This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 75 | ← | Archive 80 | Archive 81 | Archive 82 | Archive 83 | Archive 84 | Archive 85 |
The current entry is pitifully inadequate, IMO:
________
Dashes
The hyphen (-) is used to form compound words. The en dash (–) is used to specify numeric ranges, such as “open 9–5”. The em dash (—) can be used to link clauses of a sentence—like this one—as can the spaced en dash ( – ). Other dashes, notably the double-hyphen (--), should be avoided. dubious – discuss
________
Apart from the problem that, strictly speaking, hyphens aren't dashes, the use of these three significant puncuation marks is a major source of confusion among WPians—this much is clear to reviewers at FAC. It's very difficult to write good English without knowing about hyphens and dashes. For this reason, I suggest that they be given much more weight in the MoS (as much, for example, as capital letters).
The main article on "Dashes" appears to be much concerned with the computer-code aspects, and is poorly written.
Thus, I'd appreciate feedback on this draft for inclusion in the MoS. Tony 06:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to User:Noetica for valuable assistance. Tony 11:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Much improved ! SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
"Please do not use an en dash, em dash, or any type of dash other than a standard hyphen in a content page name because such symbols prevent some software (including Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP) from saving the page as a file on a computer. The non-hyphen dashes can be used in redirect pages if an enhanced precision for the page name is desired for use in wikilinks elsewhere."
Is this still the case? Just how much software still suffers from this problem? Why would someone want to save a page as a file? Who cares? En dashes are important enough to drop this rule, IMV. " Tony 13:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Any other issues—please add. Opinions welcome below. Tony 05:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Comments from Jimp
1) Might it not read better if sentence fragments were treated as such? Rather than this
Hyphens (-) indicate conjunction. There are three main uses.
- To distinguish between homographs (re-dress = dress again, but redress = remedy or set right).
- To link some prefixes with their main word (non-linear, sub-section); but a clear tendency is emerging simply to join both elements in all varieties of English, particularly in North America. The hyphen is ...
- To link related terms in compound adjectives.
- Sometimes the hyphen is ...
- Many compound adjectives ...
- Hyphens are not used after -ly words ...
- A hanging hyphen is ...
- Values and SI units ...
how about this?
Hyphens (-) indicate conjunction. There are three main uses.
- to distinguish between homographs
- For example, re-dress means "dress again", but redress means "remedy" or "set right".
- to link some prefixes with their main word
- For expmple, non-linear and sub-section. Note, however, that a clear tendency is emerging simply to join both elements in all varieties of English, particularly in North America. The hyphen is ...
- to link related terms in compound adjectives
- Sometimes the hyphen is ...
- Many compound adjectives ...
- Hyphens are not used after -ly words ...
- A hanging hyphen is ...
- Values and SI units ...
2) Hyphens are used to distinguish between what would otherwise be homographs, however, we're not free to apply them arbitarily for this purpose: there are rules. Should we not point this out?
3) "To link some prefixes with their main word ..." there's just something about the flow of this phrase that is rubbing me up the wrong way.
4) "when the union brings vowels into contact" or "to avoid two consonants"—Should we explicitely note the fact that we're refering to orthographic (as opposed to phonological/phonetic) vowels & consonants here?
5) "Hyphens are not used after -ly words ..." Is this really about hyphens? -ly words are adverbs and as such act not on nouns but on verbs or adjectives. Perhaps the point is best kept but it would make more sense if the logic behind it were explained.
6) You mention SI units ... why not extend this to all metric units (or even all units in general? We don't, for example, want to be treating millilitres and kilometres differently.
7) "on Wikipedia, they are often wrongly used to mark disjunction" Are we prescribing or proscribing this? Calling it wrong is discouragement but saying that it's used on Wikipedia could be seen as an endorsement.
8) ^ Since we have a minus sign, why use the endash in its place? However, the software doesn't recognise the minus sign as a minus sign. The endash does no better. It seems only to recognise the hyphen.
{{#expr:5-2}}
gives 3{{#expr:5–2}}
gives Expression error: Unrecognized punctuation character "–".{{#expr:5—2}}
gives Expression error: Unrecognized punctuation character "—".{{#expr:5−2}}
gives 39) "Spaced en dashes as an alternative to em dashes": "Style manuals more often prefer unspaced em dashes." Why not just go one way or the other—less confusion? Let's not bother about style manuals but the style manual.
Jimp—thank you so much for this feedback. My rejoinders are interpolated above in italics. Tony 01:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Dear friends
Noetica and I have been climbing up and down the ladder to that huge chandelier for eight days now—107 edits. It took so long and required so much effort because the subject is large and full of subtleties, several changes of policy needed to gain consensus, and there had to be a modicum of coordination with the chaotic main page, an article that remains, in our view, most unsatisfactory. There are plans to propose a merging of the several articles on WP that concern hyphens and dashes, which are currently an uncoordinated mish-mash. My thanks to you all for valuable feedback, and especially to Noetica, from whom I've learned a lot. Tony 09:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I have a question about the hyphenation of compound adjectives used attributively; it's in the list of bullets under item 3 in the hyphens section. I believe that this form of hyphenation is predominantly a North American usage; it is much less common in British English. If I'm not mistaken about that, would it be worth mentioning, so that it would be clear that in that case the national varieties guideline would also come into play? Or would it be preferable in this case for the hyphenation rule to apply regardless of national variety? Mike Christie (talk) 11:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Which dash applies when talking about rail station names like Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue? -- NE2 15:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
After the major changes to the dash sections here, almost everything at WP:DASH is redundant or belongs in mainspace. Any objections to me splitting that subarticle up, merging the MOS content here, and moving the other content to mainspace? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 21:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
WP:MOSDASH is a train-wreck, and not worth struggling to fix. I don't think we need it, anyway. There is not much that will need to be added to the elegant new section on dashes and hyphens here at WP:MOS. Keep it simple! We could merge Hyphen and Dash (punctuation) to make Dash and hyphen, and load that article with well-marshalled detail to which WP:MOS can refer. It is irrelevant that hyphens and dashes are distinct entities. So are en dashes and hyphens, and en dashes and em dashes; but for good practical reasons we should consider them all together. At the moment we have four locations to edit and coordinate for dashes and hyphens. We would be far better off with just two locations: a section at WP:MOS, and Dash and hyphen.
Currently the MoS lists the following as one of the four distinct roles of the en dash.
To represent minus signs (“–8 ºC”), always unspaced, and operators (“42 – 4 = 38”), always spaced. In these roles, the slightly shorter hyphen-minus signs (−) may be used instead (input with −); many scientists consider this to be mandatory for minus signs and operators.
Note the wording "the ... hyphen-minus signs ... may be used instead" (emphasis added). This reads as if the en dash were the primary minus sign to be used on Wikipedia with the actual minus sign's being no more than an alternative. Compare this to the wording at Manual of Style (dates and numbers)
The minus sign may be represented by a hyphen ("-") or by
−
("−").
"Since we have a minus sign, why use the endash in its place?" I've asked Tony. He has replied "I can't quite bite the bullet on proscribing the use of en dashes here. That would cause a lot of trouble, because it's so common already." [1]
Fair enough, let's not risk causing trouble. Let's avoid proscribing the use of en dashes as minus signs. However, let's reconsider our wording here. I say that there are two points to consider.
Here's my take on it. We don't need to mention the use of the en dash as a minus sign at all. We would not be proscribing it, we'd simply not be mentioning it. Let editors use the en dash if they want and let editors convert them to − (or hyphens). If, however, we are to be mentioning it after all let's use wording which implies a preference to − (or the hyphen) over the en dash rather than the other way around (which is how I read the current wording).
Note: I mention the use of the hyphen as a minus sign. There is an advantage to the use of the hyphen over either the − or the en dash (the latter don't work in calculations). This, however, is a different issue. J ɪ m p 07:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
{{#ifexpr:{{{1}}}<0|−{{#expr:-{{{1}}}}}|{{{1}}}}}
... but I'm getting ahead of myself ...−
" or "&endash;
". Multi-character codes, sure, but easy enough to remember, not too hard to type & neither significantly more or less so than the other.On your Point 2, Jimp, nothing's as easy as option-hyphen (Mac) and option-alt-minus (Windows): one slightly extended action versus a hunt and peck for the very keys a lot of people haven't memorised, the ampersand then m–i–n–u–s then the semicolon.
One slight issue related to the structure of the MOS on dashes is that the minus sign is currently treated within the en dash section. To shift the guideline to the hyphen-minus plus en dash if you really want to use it instead means that we'll need a separate section on the hyphen-minus, possibly beneath the em dash section. I guess the minus sign will need to be treated as is in the en dash section too. Possible, but not simple. And what's the upshot of your Point 3? Your feeling is still that we should lead people to observe the subtle distinction? Tony 11:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
To represent minus signs (“–8 ºC”), always unspaced, and operators (“42 – 4 = 38”), always spaced. In these roles, the slightly shorter hyphen-minus signs (−) may be used instead (input with −); many scientists consider this to be mandatory for minus signs and operators.
As an alternative to the slightly shorter hyphen-minus sign, "−" (input with −), for negative signs and subtraction operators. Many scientists, however, consider the hyphen-minus sign to be mandatory in these roles. Note: to represent a negative sign (“–8 ºC”) it is always unspaced whereas to represent subtraction (“42 – 4 = 38”) it is always spaced.
By "this", you mean the alternative text just above? Here's an edited version:
As an alternative to the slightly shorter hyphen-minus sign, "−" (input with −), for negative signs and subtraction operators. However, many scientists consider the hyphen-minus sign to be mandatory in these roles. Negative signs (“–8 ºC”) are unspaced; subtraction signs (“42 – 4 = 38”) are unspaced.
Will that do? Tony 01:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to move forward with this. Are there any more comments on the part above called "a similar proposal"? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 22:58, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 75 | ← | Archive 80 | Archive 81 | Archive 82 | Archive 83 | Archive 84 | Archive 85 |
The current entry is pitifully inadequate, IMO:
________
Dashes
The hyphen (-) is used to form compound words. The en dash (–) is used to specify numeric ranges, such as “open 9–5”. The em dash (—) can be used to link clauses of a sentence—like this one—as can the spaced en dash ( – ). Other dashes, notably the double-hyphen (--), should be avoided. dubious – discuss
________
Apart from the problem that, strictly speaking, hyphens aren't dashes, the use of these three significant puncuation marks is a major source of confusion among WPians—this much is clear to reviewers at FAC. It's very difficult to write good English without knowing about hyphens and dashes. For this reason, I suggest that they be given much more weight in the MoS (as much, for example, as capital letters).
The main article on "Dashes" appears to be much concerned with the computer-code aspects, and is poorly written.
Thus, I'd appreciate feedback on this draft for inclusion in the MoS. Tony 06:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks to User:Noetica for valuable assistance. Tony 11:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Much improved ! SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
"Please do not use an en dash, em dash, or any type of dash other than a standard hyphen in a content page name because such symbols prevent some software (including Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP) from saving the page as a file on a computer. The non-hyphen dashes can be used in redirect pages if an enhanced precision for the page name is desired for use in wikilinks elsewhere."
Is this still the case? Just how much software still suffers from this problem? Why would someone want to save a page as a file? Who cares? En dashes are important enough to drop this rule, IMV. " Tony 13:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Any other issues—please add. Opinions welcome below. Tony 05:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Comments from Jimp
1) Might it not read better if sentence fragments were treated as such? Rather than this
Hyphens (-) indicate conjunction. There are three main uses.
- To distinguish between homographs (re-dress = dress again, but redress = remedy or set right).
- To link some prefixes with their main word (non-linear, sub-section); but a clear tendency is emerging simply to join both elements in all varieties of English, particularly in North America. The hyphen is ...
- To link related terms in compound adjectives.
- Sometimes the hyphen is ...
- Many compound adjectives ...
- Hyphens are not used after -ly words ...
- A hanging hyphen is ...
- Values and SI units ...
how about this?
Hyphens (-) indicate conjunction. There are three main uses.
- to distinguish between homographs
- For example, re-dress means "dress again", but redress means "remedy" or "set right".
- to link some prefixes with their main word
- For expmple, non-linear and sub-section. Note, however, that a clear tendency is emerging simply to join both elements in all varieties of English, particularly in North America. The hyphen is ...
- to link related terms in compound adjectives
- Sometimes the hyphen is ...
- Many compound adjectives ...
- Hyphens are not used after -ly words ...
- A hanging hyphen is ...
- Values and SI units ...
2) Hyphens are used to distinguish between what would otherwise be homographs, however, we're not free to apply them arbitarily for this purpose: there are rules. Should we not point this out?
3) "To link some prefixes with their main word ..." there's just something about the flow of this phrase that is rubbing me up the wrong way.
4) "when the union brings vowels into contact" or "to avoid two consonants"—Should we explicitely note the fact that we're refering to orthographic (as opposed to phonological/phonetic) vowels & consonants here?
5) "Hyphens are not used after -ly words ..." Is this really about hyphens? -ly words are adverbs and as such act not on nouns but on verbs or adjectives. Perhaps the point is best kept but it would make more sense if the logic behind it were explained.
6) You mention SI units ... why not extend this to all metric units (or even all units in general? We don't, for example, want to be treating millilitres and kilometres differently.
7) "on Wikipedia, they are often wrongly used to mark disjunction" Are we prescribing or proscribing this? Calling it wrong is discouragement but saying that it's used on Wikipedia could be seen as an endorsement.
8) ^ Since we have a minus sign, why use the endash in its place? However, the software doesn't recognise the minus sign as a minus sign. The endash does no better. It seems only to recognise the hyphen.
{{#expr:5-2}}
gives 3{{#expr:5–2}}
gives Expression error: Unrecognized punctuation character "–".{{#expr:5—2}}
gives Expression error: Unrecognized punctuation character "—".{{#expr:5−2}}
gives 39) "Spaced en dashes as an alternative to em dashes": "Style manuals more often prefer unspaced em dashes." Why not just go one way or the other—less confusion? Let's not bother about style manuals but the style manual.
Jimp—thank you so much for this feedback. My rejoinders are interpolated above in italics. Tony 01:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Dear friends
Noetica and I have been climbing up and down the ladder to that huge chandelier for eight days now—107 edits. It took so long and required so much effort because the subject is large and full of subtleties, several changes of policy needed to gain consensus, and there had to be a modicum of coordination with the chaotic main page, an article that remains, in our view, most unsatisfactory. There are plans to propose a merging of the several articles on WP that concern hyphens and dashes, which are currently an uncoordinated mish-mash. My thanks to you all for valuable feedback, and especially to Noetica, from whom I've learned a lot. Tony 09:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I have a question about the hyphenation of compound adjectives used attributively; it's in the list of bullets under item 3 in the hyphens section. I believe that this form of hyphenation is predominantly a North American usage; it is much less common in British English. If I'm not mistaken about that, would it be worth mentioning, so that it would be clear that in that case the national varieties guideline would also come into play? Or would it be preferable in this case for the hyphenation rule to apply regardless of national variety? Mike Christie (talk) 11:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Which dash applies when talking about rail station names like Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue? -- NE2 15:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
After the major changes to the dash sections here, almost everything at WP:DASH is redundant or belongs in mainspace. Any objections to me splitting that subarticle up, merging the MOS content here, and moving the other content to mainspace? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 21:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
WP:MOSDASH is a train-wreck, and not worth struggling to fix. I don't think we need it, anyway. There is not much that will need to be added to the elegant new section on dashes and hyphens here at WP:MOS. Keep it simple! We could merge Hyphen and Dash (punctuation) to make Dash and hyphen, and load that article with well-marshalled detail to which WP:MOS can refer. It is irrelevant that hyphens and dashes are distinct entities. So are en dashes and hyphens, and en dashes and em dashes; but for good practical reasons we should consider them all together. At the moment we have four locations to edit and coordinate for dashes and hyphens. We would be far better off with just two locations: a section at WP:MOS, and Dash and hyphen.
Currently the MoS lists the following as one of the four distinct roles of the en dash.
To represent minus signs (“–8 ºC”), always unspaced, and operators (“42 – 4 = 38”), always spaced. In these roles, the slightly shorter hyphen-minus signs (−) may be used instead (input with −); many scientists consider this to be mandatory for minus signs and operators.
Note the wording "the ... hyphen-minus signs ... may be used instead" (emphasis added). This reads as if the en dash were the primary minus sign to be used on Wikipedia with the actual minus sign's being no more than an alternative. Compare this to the wording at Manual of Style (dates and numbers)
The minus sign may be represented by a hyphen ("-") or by
−
("−").
"Since we have a minus sign, why use the endash in its place?" I've asked Tony. He has replied "I can't quite bite the bullet on proscribing the use of en dashes here. That would cause a lot of trouble, because it's so common already." [1]
Fair enough, let's not risk causing trouble. Let's avoid proscribing the use of en dashes as minus signs. However, let's reconsider our wording here. I say that there are two points to consider.
Here's my take on it. We don't need to mention the use of the en dash as a minus sign at all. We would not be proscribing it, we'd simply not be mentioning it. Let editors use the en dash if they want and let editors convert them to − (or hyphens). If, however, we are to be mentioning it after all let's use wording which implies a preference to − (or the hyphen) over the en dash rather than the other way around (which is how I read the current wording).
Note: I mention the use of the hyphen as a minus sign. There is an advantage to the use of the hyphen over either the − or the en dash (the latter don't work in calculations). This, however, is a different issue. J ɪ m p 07:21, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
{{#ifexpr:{{{1}}}<0|−{{#expr:-{{{1}}}}}|{{{1}}}}}
... but I'm getting ahead of myself ...−
" or "&endash;
". Multi-character codes, sure, but easy enough to remember, not too hard to type & neither significantly more or less so than the other.On your Point 2, Jimp, nothing's as easy as option-hyphen (Mac) and option-alt-minus (Windows): one slightly extended action versus a hunt and peck for the very keys a lot of people haven't memorised, the ampersand then m–i–n–u–s then the semicolon.
One slight issue related to the structure of the MOS on dashes is that the minus sign is currently treated within the en dash section. To shift the guideline to the hyphen-minus plus en dash if you really want to use it instead means that we'll need a separate section on the hyphen-minus, possibly beneath the em dash section. I guess the minus sign will need to be treated as is in the en dash section too. Possible, but not simple. And what's the upshot of your Point 3? Your feeling is still that we should lead people to observe the subtle distinction? Tony 11:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
To represent minus signs (“–8 ºC”), always unspaced, and operators (“42 – 4 = 38”), always spaced. In these roles, the slightly shorter hyphen-minus signs (−) may be used instead (input with −); many scientists consider this to be mandatory for minus signs and operators.
As an alternative to the slightly shorter hyphen-minus sign, "−" (input with −), for negative signs and subtraction operators. Many scientists, however, consider the hyphen-minus sign to be mandatory in these roles. Note: to represent a negative sign (“–8 ºC”) it is always unspaced whereas to represent subtraction (“42 – 4 = 38”) it is always spaced.
By "this", you mean the alternative text just above? Here's an edited version:
As an alternative to the slightly shorter hyphen-minus sign, "−" (input with −), for negative signs and subtraction operators. However, many scientists consider the hyphen-minus sign to be mandatory in these roles. Negative signs (“–8 ºC”) are unspaced; subtraction signs (“42 – 4 = 38”) are unspaced.
Will that do? Tony 01:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to move forward with this. Are there any more comments on the part above called "a similar proposal"? — Carl ( CBM · talk) 22:58, 2 July 2007 (UTC)