Talk:Givers

Band name/article title

This article should rest at Givers, not at GIVERS. The latter is simply a stylization, and according to the naming convention (WP:NCM) this should be avoided. Furthermore, most retail and news sources give the band name as 'Givers', like iTunes, Amazon, and NPR. If anyone disagrees, feel free to discuss. —Akrabbim^talk 00:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I am deeply uncomfortable that while we all agree to report accurately or paraphrase what sources say, we feel entitled to make decisions about and alter the way sources prefer the spelling and capitalization of their name in some cases (here) and not others (k.d. lang). It's arbitrary and control-freakish, pure and simple. Oh, and iTunes got it wrong, and Amazon gets it mixed, and NPR got it wrong, and TIME got it right, and Last.fm got it right. Here, I think the primary source, if consistent, should guide. --Lexein (talk) 17:24, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

The same argument for leaving k.d. lang uncapitalized cannot be made to this article. It is allowed in that case because of "regular and established use in reliable third-party sources" (from WP:MOSCAPS#Mixed or non-capitalization), specifically regarding the non-capitalization of proper names. An all-caps stylization is not the same thing, and even if it was, it is certainly not "regular and established" in this case. This standard is not arbitrary—it is intended to maintain consistency and professionalism throughout the encyclopedia. —Akrabbim^talk 18:05, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Encyclopedists' aspirations aside, no individual controls their representation in media. Oh wait, they can, with a sufficiently powerful public relations firm, and legal representation, and money. You'll find irregular usage of k.d. lang in plenty of places; all you have to do is look. Pretentions of non-arbitrariness notwithstanding, it cannot be claimed that consistency or professionalism are served by disrespecting the primary source's preferred presentation of their name. If we respect sources, respect the primary source about their name. If we do not, admit it. --Lexein (talk) 18:24, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Of course some people get k.d. lang wrong, but pretty much all reputable, reliable, major third-party sources agree on the lowercase. This is not at all the case with Givers vs. GIVERS, where we have reputable, reliable, major third-party sources occasionally respecting stylization, and other times not (the AllMusic Guide is another example). We aren't respecting or disrespecting anybody's preferences by doing it this way, it is just a stylization, like KoЯn. Givers is simply an unstylized equivalent of GIVERS, you are speaking as if it is entirely incorrect. We don't respect primary sources over common usage as reflected by reliable, third-party sources. —Akrabbim^talk 18:56, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Anything wrong with using the same format as Florence and the Machine? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florence_%2B_The_Machine "Florence and the Machine (stylised as Florence + the Machine)" -> "Givers (stylised as GIVERS)". Danke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.27.115.118 (talk) 03:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)