Christianity: Christmas / Music / Anglicanism Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Christmas task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Christian music.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Low-importance).

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Fair use rationale for Image:Noboc.jpg[edit]

Image:Noboc.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 15:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Anthony Burgess[edit]

I'm pretty sure this book was reviewed in the Observer by Anthony Burgess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.152.31 (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move 17 December 2017[edit]

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. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 20:15, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Oxford Book of Carols → The New Oxford Book of Carols – Per WP:NCTHE. 142.161.81.20 (talk) 22:40, 16 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). TonyBallioni (talk) 04:31, 17 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose. "The" is not part of the proper name. Brad v 04:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Bradv: On what basis do you believe that the definite article is not part of the proper name, given that the definite article has been consistently used by the work itself since its first publication? 142.161.81.20 (talk) 05:51, 17 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support The definite article most certainly is part of the proper name of the book as can be seen from the cover. Click through its ISBN number here ISBN 978-0193533226 and you will see that all but one of the sources use the definite article in the title. Only http://www.copyright.com/openurl.do?isbn=9780193533226&servicename=all&WT.mc_id=wikipedia does not. It seems it's also the book's WP:COMMONNAME as well. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:41, 17 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support - per nominator's citation of WP:NCTHE - "If the definite or indefinite article would be capitalized in running text, then include it at the beginning of the Wikipedia article name" and Walter Görlitz's evidence that this applies. 79.65.126.84 (talk) 14:32, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support - OUP consistently describes its own book with the definite article, and it's on the cover. The The is part of its name. WP:NCTHE states: "The definite or indefinite article is sometimes included in the official title of literary works as well as other kinds of fiction and non-fiction publications and works such as newspapers, films and visual artworks. In this case, the article should be included in the name of the corresponding Wikipedia article as well." Cnbrb (talk) 12:11, 21 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: there is some inconsistency across the Category:Oxford University Press books. Some OUP book articles use the definite article (such as The Oxford History of Western Music), while others do not. I think these should be standardised, and my preference is to include the definite article. I have added move discussions on (The) Oxford Book of English Madrigals and (The) Oxford Book of Tudor Anthems - contributions invited! Cnbrb (talk) 12:11, 21 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support, per nom and comments. And per it's the name of the book and we are an encyclopedia. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:03, 24 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[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.