Talk:So Near, yet So Far

This article was nominated for deletion on 21:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was Withdrawn.

Film: Silent / American

	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 Silent films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. Please ensure that non-free content guidelines are properly observed.

Requested move 15 May 2016

Latest comment: 8 years ago6 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: Moved. (non-admin closure) Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:28, 21 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

So Near, Yet so Far → So Near, yet So Far – Per MOS:CT, "So" should be uppercased. ~~So should~~ "yet" should be lowercased, which is treated as a coordinating conjunction and a synonym of "but". Like Alone yet Not Alone, many sources uppercase "yet", yet the guideline may triumph common casing usage by sources. George Ho (talk) 21:07, 15 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Support: I think you mean trump rather than triumph, but at first glance, your move suggestion looks good to me. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:38, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
Support per nom. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:16, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

BarrelProof and Lugnuts: I fixed my mistake on the rationale. --George Ho (talk) 10:33, 18 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, OK. I had understood the intent, and I still support the suggestion (per MOS:CT and the other example). —BarrelProof (talk) 15:20, 18 May 2016 (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