Talk:Check mark

How to use the Y in a text line or table?

A check mark can be placed in a text line as a picture. Instead of using the long IMAGE tag ( [[Image:Check_mark_23x20_02.gif]] ) to bring/place the check mark, use the shorter template code/tag: {{Check mark}} for Y, (or use {{Check mark-n}} for Y), which is easy to remember and really displays the check mark Y in all browser, as the unicode equivalent check mark is not supported yet by all web browser software, so most people see a blank rectangular box, question mark, etc depending on their browser. To use the "X mark", use {{X mark}} template code for N, (or, {{X mark-n}} for N). Simple capital letter "X" can also be used instead of the "X mark" (or, Cross mark). Even more shorter code {{U2713}} can be used to display Y an inline check mark character. ~ Tarikash.

In the U.S. (but not Canada)

Why does it say that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.168.132.35 (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Left-handed ticks

Is it worth mentioning that left-handed ticks are sometimes right-to-left on the upstroke?--Knowledge33 21:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Ticks in various cultures / Yes vs. No

"In some countries, e.g. Finland and Sweden, the tick is used as an error mark and indicates "no" rather than "yes"."

I'm from Sweden, and I assume this quote refers to teachers making (usually red) tick marks on e.g. grammar/spelling errors in essays, or math teachers at bad math? I can't think of much else anyway. — Northgrove 14:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I would say that the check mark has two primary uses in Sweden. It can be used by teachers for marking errors, as you say, or it can be used when ticking off items on a list, i.e. to mark that "this is accounted for". However, the usage of a check mark as a generic symbol for "yes" or "ok" seems foreign to me. When a check mark is used outside of the context of a list, I'm more prone to see it as standing for something negative. So, I think the article is correct as it is now; to find a published reference for this is another matter... —Alatius (talk) 12:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Just want to add the interesting fact that in Denmark, just next to Sweden and with a culture quite similar to the Swedish, the check mark unequivocally means "correct" when used by a teacher. It's also the only way used to mark something as correct. Incorrect is often marked with a simple slash /, or sometimes ⁒. ✔ has no negative connotations whatsoever in Denmark, only positive. --Jhertel (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

I am an American who has lived in Australia for 17 years. In Washington state this was known as a check mark and indicated an incorrect answer or generally a had a negative connotation. It confused me for years here until I became accustomed to the opposite meaning and now get confused when I visit home! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.223.166 (talk) 10:40, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

"while in some European countries, it is more common for people to check a square box with a v-shaped checkmark"

In Finland tickmark is used for meaning 'incorrect' too, not much American influence noticeable here. For 'correct', a symbol resembling a division operator (÷) tilted 90° is used. 15:53, 8 July 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.89.239.222 (talk)

I wonder if this isn't a case of over-analyzing things. Over here, some do V marks, others X marks when "ticking" squares. I'm not sure there's some sort of widespread "standard" of doing things, and in that case. — Northgrove 14:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm from the U.S., and everyone I know uses a checkmark to mean "no". In school, in fact, we all used a checkmark as "wrong" and a star as "right" when grading. —The Man in Question (talk) 07:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I am an American who grew up in Texas but I teach English as a Second Language in Quebec. When I write check marks on students' papers, I mean it only in a positive sense to check off criteria that were met/included correctly in their texts. However, I was surprised at my students' reaction the first time they saw this. They all panicked and started asking me what their mistakes were! I learned that in Quebec, teachers use checkmarks to identify errors. This was so foreign to me I had to look it up because everywhere else I have lived (different parts of the U.S. as well as Brazil) checkmarks have always had a positive connotation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FA49:BC3E:8500:8D8D:DFAD:B7FF:9069 (talk) 23:06, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

"Tick"

I have never heard of this word before. Perhaps the article could clarify where exactly it is used - the UK? The whole British commonweath? Sylvain1972 14:44, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I would suspect it's used in countries that use British English or a modification of it. Ireland, for example, isn't in the commonwealth, but we would always say "tick" ... or at least I would. Younger generations are increasingly influenced by America, though. For people my age (22), "check" is sometimes used to mean "done", but you would talk of "ticking it off the list". The mark itself is a tick. Vanhedrarn (talk) 15:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the word "checkmark" is only used in some parts of the US. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.148.21 (talk) 09:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I live in Australia, and "tick" is the only word used. But I have lived among Americans, where it is not understood at all. Morstar (talk) 23:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

here (virginia), "tick" or "tick mark" is usually indicative of tally mark, while check mark means... check mark. as it should. pauli133 (talk) 16:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Heh! So the business jargon "It's another tick in the box for our new product", etc, doesn't exist in US English?? Hmmm..... seems doubtful Blitterbug (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

A "tick" is the noise the clock makes when it moves. In HTML, the code for a checkbox is <input type="checkbox" />, not <input type="tickbox" />. Not sure why this page is biased to British English when checkbox is more widespread. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.68.148.16 (talk) 22:38, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Renamed the article back to Tick (check mark)

This article was recently renamed from Tick (check mark) to Check mark. I've renamed it back because according to the Manual of Style we should retain the variety of English used in the first non-stub revision of the article. Hope this is ok with everyone! Ben Arnold (talk) 22:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Please read WP:RETAIN more carefully. A situation in which "a term/spelling carries less ambiguity" is an explicit exception. That's why we moved Check (finance) to Cheque (a change from American English to British English, the opposite of what occurred here).

Also note that the title format "Name (name in another English variety)" contradicts our conventions. That's why we moved Football (soccer) to Association football. —David Levy 08:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Thee points:

First, on ambiguity: Tick symbol or Tick mark removes the ambiguity just as readily as a change to Check mark so we don't need to change the variety of English to avoid the ambiguity.

Second, WP:RETAIN clearly says that the variety of English the first non-stub revision should be used. The first non-stub version for my money was either 17009740 or 19485549, both of which lead their introductory paragraphs with tick. Before I reverted your change I checked the titles of these articles and they started with Tick, now they seem to have changed to Check mark so it looks like there's something a bit weird about article titles in the revision history. The revision history now uses Check mark throughout which we know isn't true (there are several moves in the history).

So to resolve this we need to know what the article titles were for those revisions. You're an administrator, can you explain how I can see this? If it turns out they were titled Check mark then we have no dispute. All I have to go on is that the first move I can find was 288126737 where the article was moved from Tick (checkmark) to Tick (check mark). In the absence of other data Tick (checkmark) seems to be the first non-stub title. Also if you can explain how to reference article revisions better than with an ID it would make the conversation easier!

Third, I was surprised that you repeated your move after discovering that the your original move was controversial. The move rules say that you should discuss something on the talk page before moving it if it's likely to be controversial.

In short I take your point that the article should better disambiguated from "Tick" or "Check" and I agree that the term used in the first stub article should be preferred but I think you are mistaken about what that term was. But I'm happy for your move to go ahead if you can show me that I'm wrong.

Ben Arnold (talk) 23:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

First, on ambiguity: "Tick symbol" or "Tick mark" removes the ambiguity just as readily as a change to "Check mark" so we don't need to change the variety of English to avoid the ambiguity.

My understanding is that the two most common names are "tick" (British English) and "check mark" (American English). Oxford agrees. We don't even mention the terms "tick symbol" and "tick mark" in the article. The latter has a good number of Google hits, but they appear to mainly comprise technical references (e.g. to unicode characters) and some uses whose context I don't even recognize.

And again, until I moved the article, the title contained both "tick" and "check mark" (the latter of which is unambiguous on its own).

Second, WP:RETAIN clearly says that the variety of English the first non-stub revision should be used.

No, we fall back on that as a last resort when no good reason to select a particular English variety exists. It's a means to an end, not an end in and of itself. (You just quoted guideline text that I wrote, incidentally.)

Before I reverted your change I checked the titles of these articles and they started with "Tick", now they seem to have changed to "Check mark" so it looks like there's something a bit weird about article titles in the revision history. The revision history now uses "Check mark" throughout which we know isn't true (there are several moves in the history).

If I understand correctly, you must be mistaken regarding the situation before you undid the move. An article's current title always is displayed throughout the revision history.

The article's content originated as part of the Check page (which, incidentally, wasn't a stub). It was split out to a separate page titled Tick (checkmark) on 11 December 2004‎ and moved to Tick (check mark) (reflecting the latter term's common spelling) on 5 May 2009‎.

When/whether the article ceased to be a stub is debatable, but if we stipulate that it did at some point, it's likely that "tick" was listed first at the time. Again, that's merely a fallback criterion. We have a good reason to use the title Check mark, just as we had a good reason to move Check (finance) to Cheque.

In the absence of other data Tick (checkmark) seems to be the first non-stub title.

Unquestionably (unless the article is still a stub, which some would argue). It also happens to contradict our naming conventions.

Also if you can explain how to reference article revisions better than with an ID it would make the conversation easier!

You might want to use Template:Oldid and/or Template:Oldid2.

Third, I was surprised that you repeated your move after discovering that the your original move was controversial. The move rules say that you should discuss something on the talk page before moving it if it's likely to be controversial.

You moved the article back to a malformed title, citing a guideline that you misread or misunderstood. I assumed that my explanation of this would eliminate any controversy. Perhaps I was mistaken, but your title suggestions seem to imply acceptance that Tick (check mark) is unsuitable.

In short I take your point that the article should better disambiguated from "Tick" or "Check"

In American English, "check mark" is the usual term (with "check" being far less common in that context); we aren't taking "check" and arbitrarily appending "mark" for disambiguation (as you appear to be doing with "tick").

Tick (symbol) would comply with our naming conventions, except that we avoid parenthetical disambiguation when feasible (hence the aforementioned move from Check (finance) to Cheque). —David Levy 01:53, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Where in the Character Map...

would these symbols be? 76.16.191.46 (talk) 18:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

They're under what is normally the 'ü' (Alt + 0252) in Wingdings. Ther's also a version with a box around it under what is normally the 'þ' (Alt + 0254).--The Machine (talk) 18:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

History

Can anyone add a section on the history of this in the West and how it came about? Turkeyphan^t 12:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

There are some mentions on the Web about the ancient Romans marking checked items in checklists with a V, standing for "veritas", but I found nothing reliable to confirm or reject this idea. Seems somehow dubious to me though. The first OED quotation for the word itself is rather late, 1884: "Neat pencil ticks indicated favourite passages." --Thrissel (talk) 14:28, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Sounds suuuuper made-up. Folk etymology is a rich source of false claims. I say remove the section 2A02:8084:255F:3D80:8464:58FF:AF0A:B1A2 (talk) 06:19, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

I thought it was an import from French, a 'v' for "vrai" which means "true/correct". For example, nowadays, when teachers in French speaking countries correct homework, they put a 'v' beside the correct answers and when you do that often enough you start adding a tail and suddenly it's a tick.

The British aristocracy spoke French for 300 years, so this sort of mixing of the languages wouldn't be unusual. Once the connection between the symbol and the word "vrai" was severed, I'd guess it became a fully blown tick in English speaking countries with no more attempts made to make it look like a 'v'.

But I've no sources to back this up. Gronky (talk) 05:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm German and people here (including myself, up until now at least) think it's a lower-case r for richtig ("right, correct"). The more so since a lower-case f is also used in German for the contrary (falsch = "false, wrong"). The tick definitely looks more like a fast-written "r" than a "v", methinks. But it need not be true, of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.169.49.216 (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

From the Swedish article: I Finland tolkas ✓ ofta som en förkortning för ordet väärin, det vill säga ”fel”, på grund av dess likhet med ett lutande V. Bocken är däremot en övervägande positiv symbol i den engelsktalande världen och står normalt för "ja" eller för ett valt alternativ.

Translation: In Finland ✓ is often interpreted as an abbreviation for the word väärin, i.e. "wrong" because of its similarity with a slanting V. The tick (check mark) is, however devinitely a positive symbol in the English speaking world and stands normally for "yes" or for a selected alternative.

(I have cut and pasted the original Swedish here for any Swedish speakers who prefer to see the original).

From this conversation here it is apparent that in the US there seems to be two contradictory systems in use, one where the checkmark/tick means a correct answer and another which means the answer is wrong. Also it is unknown if each system is used throughout a particular state, or there is a school to school variation; or which states use what system.

A Guardian column (Notes & Queries) has discussion (chat) about this. RPSM (talk) 11:11, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I have been taught that the "v" does come from the Romans but simply stands for "seen" or in Latin: "vidi". --- DJ Doena (talk) 12:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

The whole History section sounds made-up AF. It's like folk-etymology. It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.164.24 (talk) 21:18, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Agree totally. The entire "History" section is nonsense, particularly the **** about "ink pens don't start to write immediately." Whoever added that has never touched an ink pen in her life. It's a retarded statement. The whole section should be ripped out, it's a work of the imagination 116.231.75.71 (talk)T.

✓ meaning incorrect answer in French is wrong

<<For example, in French, ✓ is used to indicate an incorrect answer, while a "B" bon is used to indicate a correct answer.>>

Considering the sentence above, here are the following points where I disagree with : 1. In French, if there is a difference in the marking for correct and incorrect answer, it would be "V" for "Vrai" and "F" for "Faux" (meaning "True" and "False" in French) 2. Nowadays, in France, with the globalization of signs, ✓ is considered as "right" with no doubt. 3. The letter "B" is not used to indicate a correct answer. "B" for "Bon" ("good" in French) is used as a grade or an appreciation about a homework or test. Actually, there are : TB, B and AB respectively for "Très Bien", "Bien" and "Assez bien" (meaning "Very good", "Good" and "Good enough" in French).

NB : I'm new in Wikipedia. I am going to delete the sentence I'm talking about. If my behaviour is not okay, don't hesitate to go back to the previous version of the article. I'm also okay to discuss about the topic I'm writing about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PhilipDangPro (talk • contribs) 15:14, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Czech?

Here is another hypothesis, that the term "check mark" might be a misunderstanding of "Czech mark", or hacek. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.122.49.58 (talk) 18:11, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

That is a good point. And now I am seriously wondering, if Americans call "ticks" check marks, do they call "crosses" Slovak koruna? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.5.133 (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

In Finland?!?

There reads: In Finnish, ✓ stands for väärin, i.e., "wrong", due to its similarity to a slanted v.
I disagree. In Finland "v" stands for väärin (wrong), and "✓" is mistaken for "v". I'd say that "✓" does not stand for anything in Finland. 109.240.237.2 (talk) 03:01, 6 August 2019 (UTC) I would second this purely based on experience of the Finnish usage. It is more likely that the use of "✓" in Finland comes from the usage in Sweden. Due to historical reasons Swedish clerical customs have a strong influence on Finnish customs.The connection between "✓" and "väärin" might be a later explanation. 2001:14BB:420:F91:AD44:E3A:B97F:EB72 (talk) 12:55, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

International differences (Sweden)

"It is common in Swedish schools for a ✓ to indicate that an answer is incorrect"

The source referenced is over 100 years old. Maybe find a source that's more up-to-date? Personally, I grew up in Sweden (admittedly not in 1917, which is when the article was published) and I've never heard of checkmarks being used to indicate that an answer is incorrect. EhBud (talk) 04:17, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I've just added more up-to-date sources. I went to school in Sweden during the 90s, and as far as I can remember, "check marks" were the standard way to mark incorrect answers in tests. Akronym (talk) 15:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

I live in the U.S. and my school used checkmarks to mean something is incorrect. AdustKitten237 (talk) 23:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Pakistan ke prime minister ka naam kya hai

Pakistan ke prime minister ka naam kya haiPakistan ke prime minister ka naam kya hai Raheel ghouir (talk) 07:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Order of names

Why does Philippine English end up being earlier than British English? Sounds like skewed priorities there paulsd (talk) 12:25, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Alphabetical order of the terms used. Other than that, there's no reason to 'prioritise' one language variant over another anyway... Arlo James Barnes 10:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Why are there no examples of left-handed tick marks?

Why are there no examples of left-handed tick marks? Wikipedia should be inclusive. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Draw or video one for us and we'll include it! Arlo James Barnes 10:41, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Keyboard entry

Does what is described in Keyboard Entry actually work in any modern software? Does the software purposely emulate how old fonts behaved? Spitzak (talk) 17:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

As to the first question, it works in Microsoft Word and Excel as well as in LibreOffice Writer and Calc. I don't understand the second question; are you asking about the intent of the font designers?

Peter Brown (talk) 00:46, 20 December 2023 (UTC)