Talk:If Tomorrow I Were Leaving for Lhasa, I Wouldn't Stay a Minute More...

Requested move

 * 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.

Not moved. bd2412 T 01:10, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

If Tomorrow I Were Leaving for Lhasa, I Wouldn't Stay a Minute More... → & – This is what it actually says on the cover. FokkerTISM 13:05, 26 September 2013 (UTC) I think it's a notable article as this is one of only two releases by a significant cult band, and was recently rereleased to considerable acclaim. It just needs some critical reception and references added. As for the quote mark, that's an artistic element and not part of the album's official title (I did publicity for the band back in 1990, was familiar with the album's creation, and run their Facebook page, so my assertion is reputable) http://www.independentprojectrecords.com/shop.html. Greg Fasolino (talk) 15:47, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete article or move to a different name: The article should be deleted, because there is almost no indication of notability. But if the article stays, the quote mark on the left side of its name (strangely not matched with a quote mark on the right side of its name) should be removed. I notice that the album cover photo does seem to include the quote marks; however, they are unusual and they are not used by either of the cited sources. The suggested title includes quote marks, which I suggest should be removed. Also, Wikipedia has a house style for capitalization, found in MOS:CT, regardless of what appears on the promotional material. I believe the title should be or . —BarrelProof (talk) 14:37, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose per MOS:CT; consequently I support If Tomorrow I Were Leaving for Lhasa, I Wouldn't Stay a Minute More... per BarrelProof. --BDD (talk) 22:01, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Already moved back to title that omits quotation marks. Adding them makes the title more inconvenient than the current title is. --George Ho (talk) 18:36, 4 October 2013 (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.

Actually, it was moved (to a different destination than what was originally suggested), but George changed the record of the previous name to match the name it was moved to. —BarrelProof (talk) 03:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)