Talk:Style guide

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Style guide article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Journalism High‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Academic Journals

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals 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.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Literature Mid‑importance

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature 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.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Graphic design Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Graphic design, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of graphic design-related subjects 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.Graphic designWikipedia:WikiProject Graphic designTemplate:WikiProject Graphic designGraphic design articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Archives

Archive 1 (Jan 2003—Jan 2014)

____

Notice and request for participation

There is ~~an RfC~~ a Requested move in which the participation of editors/watchers of this article would be greatly appreciated:

Talk:Assault weapons legislation#Requested move

Thank you. --Lightbreather (talk) 22:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was an RfC, but I realized this is the appropriate process. Lightbreather (talk) 05:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

House style in illustration

House style redirects here, but this article doesn't cover that concept as it applies to illustration. Companies that produce comics and animation often have a house style that's used in their published work, so that not only are specific characters such as Bugs Bunny or Archie Andrews drawn the same way, but other characters, settings, etc are drawn consistently. Some of this is a reflection of corporate identity (it isn't covered there either) but it's closer in spirit and practice to the use of a writing style guide. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:19, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hearing no further input, I've changed the redirect into a disambig page. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 19:04, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sizes section list

Shouldn't the list items be followed instead by a mere comma, considering the list itself lacks any commas? Otherwise, the semi-colons are technically being used incorrectly. o.o Just want(ed) to ask before changing them. ~ gotjane 00:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's because the list items are freehanging. There's wide precedent for such use. But freehanging list items don't really need any terminal punctuation (and that is the more common style), so I'll just delete them. Quercus solaris (talk) 23:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Use of 'cascade' in 1.1

I don't think this usage is correct or clear.Does the smaller object cascade into the larger? I will edit unless there are objections. DavidCh0 (talk) 07:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is already correct as is. It is already explained at the top of the section. The concept is directly analogous to Cascading Style Sheets, where inline styles in HTML cascade over CSS styles. For example, is Heading 1 element (h1) italic or not italic? If CSS instructs that it is italic, but inline style instructs that it is not italic, the inline wins. The same principle is at work on the human-readable level of style guides. If a project style sheet says "Use APA style unless otherwise indicated," then the editor edits to APA style except for the exceptions defined in the project style sheet (say, for example, that APA hyphenates a certain term but the editorial office of journal XYZ prefers open styling for it). Quercus solaris (talk) 00:58, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In your example the italic specified in the Cascading Style Sheet cascades over HTML inline styles, unless the inline style specifies that it is not italic. The word cascade implies top to bottom, larger to smaller. Think waterfall. This is why I find the analogy confusing, and why I think the references to cascading and web design need to be removed. DavidCh0 (talk) 11:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Canadian English

I believe there is a newer edition, but haven't read it myself -- online and print. Although only bibliographic, as I haven't seen any of it beyond press releases I don't feel qualified to update it (particularly as core content of this article, rather than more usually modest role of references). Any editors out there (lol!) who have want to update its bullet here? DanTrent (talk) 11:02, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

Why in heaven's name would we want to illustrate an article on style guides with a photo of a dictionary? That makes as much sense as illustrating an article on aardvarks with a photo of an anteater. 137.83.219.6 (talk) 20:44, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Isn’t this article lacking credible sources?

This article seems almost like entirely an original research essay. I’m very new to Wikipedia, and I don’t have general knowledge in this field, so it’s beyond my ability to improve it a lot. ChishaWolf (talk) 16:04, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article as of today is a short exposition of basic facts about its topic, providing dozens of concrete examples (via inline mention of them, with links to their articles). See WP:BLUE for more help regarding how Wikipedia handles basic facts. Of course it is true that where it states basic facts such as "style guides often give advice about usage" or "style guides often give advice about punctuation", this article could cite specific chapters of specific MOSs (such as the CMOS chapter on punctuation, for example) so that it would have a numbered reference list. That can be done whenever anyone has time to do such a self-evident backfilling. But in the meantime, it does not translate to any idea that any of the basic information in the article is "original", or "research", or an "essay". Quercus solaris (talk) 06:25, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Most of WP's articles could use some improvement, but this one is nothing like "an original research essay". — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm also new, but I was wondering what both of you thought about the first and only reference. Although it is a good source, I'm not sure if the definition of a style guide should be coming from The Guardian. 2020sEra (talk) 18:33, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian and Observer style guide [sic] is one of the major style guides for British news writing. It may not be a comprehensive one, or one that agrees with other style guides (especially academic ones) on everything, but it seems reasonable when it says its purpose is to provide a set of standards for the writing, formatting, and design of documents. Similar statements are probably findable in other style guides laying out what their purpose is. There doesn't seem to be anything incorrect about the statement that a style guide provides a set of standards for the writing, formatting, and design of documents, so what is the issue? — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Technical and Professional Communication

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 September 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 2020sEra (article contribs). Peer reviewers: KLHates.

— Assignment last updated by Savmanbanans (talk) 17:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As part of my assignment, I made multiple copy edits throughout the entire article. I mostly removed repetitive information and refined word choices to allow for an easier read through. I made sure to leave comments for my edits under the "View History" page for more experience Wiki editors to review as well. I also added a few citations, but I noticed one of them appears broken. I tried fixing it, but I was unsuccessful. If anyone can help with that, I'd be appreciative. Below, I describe an additional section I made and whether or not this article should keep it. 2020sEra (talk) 16:20, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some of that was an improvement, but some of it was not, including making claims not supported by the source material, not following our own style guide, using redundant wording, moving words or changing them in ways that completely changed the meaning of the material, etc. Rather than do a mass revert (which would be rude since you put significant work into it and some of your changes were constructive) or re-work it all in one potentially confusing pass, I tweaked it bit by bit with eplanatory edit summaries. (And a few improvements made in that series of edits don't relate to your changes). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 19:17, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Website Style Guide

Hello Everyone, I added a small section concerning the specific use of website style guides. I'm not exactly sure whether or not the information belongs here or not, but I thought there should be a section acknowledging the difference. I thought it might be useful to audience members wondering what the difference might be between a website's style guide over a book publisher's style guide. What does everyone else think? And if maybe you don't agree with the exact information I have, do you think there should there be any information dedicated to web style guides only? Please let me know, thank you! 2020sEra (talk) 16:13, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Needs copyediting for clarity. And Wikipedia uses sentence case not title case for headings (MOS:HEADINGS). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:18, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Digital Writing

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2024 and 13 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): GingerStoleMyBread (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Rayvenscry.

— Assignment last updated by Gcutrufello (talk) 17:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]