This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hal,
I see you have edited the text to add an extra s after Ayres', Sykes', McLaws' & Rodes' in my new text. Although the style guide allows this for people whose dialect pronounces such as "Ayres's", it does not make it compulsory.
So if an article is consistent for each name there is no need to change it.
Do you actually pronounce two "s"s for all names ending with s?
You have referenced a Chicago style guide in another article. Is this a common form of speach in Chigago?
Graeme Cook (
talk)
08:23, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Hal,
Would you point out where this article already used this method (s's) of possessives?
The style guide allows s's for those who pronounce s's. Do you actually pronounce two "s"s for all these names ending with s?
Graeme Cook ( talk) 07:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hal,
Sentences using a possesive seem to have been removed at some stage since then.
The style guide refers to consistency for each name not that all names in an article use the same possesive.
I note you haven't gone for Gaines's Mill in articles.
This last is a poor argument. There are many homonymes and homophones in English that cause problems. These do not have to be cured.
Graeme Cook ( talk) 08:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Hal,
That one piece of work proceeds another has no value on deciding a style used in Wikipedia. If at sometime in the past one style was used then this text was removed, it has no bearing on the style that should be used in new text, provided that, for that name, the style is consistent in the article as it stands at that time.
Do you think that all names ending in 's' in an article should use the same style or that the style for each name should be consistent?
Graeme Cook ( talk) 07:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hal,
I see you have edited the text to add an extra s after Ayres', Sykes', McLaws' & Rodes' in my new text. Although the style guide allows this for people whose dialect pronounces such as "Ayres's", it does not make it compulsory.
So if an article is consistent for each name there is no need to change it.
Do you actually pronounce two "s"s for all names ending with s?
You have referenced a Chicago style guide in another article. Is this a common form of speach in Chigago?
Graeme Cook (
talk)
08:23, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Hal,
Would you point out where this article already used this method (s's) of possessives?
The style guide allows s's for those who pronounce s's. Do you actually pronounce two "s"s for all these names ending with s?
Graeme Cook ( talk) 07:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hal,
Sentences using a possesive seem to have been removed at some stage since then.
The style guide refers to consistency for each name not that all names in an article use the same possesive.
I note you haven't gone for Gaines's Mill in articles.
This last is a poor argument. There are many homonymes and homophones in English that cause problems. These do not have to be cured.
Graeme Cook ( talk) 08:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Hal,
That one piece of work proceeds another has no value on deciding a style used in Wikipedia. If at sometime in the past one style was used then this text was removed, it has no bearing on the style that should be used in new text, provided that, for that name, the style is consistent in the article as it stands at that time.
Do you think that all names ending in 's' in an article should use the same style or that the style for each name should be consistent?
Graeme Cook ( talk) 07:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)