Talk:Father Was a Fullback

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

College football Low‑importance

	College football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 27 October 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

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: page moved. Wbm1058 (talk) 04:27, 3 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Father was a Fullback → Father Was a Fullback – Was should be uppercased per MOS:CT (and WP:NCCAPS). Take Talk:A Boy Was Born as precedent. George Ho (talk) 04:30, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Support: per MOS:CT. Like all highly-reputed reliable publications, Wikipedia has a house style, as documented in WP:MOS. In the absence of exceptional circumstances, we should apply it consistently. The titles of creative works are very commonly subject to house style adjustments, and capitalization styling is one such (rather minor) adjustment that should simply be applied without comment. Saying all that may seem overmuch, but some editors don't seem to think that way, so it may bear repeating. —BarrelProof (talk) 05:36, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
Support per MOS:CT and BarrelProof. Darkday (talk) 18:05, 30 October 2015 (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.

Add topic