Talk:Beatles for Sale/Archive 1

Archive 1

Beatles For Sale?

Shouldn't the "f" in For be capitalised? "For sale" is a distinct phrase, and it seems very peculiar to capitalise the second word of the phrase and not the first. --kingboyk 11:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

No. For is a three-letter preposition. In titles, you don't capitalize prepositions shorter than five letters unless they're the first or last word in a title.—thegreentrilby 19:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

True but it looks horrible. As does On an Island by David Gilmour, amongst others. Jellyman (talk) 22:03, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

No it doesn't. 199.247.253.44 (talk) 08:12, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The f should not be capitalized - the reason it lookes strange is beacause we are used to "reading about" the title in cursive. Typographically one doesn't use cursive in the half fat type - so yes: the small f is correct it just looks strange in the half fat type article headline —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.213.208.27 (talk) 12:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

You people really are too much. Just like the idiotic article this discussion is attached to. The word 'for' gets capitalised if the people using it bloody decide to capitalise it. And guess what they decided? You people really don't have a clue. The above cited capitalisation guidelines hold only for the US. I won't bother going into what the rules are in other English speaking countries for fear of your brains imploding. But now check what the Beatles themselves have to say about your wee petty war. http://beatles.com/#/albums/Beatles_For_Sale

That's good evidence, as it's from the official website (esp. the beginnings of paragraphs 2 and 5). But you don't need to be so insulting, IP. After all: "you people" includes you, does it not? Doc talk 08:41, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

GA Re-Review and In-line citations

Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 02:06, 26 September 2006 (UTC)