Talk:Pvris

Requested move 6 March 2019

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Close call, but it'd be wrong to say PVRIS is the only way to stylise it. The arguments raised by the support outweigh those of the opposition. Anarchyte (talk | work) 11:53, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

---

PVRIS → Pvris – You say Pvris like a word, not spelling it out, so it should get like this. It's like the Chvrches article title, you know. --Quiz shows 04:52, 6 March 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 21:52, 14 March 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. SITH (talk) 22:19, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

• Support pronounced "Paris" In ictu oculi (talk) 07:04, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose. MOS:TMRULES regarding standard capitalization comes with the caveat "as long as this is a style already in widespread use, rather than inventing a new one". External sources almost exclusively capitalise the name, so I'm not sure this would be the correct move. PC78 (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  • For example, I've just skimmed through the top 150 Google News hits for "pvris" and could only pick out four that use standard case. By comparison, a similar search for "chvrches" seems to favour standard case though the results are more mixed. PC78 (talk) 07:55, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
    • But the quality of many of the sources doesn't look especially high. Looking through the list of cited sources, the best quality one seemed to be Billboard. Five out of six of the cited Billboard articles use "Pvris", and the other one mentions them only once. —BarrelProof (talk) 02:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
      • I didn't specifically mean the sources cited in the article, but either way they mostly look good to me. The Boston Globe, HuffPost, Rock Sound, Classic Rock, Alternative Press, Kerrang!, Metro... none of these look like poor quality sources to me. PC78 (talk) 01:43, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
• Weak support. Unlike the MGMT RM, there is some legitimacy to this one as it's clear this is nothing more than a stylization. PC78 is correct in that this style, though, is quite common in reliable sources (though I feel like if you allow this, there's virtually no all-caps stylization that shouldn't be allowed). It's a mixed bag, but I lean lowercase for Wiki, though I won't be upset if consensus is otherwise. Nohomersryan (talk) 19:27, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose. Look no further than the titles in the (extensive) references section of the article. The all-caps variation is dominant in source usage. We need to follow suit. This is exactly the kind of thing where if we get it wrong, others may start to follow our incorrect usage. That's exactly backwards. --В²C ☎ 21:50, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
• Support MOS:TM, MOS:ALLCAPS: Looking at news sources using a web search, Billboard is not the only source that uses "Pvris" (e.g., see also NME, The New York Times, The Plain Dealer, and Vice). There are several sources that use the proposed styling (higher quality, less promotional sources than most of the ones cited in the article), and vanity all-caps should be avoided on Wikipedia. It's not an abbreviation – just a styling. The MoS does not say we should pick the most popular styling – just that we shouldn't invent one that isn't already in use. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:36, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
• Strong support per MOS:ALLCAPS, MOS:TM, MOS:TMRULES. Another disruptive all-caps stylisation, not an acronym. Also move White Noise (PVRIS album) → White Noise (Pvris album). Lazz_R 00:36, 16 March 2019 (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.

Expunging of details

What's with the wholesale removal of previous members and other content including singles? Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:41, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• PVRIS.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)