Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Spelling: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 11:50, 16 November 2008

Manual of Style

	This page falls within the scope of the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, a collaborative effort focused on enhancing clarity, consistency, and cohesiveness across the Manual of Style (MoS) guidelines by addressing inconsistencies, refining language, and integrating guidance effectively.Manual of StyleWikipedia:WikiProject Manual of StyleTemplate:WikiProject Manual of StyleManual of Style articles
	This page falls under the contentious topics procedure and is given additional attention, as it closely associated to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style, and the article titles policy. Both areas are subjects of debate. Contributors are urged to review the awareness criteria carefully and exercise caution when editing.
	For information on Wikipedia's approach to the establishment of new policies and guidelines, refer to WP:PROPOSAL. Additionally, guidance on how to contribute to the development and revision of Wikipedia policies of Wikipedia's policy and guideline documents is available, offering valuable insights and recommendations.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Dialogue

I don't understand...the word "dialogue" in the comparison chart is exactly the same in each column...why is it being compared? Calgary (talk) 05:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Someone had made the alternate spelling invisible. --Old Moonraker (talk) 05:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

suggestion

I know that, on the Chinese Wikipedia, they have a tab that allows you to alternate between Simplified and Traditional Chinese, while keeping local vocabulary in mind. In the edit field, they have templates where, if an instance of word X appears, it will change to word Y when a local variety of Chinese is used. For example, both Hong Kong and Taiwan use Traditional Chinese, but they have different words for "bus". I don't see why we can't do something similar on here, letting people choose between UK and US English and all. Pandacomics (talk) 14:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese has very flexible grammar, unlike English. Just switching spellings won't do much for the reader---any kind of "translation" has to be able to take care of idiom and metaphors. And anyway, the varieties of English are all mutually intelligible. 118.90.54.71 (talk) 12:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

table

Can someone move Canada to the second-right position? It would all be easier to read, then. Tony (talk) 00:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aus/NX English

Australian and New Zealand English have almost exactly the same words in the word comparison table. Should we combine them? This, that and the other _[talk] 23:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"ise" versus "ize"

Hello. I'm a bit confused by the rewording.

used by the UK government: the Cabinet Office specifies the Concise Oxford Dictionary in its style guide for online publications which, while allowing either ize or ise, notes that "ise ...is in common use, especially in British English, and is obligatory in certain cases".

I agree that the (former) Cabinet Office website recommends the Concise Oxford Dictionary be used. But is the quotation ("ise is in common use...") from the dictionary, or from the website? I cannot find it on the website, and my Concise OED (11th ed) does not have the bit about "obligatory in certain cases". In fact, the "ize" spellings always come first in the dictionary. 81.98.251.134 (talk) 16:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry—now tightened it up. --Old Moonraker (talk) 18:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But I still have two problems: (a) the website linked to has a tag at the top saying that it is a "historical archive"; (b) there is still no evidence that the government soley uses "ise". All we know is that one part of the government recommended using the Oxford dictionary; this dictionary principally recommends "ize" but recognizes that "ise" is often used.

By contrast, and more importantly, here is some evidence that the government sometimes uses "ize", as a quick google search revealed. For example, "recognize": [1]; [2]. For organization: [3]; [4]. The "ize" spelling is also used in British law [5]. My impression is that the UK government does not have a position on the "right" spelling. I propose to remove the statements that "the UK Government uses "ise"", until some evidence is provided. 87.112.29.103 (talk) 11:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 11:42, 16 November 2008 edit 87.112.29.103 (talk) →‎"ise" versus "ize" ← Previous edit		Revision as of 11:50, 16 November 2008 edit undo 87.112.29.103 (talk) →‎"ise" versus "ize" Next edit →
Line 28:		Line 28:
	::Thanks. But I still have two problems: (a) the website linked to has a tag at the top saying that it is a "historical archive"; (b) there is still no evidence that the government soley uses "ise". All we know is that one part of the government recommended using the Oxford dictionary; this dictionary principally recommends "ize" but recognizes that "ise" is often used.		::Thanks. But I still have two problems: (a) the website linked to has a tag at the top saying that it is a "historical archive"; (b) there is still no evidence that the government soley uses "ise". All we know is that one part of the government recommended using the Oxford dictionary; this dictionary principally recommends "ize" but recognizes that "ise" is often used.

	::By contrast, and more importantly, here is some evidence that the government sometimes uses "ize". For example, "recognize": [http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/CityPolice/Advice/identitysought/mostwantedlargeimages.htm]; [http://careersadvice-findacourse1.direct.gov.uk/pls/hot_ca/page_pls_user_reg_course_dets?x=262039465907&y=0&a=800001&w=24254937&s=139302215&p=1&location_id=&town_city=&qualification=&postcode=&distance=10&l_search_type=P&firsta=&last=&duration=&chkstudymode=&start_date=&chkflexistart=N&AffiliateID=0&z=70678]. For organization: [http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/csia/ia_technical_programme/~/media/assets/www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/csia/iatp/data_export%20pdf.ashx]; [http://www.publications.doh.gov.uk/ipu/socialcare/stocktonconsort/CD%20Docs/models/CAMHS/or19.htm]. My impression is that the UK government does not have a position on the "right" spelling. I propose to remove the statements that "the UK Government uses "ise"", until some evidence is provided. [[Special:Contributions/87.112.29.103\|87.112.29.103]] ([[User talk:87.112.29.103\|talk]]) 11:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)		::By contrast, and more importantly, here is some evidence that the government sometimes uses "ize", as a quick google search revealed. For example, "recognize": [http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/CityPolice/Advice/identitysought/mostwantedlargeimages.htm]; [http://careersadvice-findacourse1.direct.gov.uk/pls/hot_ca/page_pls_user_reg_course_dets?x=262039465907&y=0&a=800001&w=24254937&s=139302215&p=1&location_id=&town_city=&qualification=&postcode=&distance=10&l_search_type=P&firsta=&last=&duration=&chkstudymode=&start_date=&chkflexistart=N&AffiliateID=0&z=70678]. For organization: [http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/csia/ia_technical_programme/~/media/assets/www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/csia/iatp/data_export%20pdf.ashx]; [http://www.publications.doh.gov.uk/ipu/socialcare/stocktonconsort/CD%20Docs/models/CAMHS/or19.htm]. The "ize" spelling is also used in British law [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1989/Uksi_19891346_en_2.htm]. My impression is that the UK government does not have a position on the "right" spelling. I propose to remove the statements that "the UK Government uses "ise"", until some evidence is provided. [[Special:Contributions/87.112.29.103\|87.112.29.103]] ([[User talk:87.112.29.103\|talk]]) 11:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)