Talk:Title of show

Title of Show and not [title of show]
Please read WP:MOSTM, which explains why in an encyclopedia, the correct English formatting is used (ie. Title of Show) and not the stylistic preferences of advertising material. Specifically, see: "Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration" Thus, the square brackets are eliminated (except in the first line to indicate the styling of the text in promotional material). For example Yellow Tail (wine) (styled as [ yellow tail ]). "Trademarks rendered without any capitals are always capitalized" For example Thirtysomething (styled as thirtysomething).
 * Manual_of_Style_(trademarks)
 * Manual_of_Style_(trademarks)

See also the naming conventions policy WP:NC, specifically "Follow standard English text formatting for article names that are trademarks"
 * Topic_creation

Remember, there is no difference in how [tiotle of show] and Title of Show are read or pronounced, the difference lies only in the stylistic formatting, which needs only be mentioned once in the lead sentence. Subsequently, standard English rules should be used throughout. Cheers, Nouse4aname (talk) 08:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This needs to be discussed properly. Being a fan of the show means this is quite important to me. There is a discussion at WP:MT currently on this subjectMark E (talk) 11:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Copy-edit of latter section
I've just finished the copy-edit requested in the Title of show show section. I note that it's entirely referenced by Youtube videos, which aren't generally considered to be suitable references. I also deleted a long list of 'review' video links. A better (read: an editor more interested in this article than me!) might like to improve the referencing to encompass third-party references or alternately delete the entire section as s/he sees fit. Thanks, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:10, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Off-Broadway Show in Jackson, MI
An Off-Broadway show is being produced in Jackson, MI, at The 4th Wall and was announce by Gary Minix. Can this be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.1.78 (talk) 21:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Should we include *every* off-Broadway production? Should a rural am dram group in Nether Wallop's (hypothetical!) production be included too? No - unless you can provide references in reliable, third-party sources. Otherwise, the article fills up with cruft and becomes useless. Been there, done that. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 02:56, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 12 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: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 20:39, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Title of show → (title of show) – Make database title closer to title in correct title hatnote &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 23:05, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 03:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Better discuss this move. The show producer's official spelling of the show's name is "[title of show]", but square brackets are not allowed in article names. Do we replace the [ ] by the nearest allowed, or do we omit them as stylization? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 03:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Omit unnecessary stylization, per MOS:TM. Doing some kind of "approximation" has no rationale whatsoever, and would be WP just making up a fake name and asserting it as legit.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:33, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: I'm not suggesting removing the correct title hatnote, and thus not trying to claim that either title of show (as the displaytitle currently claims) or (title of show) (which I'm trying to move it to) is the actual name of the musical or would be a preferred title to [title of show]. Are you suggesting that if [title of show] were a technichally valid title, the article would not be at that title? &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 18:53, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Most of the sources do seem to use the stylization. – Laundry Pizza 03  ( d c&#x0304; ) 03:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The sources use the stylization of square brackets. This move request is instead suggesting that the article be moved to the stylization of parentheses, which the sources do not use. —Lowellian (reply) 04:02, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose per MOS:TM. —  AjaxSmack  03:31, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Support. I think I clicked every single reference (and fixed one), and every single RS uses the stylized title, [title of show], and it is already used throughout our article. Technical limitations should not preclude using the next best thing, and those are parens rather than square brackets. And let me quote what MOS:TM actually says, emphasis mine: Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization practices, [...] as long as this is a style already in widespread use (well, it is not), and Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, [...] unless a significant majority of reliable sources that are independent of the subject consistently include the special character in the subject's name (well, they do). No such user (talk) 14:25, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose because replacing characters with incorrect characters doesn't get the name "closer in title" to the correct title and instead wrongly implies those are the correct characters. —Lowellian (reply) 01:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't, as the correct title hatnote will remain. &#123;&#123;3x&#124;p&#125;&#125;ery (talk) 14:39, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If the correct title hatnote solved everything, then the stated motivation of getting "closer in title" would be irrelevant, and there would be no need for this move request in the first place. The title of the article by itself, regardless of any hatnote, matters. Replacing characters with incorrect characters misleads that those are the correct characters. —Lowellian (reply) 18:26, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose because the does not bring it "closer" to the [ ] which is the correct use in the title Mark E (talk) 11:41, 17 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.