User talk:Cauldron bubble

Cauldron bubble, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Cauldron bubble! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Cauldron bubble! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 04:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the welcome! And the cookies! Cauldron bubble (talk) 12:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for catching and fixing a couple of bugs I made in editing an article's massive overcapitalization. I appreciate it. On the other hand, all-cap BRODYQUEST is not aligned with the guidelines of MOS:CAPS, since it's commonly found as "Brodyquest" in sources. Dicklyon (talk) 17:00, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the bandcamp official page where the song was originally released, BRODYQUEST is stylized all capitals. Why would you prioritize what non-official sources use over what official sources use? In a work of art, the title is determined by the artist. Any source that doesn't use the artist's title (or at least mention it) is incorrect. Cauldron bubble (talk) 17:12, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My reading of the guideline MOS:CAPS is that independent sources matter more than official/primary sources in our styling decisions. Dicklyon (talk) 04:13, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I searched google and found this page: [1] which indicates that the title case the artist used can be included in the article, so I did that [2]. This approach makes sense because it recognizes that the artist did in fact choose a stylized title, even though that stylization is not used in the Wikipedia article.

I do understand why consistent cases are important in Wikipedia articles. However, changing the case of the title of a creative work without adding that the title of the work is stylized in a different way is extremely bad practice. This situation, and situations like it, are times when more thought is required when making changes to meet case guidelines. Cauldron bubble (talk) 03:09, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]