Talk:Love Me like You Do

Title
After doing some research, I reliaze like is not capitalized. Yet, official sources have it capitalized. (and iTunes) I think it is best we leave from official sources. All titles are written differently than what it should be. Callmemirela ( talk ) 05:46, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "Official" titles do not always meet Wikipedia's manual of style - see examples such as Artpop (if we used the "official" title, it would be all-caps). WP:COMMONNAME applies to the actual name of an article, not capitalization. "Love Me like You Do" is the common name of the song; per our MoS it is preferred to not capitalize "like". –Chase (talk / contribs) 06:13, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , per WP:UCRN, it seems the article title and also usage of the song name should be Love Me Like You Do, as numerous reliable references (which I think is plausibly what had meant by "official sources") use this style (rather than what could be seen as somewhat pedantic if insisting on lowercase for a four letter preposition in a title), e.g. a recent example in The Guardian. Other examples, besides references already listed in the article, include the BBC, USA Today, The Huffington Post, Daily Mirror, (not going to do cites for all of these, atm) Daily Mail, Belfast Telegraph, The Independent, International Business Times, New York Daily News, Music Times, UPI, Scottish Daily Record, Latin Post, et al. In fact, I think it would be difficult to find sources using "like" in place of "Like" for the song name. Thus, in this instance, I think using the title like reliable sources do would be more appropriate than relying on MoS to rename to something not supported by what the song is commonly called (i.e. with same capital letters). And, this should apply to all uses of the song title, not merely the article title for the song. – 99.170.117.163 (talk) 12:26, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * , I don't agree with your ARTPOP example as many sources  show that the general consensus is that the name should be written as Artpop rather than the Stylistic, ARTPOP. Love Me Like You Do, however has been written in this way many times by many sources and is not a Stylistic name. - bhavik333 (talk) 16:16, 31 October 2015 (GMT)
 * , I wasn't aware, thanks for informing me. Shouldn't this article Love Me Like You be changed too, under that rule? bhavik333 (talk) 21:28, 3 November 2015 (GMT)4
 * I don't necessarily agree with the title as it's written on every article, YouTube, and iTunes that it's called Love Me Like You Do. However, there is a section concerning this on song titles mentioned by Widr. I can't oppose that even though I disagree with the title. Callmemirela  🍁  &#123;Talk&#125;   &#9809;  03:34, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Please see Manual of Style/Capital letters. "Like" is a preposition, containing four letters or fewer. Widr (talk) 16:51, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
 * No, in this title, "like" is a conjunction that should be capitalized per name (which does apply to caps) and . That said, the preposition thing is obviously wrong w/r/t "like" in general: "Love Me like You" should be (and, everywhere apart from Wikipedia at the moment, is), also capitalized. See the discussion here. —  Llywelyn II   15:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Per the argument against a move depending on the and the  actually supporting the capitalized L, put this up at . Moved 10:51, 13 February 2016, by‎ Anthony Appleyard. —  Llywelyn II   11:12, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Small clarification of the above: this was moved by WP:RMTR as "presumed uncontroversial"; the WP:RM discussion process was not used. It was moved as a "bold" or "technical" move without listing it for formal discussion (then the move was reverted after I objected). —BarrelProof (talk) 18:21, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Personally, I think it's being used as a preposition. But even if it's a conjunction, MOS:CT says to use lowercase for short coordinating conjunctions too, and as far as MOS:CT is concerned, "short" is anything less than five letters long. So MOS:CT seems to say we should use lowercase either way. I had that move reverted, as it is obviously not uncontroversial to be making such a move without a formal RM, especially right now during the discussion noted above. —BarrelProof (talk) 14:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * After further discussion elsewhere, it was said that when "like" is used as a conjunction, it is being used as a subordinating conjunction (which the MOS:CT guideline says to capitalize) rather than as a coordinating conjunction (which the guideline says not to capitalize). I won't claim expertise on identifying parts of speech. Process-wise, I still think it would be more proper to use the RM discussion process than to just boldly move this under the current circumstances, but I do not object to capitalization at this point (on the basis of LlywelynII's judgment that the MOS:CT guideline says to capitalize in this instance). —BarrelProof (talk) 17:53, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That would need sources. I've been looking into this stuff for two days straight, and have yet to see such a claim in RS. Linguistically, 'when "like" is used as a conjunction, it is being used as a subordinating conjunction' doesn't make sense. It's like "when this is used as a noun, it's being used as a verb." There are some cases where the same meaning of the word can be used as a preposition or a conjunction, but in different sentences. And only some sources suggest that (Cambridge Online is one ). All it means is "it's a case-by-case basis" which we already knew. Even if it could serve as two parts of speech at once one in the same phrase, it still wouldn't mean capitalize it; MOS:CAPS says to lower-case prepositions and upper-case subordinating conjunctions, resulting in a conflict (i.e. doubt).  It says as a more general rule, to not capitalize when in doubt.  So, no, it doesn't support the capitalization cause.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  18:37, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * My comment was based on this remark (which no one has replied to so far). If that's not correct, then ... —BarrelProof (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I understand. There's just a lot of confusion on this point (much of it in sources). For instance, if you check out the online Cambridge Dictionary and closely compare the "like" and "as" definitions, for the constructions in which one can be swapped for the other, the two entries do not always agree on whether the usage is prepositional or conjunctive; it's going to take a many-sources comparison to get a clear picture of this, and that should really be done for articlespace, not just to settle a WP:RM dispute.  I'm working on it, a little, starting with Cambridge and Oxford.  Part of the problem in these debates is people keep running to trivial dictionaries, like paperback Merriam-Webster's, and this is a mistake. It's going to take research in multiple unabridged ones and, more importantly, in grammar books (dictionaries are a bit poor for this even at the unabridged level, because they're written to be summarartive and expedient, not comprehensive, and their entries are often written by a single person with little review as to details of this sort; they're mostly concerned with the meaning and pronunciation being correct, not the fine distinctions between conjunctive prepositional use.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:00, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Also see long discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there needs to be a moratorium on such requests to upper-case "like" titles (or "as" ones) until MOS:CAPS / MOS:TITLES / MOS:TM settles this.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Love Me like You Do and Love Me Like You Do (disambiguation) have already been back and forth like a tennis ball between "...Like..." and "...like...". Please put no more move requests in Requested moves/Technical requests about this matter until this dispute is finally fully settled. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:23, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Noting for posterity that "Love Me Like You Do" was the status quo ante title and if further discussions end as no consensus, that is what should be defaulted to. Jenks24 (talk) 10:55, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, it hasn't had that title for about ten months, and it looks like six months went by with no one complaining about it, so I would personally interpret the status quo as being the title it's had during the last 10 months. That's a judgment call, I suppose. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:53, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep. Anything longer than a couple of months is clearly a new status quo. Cf. WP:CONSENSUS on silence = assent.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "Official" sources are not at issue here; this is about styling of a name (determining what the name is is determining whether this is love me like you do, with some form of styling, vs. love me like you don't or hate me like you do or love you like she does. That's a WP:COMMONNAME matter. And even there, we don't care what the "official" name is, per WP:OFFICIALNAME.  When it comes to the stylization, most of the music press, like many other journalism publishers, use the "capitalize propositions of four letters or longer" style scheme promulgated by The AP Stylebook. WP does not use that style; WP is not journalism, and is not written in news style. It uses the "capitalize prepositions of four letters or longer" rule found in the majority of mainstream, general-English style guides that aren't journalism-specific. There's a third style, "never capitalize any prepositions at all", favored by Chicago Manual of Style and various academic publishers.  WP's is the usual one, the compromise between the two extremes. (The AP style is extreme because it capitalizes "from" and "with", which most writers and readers do not; not even all journalism follows this, it's just one common newspaper style.)  It really doesn't matter if almost every music magazine and website in the world spells this with "Like"; it's not because there's something special about the word, it's because their house style is to capitalize all preposition of that length, and ours is not. It's not WP making up some fake rule, it's WP following the most established one, based on the actually reliable sources for writing English in a formal but not ivory-tower register.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  18:37, 17 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Reading the lyrics, the meaning of the title/chorus is "make love to me, in your customary manner (which is very good)", or "love me, in the sexual sense, as you characteristically do (so well)". Both Oxford  and Cambridge  classify this 'typical or characteristic of' or 'to be expected of' usage as purely prepositional (even though Cambridge leans toward classifying some other uses of the word as sometimes conjunctive  prepositional, depending on exact construction, that Oxford considers purely prepositional).  Just going through those two sources, and only looking at prepositional and conjunctive uses of the word, there are at least 16 different classes of usage that can be identified (both sources jumble some of them together, which can be teased back apart if you try an as-for-like substitution test with the example sentences), and that's just going through 2 (albeit major) sources. The case in this song title is very clearly in one definition squarely, however; the 'typical/characteristic/expected of' meaning is quite distinct from the others, which are: 'in the same way as' or 'in a way appropriate to', 'in the same way that', 'in the manner of', 'similar to', 'similarly to', 'with the appearance of' or 'pretending to be', 'difficult to distinguish from', 'to the same degree as', 'such as / for example', 'having qualities/characteristics of', 'as if / as though', 'as if it will/was/did/might/could' or 'in a way that suggests', 'willing to' or 'in the mood for', 'of this/that sort' or 'akin to', and 'in such a way/manner as'; most but not all of them are comparative (literally or metaphorically). These vary between purely prepositional, purely conjunctive, either/or (according to Cambridge) depending on exact constructions, or in one case arguably adverbial. With like, some are colloquial; with as some are archaic (this one is neither); and only about 1/5 of them can swap the one word for the other (or 1/4 if you count obtuse academic and biblical forms, e.g. "they were as brothers").  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:00, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Love Me like You Do. 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.pieci.lv/lv/top-40

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:08, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Love Me like You Do. 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/20150706175422/http://www.billboard.com.br/tipo_lista/top-100/20140927/ to http://www.billboard.com.br/tipo_lista/top-100/20140927/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150525204824/http://monitorlatino.com/top-canciones-de-momento-mexico/ingles/ to http://monitorlatino.com/top-canciones-de-momento-mexico/ingles/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160104175405/http://austriancharts.at/year.asp?cat=s&id=2015 to http://austriancharts.at/year.asp?cat=s&id=2015
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://hitsdailydouble.com/news%26id%3D297039
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00RY93NC2
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.allaccess.com/top40-mainstream/future-releases

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:25, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Love Me like You Do. 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/20150221204522/http://www.bamp-bg.org/en/2009-07-08-09-48-53/nmc-charts/472-09022015-15022015.html to http://www.bamp-bg.org/en/2009-07-08-09-48-53/nmc-charts/472-09022015-15022015.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150215071829/https://ie.7digital.com/artist/ellie-goulding/release/love-me-like-you-do-from-fifty-shades-of-grey-1/ to https://ie.7digital.com/artist/ellie-goulding/release/love-me-like-you-do-from-fifty-shades-of-grey-1/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:43, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Love me like you do
Is the song love me like you do by ellie goulding a pop song?? 2604:3D08:367D:5D00:C4B3:7CD7:B804:8C64 (talk) 04:09, 26 December 2021 (UTC)