Talk:Tom Thumb (film)

Copyright problem removed
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Requested move 18 February 2015

 * 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: moved. Number   5  7  12:40, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Tom thumb (film) → Tom Thumb (film) – Back to status quo. Every single guideline recommends that the original style and capitalisation is ignored, in favour of our house style. See MOS:CT, MOS:TM (the reference to thirtysomething is particularly relevant), MOS:CAPS, also WP:NCCAPS, WP:NCFILM. Rob Sinden (talk) 10:27, 18 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Don't lie. It's not "Back to status quo" at all. From 24 November 2006‎ to September 2013‎ it was lower case: that's the status quo. Not every guide tells us to ignore capitalisation, which is why we have articles on iTunes, eBay, IMAX and a host of others that have non-standard capitalisation. WP:TM is a non-starter (it's not a tm, it’s a film title, just in case you hadn't noticed). - SchroCat (talk) 10:47, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Read WP:TM, it makes explicit provisions for eBay and iTunes. IMAX is an acronym and thus allowed under WP:CAPSACRS. --Rob Sinden (talk) 10:52, 18 February 2015 (UTC)


 * (again) I did. And if we have flexibility for some articles, then we can have it for more than just those two, without stretching the brain too much. There is no need for such a limited thinking pattern when it comes to matters like this. - SchroCat (talk) 10:54, 18 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Support. The lower case is pure marketing. I've never seen it used when referring to the film elsewhere. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:16, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure about that? - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * If we're just going to search for examples then the BFI seem happy with title case. That might be because it is their house style to use it.  When it comes to composition titles and the like, it is our house style to use title case also, and this is what we follow.  We do not take our capitalisation from the original marketing material or from the house styles of other publications.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you going to bludgeon every post of mine? That would be rather hugely tedious. - SchroCat (talk) 16:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose, per my reasons above. - SchroCat (talk) 16:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per MOS:TM since the article title does not need to be stylized, and there appear to be numerous reliable sources that accept writing it as "Tom Thumb". It is simple to write "Tom Thumb (stylized as tom thumb)" and to proceed with writing Tom Thumb as such in the article body. It looks like lowercase-title films avoid using lowercase on Wikipedia: Bananas (film), Better Off Dead (film), I Am Sam, and Arthur (1981 film). I believe we also render uppercase-title films as title case, e.g., Gattaca. Erik (talk &#124; contrib) (ping me) 18:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per nom Red Slash 20:00, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Support. As noted by Rob Sinden and Erik, there's wide precedent for ignoring all-lowercase titling in media (plus, of course, the MOS instruction to do so). In addition to examples already cited, see both other Arthur films and a litany of television shows: Caillou, Dinnerladies, Glee, Jackass, and Perception. I see no compelling reason to make an exception here. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:03, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Guidelines are clear on this. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:16, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per MOS:TM, but isn't there another Tom Thumb (1972 film) in Google Books? Michel Boisrond and Charles Perrault's Le Petit Poucet with Marie Laforêt, Jean-Pierre Marielle, Jean-Luc Bideau... In ictu oculi (talk) 04:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * If that article is ever created, then we can rename this to Tom Thumb (1958 film). --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2015 (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.