A fact from Second Thoughts Are Best appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 November 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This is a new article that I am starting as an assessment for my university class in History of English culture, 18th century studies.
I am going to develop my article in 4 sections: the night watch (current state and Defoe proposal), reforming society (reformation of manners, prostitutes, soldiers vagrants and beggars), reforming places (lightning, the problem of Geneva shop and night houses, securing alley and lanes), and reforming theater (the “bad” example of the beggars opera mostly).
My provisional bibliography contains:
Tobias J.J., Crime and Police in England: 1700–1900, Dublin Gill: Macmillan, 1979
Beattie J.M., Policing and punishment in London 1660–1750, Urban Crimes and the Limits of Terror, Oxford, 2001
Backscheider P.R., Daniel Defoe: His Life, Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1989
Novak M. E., Daniel Defoe, Masters of Fiction: His Life and Ideas, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001
Hitchcock T. and Shoemaker R., Tales from the Hanging Court, London: Bloomsbury, 2006.
Feel free to suggest readings! Also you can contact me on my talk page to discuss about the article.
--Irene1209 (talk) 16:26, 2 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 years ago10 comments7 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Oppose. Unimportant word. Capitalisation creates emphasis not consistent with the meaning. Capitalisation would be inconsistent with sources Reject the MOSCT on this word as a random rule made up long ago by someone forgotten and carried into the guideline without thought or discussion. "Is" and "are" are frequently very dissimilar to other verbs, frequently unimportant like all other verbs usually are. the MOSCT is doing a disservice by oversimplification. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:18, 28 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Support. MOS:CT is clear; among the words to be capitalized in titles are "every verb, including forms of to be". (Full disclosure: I was brought here by a [neutral] notification left by George Ho on my talk page.) Deor (talk) 19:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.