Talk:The Taste of Rain... Why Kneel

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Hip hop

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Deep Puddle Dynamics was copied or moved into The Taste of Rain... Why Kneel? with this edit on 04:17, 19 June 2011. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Requested move 17 June 2018[edit]

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.

Moved to The Taste of Rain... Why Kneel. See a fair general agreement to erase the question mark from this title. The ellipsis can stay as it is, since in this case it acts as a lead in, sort of an informal colon, to the ensuing text, "Why Kneel". Editors are correct that a leading space before the ellipsis would indicate missing text rather than the informal colon. Have a Great Day and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth ^put'r there 00:36, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Taste of Rain... Why Kneel? → The Taste of Rain...Why Kneel – According to the record label's website [1] and the back cover of the record [2], the official title seems to be "The Taste of Rain...Why Kneel". 153.166.45.121 (talk) 09:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. bd2412 T 02:43, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move to The Taste of Rain ... Why Kneel? per MOS:ELLIPSIS. Punctation spacing is a style matter of an "officialness" issue. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 09:11, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to The Taste of Rain ... Why Kneel?. Not sure I understand all of the rationale of the above, but I think it means that the ? is a matter of usage and should follow reliable secondary sources (rather than the official name and/or primary sources as suggested by nom) but the proposed blanks are a matter of style and should follow our own MOS. Agree with that if so! Andrewa (talk) 15:27, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, MOS:ELLIPSIS is for texts not titles. For example, it is I Am... Sasha Fierce not I Am ... Sasha Fierce. WP:AT is the policy here. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 18:39, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- It's for texts, true, but there seems no reason not to apply it to article titles. We generally prefer article titles as they would appear in running text, for many reasons. Andrewa (talk) 23:11, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - But we certainly prefer titles as indicated by independent reliable sources, regardless of Wikipedia's guidelines. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 00:45, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's treating the title as a quotation, in effect. Interesting suggestion that should be further discussed IMO. No change of !vote as yet at least. Andrewa (talk) 06:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support as proposed. The question mark isn't consistently used, but the ellipsis is used. The proposed version is the correct rendering per WP:ELLIPSIS. The three dots separated by spaces are used to indicated of excluded text from the quoted material. It's not forced when the quoted material actually includes the dots itself, "in which case the punctuation is retained in its original form".--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:35, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, this treats the title as a quotation, does it not? That raises all sorts of issues. Andrewa (talk) 06:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - It doesn't really raise any issues beyond the fact that we follow the sources. We don't use an ellipsis surrounded by spaces unless it's actually being used to indicate removed material. There could be an argument to space it if the sources aren't consistent, but we haven't seen that argument.--Cúchullain ^t/c 17:57, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

This has raised far more issues than I was expecting. I am involved but would welcome a relisting. Andrewa (talk) 06:12, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.