule? 208.44.170.115 (talk) 20:06, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose - Per all other opposes voicing their consensus. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• So your reason is that others have spoken, but you don't really know what the rules are, do you? Neither has a consensus been made, nor has everyone reviewed the rules. Please take a real look at things. Don't shoot me down because of a pre-existing bias that you may have. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 20:22, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Sigh. I have been explicitly asked to, but in this case I refuse to take a position here, other than what I wrote here on my talk page. It's not a vote, and any further comment by me here would be pure voting. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:42, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Consensus, and resignation on this one. I have been defeated, yet I will still cite the rules being in my favor. Thank you for all who have genuinely taken their time to objectively view this. To any admins out there, please consider this a closed matter. I would like the title of the page to reflect the band's actual name (moe.), but I see that people seem to be confused and upset by this. I'm dropping the matter, so (to everyone:) please do not create new responses either for or against it. I have found that even when there is overwhelming evidence in your favor, only people's bigoted opinions seem to be what really matters here. Cheers! 208.44.170.115 (talk) 21:16, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• Move, I disagree. I was canvassed but this is something that should be changed and a good application of WP:IAR, the band's name is moe. It's not unheard of in the news [[2]] and their own website even lists it like moe, selling tickets sold that way too. This is a poor application of the rules and a rather fast close. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 00:44, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose – there's no particular good reason to "ignore all rules" on this one. Dicklyon (talk) 04:31, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

• It isn't IAR, anyways. The rule is spelled out here. It is bigoted to suggest that it is either ignoring the rules, or trying to create something new. Otherwise, there's a lot of work to be done changing the suggest the following articles to suit your version of the rules: deadmau5, k.d. lang, bill bissett, danah boyd, and everything else that uses the guildlines which were previously established by Wikipedia. Good luck with those edits! 208.44.170.115 (talk) 12:55, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

• Close this, please - I no longer have the desire to move this, since people have shown a large scale of bigotry regarding the issue. Instead of reading the rules, people looked up other things which didn't pertain to the situation. "moe." is the proper name of the group. Their name is shown as "moe." on all their tickets, every press release, and any mention of them in the press. Since no one wants to apply the rules evenly here, and because I'm being bullied by bigots, I'd like to close the matter out and be done with it. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 12:55, 21 June 2018 (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.

Band name in lead sentence

For a long time, the lead sentence of this article started Moe, generally stylized as moe., is an American jam band... Recently, in conjunction with the discussion about the name of the article, this was changed to moe. is an American jam band... I think it should be changed back to the way it was. The old text made things clearer to our readers, and I believe it also conformed to Manual of Style guidelines. Usually the name of a band is a proper noun, with initial capitals and no punctuation, but in this case it's stylized. That should be made clear in the lead sentence, as it was before. (This is independent of the name of the article itself, a question that I'm not taking a position on at this time.) — Mudwater ^(Talk) 11:33, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

• That is incorrect usage of the band's name. Please don't add your assumptions to the article. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 12:57, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

• The rules clearly state that the band's name be displayed as "moe.", not referred to as "generally stylized as". 208.44.170.115 (talk) 13:01, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

  "The rules", as you call them, evidently say. "if the title of the article is the stylized version of the name (e.g. iPod, deadmau5), it should be given in the boldfaced title recapitulation at the beginning of the lead". The article title is "Moe", so it is stylized as "moe." and needs to be represented accordingly. Lordtobi (✉) 13:34, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

• The aritcle is titled moe., not in caps, and there is an explanation at the top. It follows the aforementioned rules, and does not need to be changed. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 13:40, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
• Per MOS:TMSTYLE, it should revert to Moe, generally stylized as moe., is an American jam band... All further mentions should also be changed from "moe." to "Moe". --woodensuperman 14:33, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
• PER WP:MOS Indicating Stylizations, the band name and article names are correct as moe., so please leave them be. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 14:57, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

You're not even reading the guideline that you are citing properly, which specifically gives the exact opposite instruction to the one that you are trying to force!!!! Wow. --woodensuperman 15:03, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

User:Woodensuperman, please stop vandalizing the page. I asked that the page be moved, but have since revised my statement. This doesn't give you the right to vandalize what was already written. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 15:02, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Apology & question

^{Hi, I'm copying this specific paragraph from my talk page, because it seems to be relevant, and it might be a reasonable request. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:48, 28 June 2018 (UTC)}

Previous discussion on the talk page

Band name for moe.'s article Note: This seems to be about this edit to Moe (band) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:25, 20 June 2018 (UTC) The band is not "Moe" with a stylization to "moe.". "moe." is the band's name, and doesn't need to be explained in any different or ambiguous way. Your edit makes it seem like people have referred to them as "Moe" (capitalized and without the period) which is untrue. Please respond to the talk page if you feel that I am in error. Replacing a bad edit does not make the information correct. In fact, nowhere else in the article is the band referred to with capitalization AND without the period. ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.44.170.115 (talk) 14:55, 20 June 2018 (UTC) Thank you Good catch on the comma, also. Have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.44.170.115 (talk) 15:09, 20 June 2018 (UTC) Hi 208.44.170.115, Thank you too for the explanation and the improvement -- you might well be right! The edit originally made me raise an eyebrow because of the comma, and because it made the beginning of the article start with a lowercase letter. I have now only removed the comma, without undoing your edit again. About the spelling, I'm not entirely sure: See Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Trademarks#Trademarks_that_begin_with_a_lowercase_letter and the non-binding essay Wikipedia:Other stuff exists -- but all the sources of the article use the spelling "moe." as well, suggesting that you're correct. I see that you have requested moving the page, because the title is capitalized and does not have the period; thank you for taking the time to improve the article! I'm curious to see what other users think about this. Have a great day too! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:23, 20 June 2018 (UTC) Would you be able to lend your support to the move, please? It seems that some of the previous "opposers" are objecting to the move (they supported a move to the current (wrong name) page). Yet, Wikipedia clearly shows that moe. (band) should be the right name as referenced here: WP:Manual_of_Style/Trademarks#Indicating_stylizations. The example cited is of deadmau5, yet there are plenty more articles in which a band/author/artist/person is listed in the correct style (all lowercase). Thank you. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 16:52, 20 June 2018 (UTC) This did not turn out well. You appear to have messaged a lot of other editors to join the discussion, which would not have been needed and has been interpreted as "canvassing". But that alone would not have been a huge problem, considering that you obviously did not know about the guideline, and that it is sometimes even misinterpreted by experienced editors. The problem was that you have repeated the same edit over and over again to force these changes into the article during the discussion. When coming back from the block, it would probably be a good idea to try to forget about this "moe." issue. You seem to be interested in Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, you seem to be interested in actually improving this encyclopedia, and what happened has enriched your experience. Shit happens. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2018 (UTC) Talk:Moe_(band)#Requested_move_20_June_2018 15:05, 21 June 2018 NeilN (talk | contribs) blocked 208.44.170.115 (talk) with an expiration time of 48 hours (anon. only, account creation blocked) (Disruptive editing) 15:09, 21 June 2018 CambridgeBayWeather (talk | contribs) protected Moe (band) [Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 15:09, 25 June 2018) (Persistent vandalism) (hist) (thank) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:57, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

It turned out horribly. I made an honest mistake with the canvassing. I didn't intend anything malicious, and was unaware of the rule. Chalk it up to "lessons learned". What I will ask is if you could undo the malicious edit that was done by WoodenSuperman, please? If you look at what he did, he removed the entire formatting of the band's name throughout the article using a "replace all". What's interesting was that The article had been acceptable for years. Now, due to my request, the page looks horrible. Thank you. 208.44.170.115 (talk) 12:04, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry? Malicious edit? Seriously? Read the guideline that you keep citing properly: "then resume using an alternative that follows the usual rules of spelling and punctuation, for the remainder of the article". --woodensuperman 15:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC)