Talk:Comic Sans

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Comic Sans MS)
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Computing (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Microsoft Windows / Computing  (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Typography (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
 

Miscellaneous (old)[edit]

I can't help but get the feeling that a lot of people hate this font just because it's Microsoft-y. (yeah, I know...) Some people need to get a grip.

someone interested in starting a petition against comic sans to always ban this font from planet earth? contact me, --Abdull 16:58, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm not really the petition-signing type, but I'm with you in spirit. Rhobite 18:03, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

the "Sample of the Comic Sans typeface" does not work here.. the font called "Comic Sans MS" here, not "Comis Sans" .. -- 219.77.34.79 03:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

People can type in whatever font they want. It's a free Internet, and that petition is ruining Internet freedom.--72.49.52.246 21:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)


If you really care about net freedom, I'd worry more about SOPA.75* 17:15, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Shiny, happy euros[edit]

Regarding the euro paragraph and the revert: how is this OR? It's an accurate description of what's in the font. See page two of this thread [1] for a discussion. Dyfsunctional 18:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, you were the person who brought it up over there, so it's still arguably original research . . . but I see you got several people to agree with you. :) It is an interesting tidbit. It would be nice if we could integrate it more smoothly into the text. Perhaps as support for Connare's claim that the typeface was designed for children's software? (In the spirit of full disclosure, I'm one of those Wiki editors who dislikes "Trivia" sections on instinct . . . .) —BrianSmithson 13:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
I can't seem to reproduce the "Happy Eye Euro" in Microsoft Word XP? What gives? :D 66.91.193.112 12:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
I can reproduce the cuddly €-sign on a mac running Mac OS X 10.4, I've uploaded a PDF depicting it. Danchr 23:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Parent typefaces category[edit]

Please see Category talk:Typefaces#Should typefaces go in parent category?. I'd like to get this settled one way or the other. —Chowbok 00:00, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


Hyphens vs. em dashes[edit]

As somebody once told me: don't change em dashes to hyphens (or vice versa). This contravenes the guidance given in Wikipedia:Manual of style (dashes):

In the interests of Wikipedia:Wikilove, editors are encouraged to be accepting of others' dash preferences and not to modify a chosen style arbitrarily in the same way as they would refrain from arbitrarily changing "artefact" to "artifact" (or vice versa). The following five dash styles are currently in use on Wikipedia. Please do not change them to reflect your preference.

Chowbok 21:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, if you read the guide carefully, you'll notice that it's about en-dashes and em-dashes. The reason is that there's an en-dash camp and an em-dash camp and they strongly disagree with no resolution in sight. The rule of leaving en-dashes as en-dashes and em-dashes as em-dashes keeps the peace. Shinobu 20:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Wait for real? People actually had edit wars over this? Man, I thought the Ban Comic Sans people were wigging out about something trivial but god DAMN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.62.206.252 (talk) 07:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Benefits of Comic Sans MS?[edit]

My future father-in-law works in Adult Education here in the UK. He claims that students with learning difficulties (I don't know what kind of learning difficulties) find Comic Sans MS to be the easiest font to read both in print and on-screen.

I have briefly searched for some kind of official source about this and came up with this. The second paragraph of the section titled "Comic Sans" refers to a UK study of people with dyslexia.

I'd be interested to hear people's thoughts on this as an argument against an outright ban, though I take the point on the above link regarding the focus of the research.

--Umnumshibai 00:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's a good counterpoint to the assertion that the font is "poorly designed". Perhaps there should be a "praise" section as well as a "criticism" section? 217.155.20.163 21:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Still appears to be anecdotal. This is an area where it is extremely difficult to say what is happening, and why it appears this cohort responds to Comic Sans. CApitol3 22:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Have included link to documents from DFES that this font is often used and that it is "commonly preferred by learners" - no explanation why as of yet —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pysproblem (talkcontribs) 14:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I work in Adult Education in the UK, Comic Sans is suggested for use with learners as it is a font which resembles basic handwriting and is clear to read. There don't seem to be many fonts which render 'a' in a similar way to handwriting. I use it with beginner readers and writers who often are not familiar with the concept of writing, or at least are unable to write in their first language. Typed text can create extra problems at this intial stage. Consider the form of Ilford in Arial (I work in East London, it comes up a lot!) -pysproblem

I definitely think there should be a benefits of Comic Sans section that talks about the literacy benefits. Comic Sans is the most widespread font I've found that mimics handwriting. In particular, the "a" and "g" are in simpler handwritten style as opposed to the corresponding letters in Times New Roman. Some other fonts also have the easy-to-read "a" and "g", such as Century Gothic and Bauhaus 93, but they don't put serifs on the capital "I", so it can be confused with lower-case "l". In addition to a benefits of Comic Sans section, we should create a "Literacy Fonts" page that focuses on English fonts that are easiest for those learning to read. --Showeropera (talk) 04:59, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

eu sou o João e gosto de bananas keres me dar com a tua nu meu cu? se sim liga para o 917003860

In my experience Comic Sans is used a lot by UK primary schools, even when the school is communicating with parents via letter. Presumably this was originally for the reasons given above. --Mattmm (talk) 13:53, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Anti Comic Sans Movement?!?!?[edit]

It's a font, people can't "misuse" a font, you can write it in whatever you want. Grk1011 (talk) 23:25, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it's a crime to 'misuse' Comic Sans, just to 'use' it. Vigimael (talk) 17:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I think its outrageous to lead a campaign against a font. They're just made so you can be creative, what do people want, all writing to look the same? Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Incorrect. The use of Comic Sans is the opposite of creativity. Its very use is the act of conformity combined with passivity. It's like playing baseball with a wiffleball and a plastic bat — a pale, safe version of the real thing.
There are many, many other "handwriting" fonts available as an alternative (if not an improvement) to Comic Sans. Use them! —Down10 TACO 10:30, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
I say you can use the font in an inappropriate context. I hate it when I see it (again and again!) in Powerpoint presentations. However, if you're trying to do a mock-up of a cartoon strip, for example, then it's appropriate (indeed this is the only purpose for which I've used it).
For those say not, would you be happy if your wedding reception venue decided to print the menu in a font reminscent of dripping blood? Or would an intricate calligraphic font be appropriate as a default in an email browser? No, of course not. There may be a few individuals who would think both of those two selections are wonderful, and no doubt that reflects their personality, which is fine. But choice of Comic Sans tends to reflect ignorance, in my view/experience.
—DIV (128.250.247.158 (talk) 09:20, 15 April 2009 (UTC))

Just a reminder, Wikipedia is not a forum. The point of the discussion page is to discuss improvements to the article, not to discuss the topic. Our personal opinions on Comic Sans or the anti-Comic Sans movement is irrelevant to the creation of an encyclopedia. — Alan De Smet | Talk 00:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

"... they need to get a life."[edit]

Totally! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.186.73.233 (talk) 15:43, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Is this grammatically correct?

Technically.. Yes. 93.172.188.146 (talk) 18:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Rationale Needed for Anti-Comic Sans[edit]

I came to this article looking to understand the specifics of why people want to ban Comic Sans. I didn't find it. It's unclear why typographers in particular are against it. Does it go against some typographic conventions? If so, please mention them. Is it because it's used for formal communications? If so, it's not clear how banning solves the problem. Some people have mentioned other fonts being better than Comic Sans for specified applications. If so, please state the application, the alternative font, and why it is better, so that I can at least understand the criteria by which Comic Sans is being labeled "inferior". Thanks. 70.251.150.85 (talk) 00:41, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

These ones are much better: http://frankbruder.fr.ohost.de/fonts_en.html#tomsonTalks (only capital letters though, feel free to improve) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufscript Gürkan Sengün (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC).

I tried to gather some onformation on their site and complete the article. Hope this will help. RCelistrinoTeixeira (talk) 20:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

In most actual critiques I've seen, the hate is not because it's a handwriting font, or a comic-lettering font, but because of its aesthetic flaws and its inappropriate overuse.
A typeface is visually pleasing when it has a variety of contrasting line widths such as a calligrapher would make with a pen tip, a mixture of stylishly straight and curved lines, letters made to resemble regular geometrical shapes such as circles, and/or line endpoints and serifs which emphasize the "hand" of the artist's line. Many fonts disregard some of these guidelines, such as Courier New, but in artistically balanced ways; Comic Sans violates all of them without distinguishing itself. It has a single mechanically-perfect line width which would be impossible for a human hand to produce casually; it is made mostly of single-curved lines that lack a comic letterer's practiced style; it has no geometrical regularity of form, and yet each line's endpoints are all perfect circles. The cumulative aesthetic effect is similar to that of a resume written in dark green crayon by a seven-year-old.
It was intended for onscreen speech bubbles at a small font size, not for business billboards or for printing on paper. When people use it, they think it creates a casual sense of cozy warmth, or a personal, handmade touch. Instead, the effect is one of mediocrity, haste, or childishness in the place of professionalism, especially in business situations. Here's a tip: if you wouldn't write it on printer paper in magic marker and tape it to the wall, don't use Comic Sans. The effect is the same.
There are other handwriting fonts and comic lettering fonts which are much more appealing aesthetically, which provide a sense of personal human contact. Read your local newspaper's comic page. Notice how each strip has its own lettering, some more artful and utilitarian than others. If Caps Lock in text IS LIKE YELLING, then Comic Sans is like an adult speaking in a child's voice. --BlueNight (talk) 02:33, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Quick note: here's an article which describes it from a graphic designer's point of view. It gives examples and alternatives. --BlueNight (talk) 02:38, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

BBC says[edit]

More source, from the Beeb.[2] Ranmore (talk) 18:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Article title[edit]

I reverted the move from Comic Sans to Comic Sans MS. "Comic Sans" is the common name and seems like the better title. --Pnm (talk) 07:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Done again, for the exact same reason. See the various sources cited, they all use "Comic Sans" not "Comic Sans MS" — Alan De Smet | Talk 05:36, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
We have Trebuchet MS. And not all sources cite your preference. Comic Sans MS is the official and regular name. Edokter (talk) — 11:01, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
And creating a buch of unneeded redirects was rahter pointy. Per WP:REDIR, these should only be created when linked to. Edokter (talk) — 11:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is a poor argument. What redirects are you talking about?—Chowbok 12:30, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Trebuchet MS disambiguates from Trebuchet, for which the primary topic is the weapon, not the typeface. – Pnm (talk) 16:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Actually, citing WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is an even poorer argument. I am not at all convinced "Comic Sans" is the common name, especially when it differs so little from the official name, which also makes WP:COMMON a poor argument. Edokter (talk) — 18:20, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Looking at Comic_Sans#Notes and clicking some of the links it seems obviously the common name. All but two use of the citations use "Comic Sans" in the title, none use "Comic Sans MS." I clicked a few of the articles and found the same there. – Pnm (talk) 21:06, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm Comic Sans, *******[edit]

Is the profanity-filled section about the monologue really necessary? WP:PROFANITY states, "Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available." I do not believe that the removal of this section would decrease the quality of the article, but I'm going to make sure by posting here. Interchangable|talk to me|what I've changed 04:02, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

That is why I came to the talk page. I was reading the article,and all of a sudden I was reading a bunch of curse words in a monologue that really didnt make sense. I know Wikipedia is not censored, and I do not have a problem with curse words. It just seemed unnecessary in the article. It should be removed. There is no reason for the monologue.--98.87.89.184 (talk) 20:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

User "Ohnoitsjamie" keeps on removing link to Comic Sans Machine[edit]

I added a link to a "Comic Sans Machine" at http://www.comicsans.de - it's a simple site that turns the font of a website into Comic Sans. A Wikipedia user called "Ohnoitsjamie" keeps on removing that link, saying it was "somehow against the Wikipedia guidelines". What do you think? Even Vincent Connare, the maker of Comic Sans, posted it to the Microsoft Typography blog at http://www.microsoft.com/typography/links/news.aspx?NID=4844— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna flieder (talkcontribs) 16:07, August 8, 2011

As I've already explained to you, it's not in the least bit useful, and functions primarily as pharma advertising. If it's added again, you'll be blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:19, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

You are wrong. The site has nothing to do with pharma. It's a font type made by Vníncent Connare, who likes the site, as you can read in the Microsoft Typography blog. If you still think, the link to http://www.comicsans.de/ is against any Wikipedia guidelines, please explain.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna flieder (talkcontribs) 16:26, August 8, 2011

I know what Comic Sans is. Connare posted a link to the site in 2005. That's it, and that does nothing toward the site meeting WP:EL guidelines. I'm not discussing it further. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I have read the whole guidelines page and could not find your reason for constantly removing the link. Could you please point out what you think is wrong? If you can't point out a valid reason, I kindly ask you to recover the link.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna flieder (talkcontribs) 16:37, August 8, 2011

How about reason to not link #5: "Links to individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising." That's your site, in a nutshell.—Chowbok 20:22, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
That site seems to be a spam magnet, with anonymous users dropping in spammy commercial links for "conversion" and listing in the site's prominently featured "Recent Ten" list. I see no value to Wikipedia. --CliffC (talk) 00:33, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

K alliteration[edit]

Do we really need a fake alliteration with K to illustrate this font? Or is this somehow appropriate for this font?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.202.66 (talkcontribs)

Use on Wikipedia[edit]

Can Comic Sans be used on Wikipedia, especially with the <font> tag? I know the tag is deprecated, but it still works. Allen (talk) 03:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wimpyguy (talkcontribs) 16:02, 26 February 2014‎ (UTC)
@Morriswa: @Wimpyguy: Wrap the entire article in: <font face="Comic sans MS"> -Newyorkadam (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)Newyorkadam
The <font> tag is deprecated, better use <span style="font-family:'Comic Sans MS';">...</span>. But I would strongly advice against the use of Comic Sans on Wikipedia; it will not be met with sympathy. (Ducks...) Edokter (talk) — 21:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Common name[edit]

Using the sources on this very article, "Comic Sans" (without the MS) is the WP:COMMONNAME for this topic. Is there any lasting opposition to using that title? czar  02:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Apparently, because this article has been moved several times. Edokter (talk) — 10:15, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Looks like it's been moved to "Comic Sans MS" once by User:1() in 2006 (with no rationale) twice by Edokter in 2011 ("official name", "official and common name") and once by User:Ï¿½ in 2013 ("official name; compare Trebuchet MS"). Might be worth starting a formal move discussion to establish a clear consensus on this. --McGeddon (talk) 11:05, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived 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. EdJohnston (talk) 04:22, 26 April 2014 (UTC)


Comic Sans MSComic Sans – Based on its usage in the sources linked within the article and in any measure of ghits, "Comic Sans" is this topic's common name. Following McGeddon's outline of previous move justifications above, the official or formal name "Comic Sans MS" can still be used atop the article as its full name, but the common name policy says

Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources.

I propose this move because that name in this article's reliable sources is "Comic Sans" sans "MS". czar  12:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support; the article's sources and wider usage online show that "Comic Sans" is the WP:COMMONNAME for the typeface. As there are no articles about other things called Comic Sans, "Comic Sans" is a sufficiently WP:CONCISE title to identify the subject. --McGeddon (talk) 12:08, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose as being the one who moved it here in the first place, to bring it in line with Trebuchet MS, another of Connare’s fonts — if we were to apply WP:COMMONNAME, we would have Trebuchet (typeface) instead. � (talk) 22:28, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
I think most editors are fine with using WP:NATURAL disambiguation for Trebuchet. --BDD (talk) 18:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Agree. See vote below. Andrewa (talk) 17:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support per COMMONNAME. --BDD (talk) 18:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:COMMONNAME. Consistency is overrated so I don't think the fact that "Trebuchet MS" is titled that way should trump the fact that Comic Sans is almost always referred to without "MS". —seav (talk) 08:16, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Consistency is good in general but not the only or even the main criterion. Unlike Trebuchet, there's no need to disambiguate here, naturally or otherwise. Andrewa (talk) 17:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Red Slash 03:49, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, it's the common name. I am one of those vehement Comic Sans opposers, but I didn't even know its official name was "Comic Sans MS". JIP | Talk 14:50, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

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.