Talk:Sentence spacing: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:00, 26 November 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sentence spacing 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

Sentence spacing is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 4, 2010.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 11, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
April 12, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
April 27, 2010	Peer review	Reviewed
May 27, 2010	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
July 15, 2010	Featured article candidate	Promoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 22, 2006. The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that French spacing, the typographical practice of adding two (rather than one) spaces after a full stop, is a result of the monospaced fonts used by typewriters?
Current status: Featured article

Typography FA‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography 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.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Sentence spacing was copied or moved into History of sentence spacing with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

faq page

Frequently asked questions (see also: Sentence Spacing FAQ)

Q: Why is this article restricted to "languages using a Latin-derived alphabet"?

A: Double sentence spacing (on typewriters) was primarily used in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada (English). Because traditional spacing and French spacing is relevant to the topic, the article cannot be limited to "Sentence spacing in English." However, including languages based on Sanscrit, Cyrillic, Cuniform, Hieroglyphics, Chinese, and Japanese characters (among others), adds little to the article.

Q: Why is the "introduction of movable-type printing" mentioned in the lede?

A: This excludes the topic of sentence spacing in handwriting.

Q: There is no single authority for the English language, so why is any of this relevant?

A: There is no single authority for the English language. However, there are commonly accepted writing conventions in national varieties of English (e.g., American and British English). For example, it is conventional in written English to capitalize the first word of every sentence; end sentences with a period, question mark, or exclamation mark; use "quotation marks" instead of «guillemets», indent paragraphs or separate them with vertical space, etc. Not adhering to commonly accepted conventions can make written products look unfamiliar to the average reader. Conventions can be determined by using primary source reference works, as well as determining what is common usage, which can change over time.

Q: Why did early professional typesetters use exaggerated spacing (em spaces) between sentences? What led them to believe that was the best way to set type?

A: There doesn't seem to be a good answer to this in published literature. Modern typographers only speculate about the rationale. If you can find the answer, please add it to the article.

Q: What is the reason for the shift away from double sentence spacing in professionally published works in the early 20th century and in style guides in the late 20th and early 21st centuries?

A: There doesn't seem to be a good answer to this in published literature. If you can find the answer, please add it to the article.

Q: Why does this article use terms like French and English spacing while acknowledging that they are confusing because they are not used consistently?

A: This article simply reports what sources say about the topic. In this case, the sources themselves are contradictory. But coverage of these terms is necessary for completeness according to Featured Article criterion 1.b.

Q: Why isn't typesetting time and cost mentioned, when it may have been a major factor in the modern transition from wider spacing to word spacing?

A: Editors here have not found reliable, published sources that comment on this potential factor. If you can find the answer, please add it to the article.

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

French spacing Expansion dispute

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sentence spacing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:20, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2018 Study

The 2018 study that was in the lede was quoted incorrectly. As written, it was a conclusive statement about the readability of double sentence spacing attributed to the study's authors. However, the quote actually came from the secondary source that cited the study. And the author of that Forbes secondary source said it in jest, which is apparent when reading past the first paragraph in the article.^[1] The title of the Forbes article (below) also contradicts the quote as stated in the lede.

Anyway, the study should be in the article, but seems more appropriate in the "studies" section. So I moved it there and clarified some of the details of the study. It also seems to be a bit like the 2002 Loh, Branch, Shewanown, and Ali which found slight evidence in the opposite direction, but not enough to be significant. I'd say this is a worthy contribution to the literature, but didn't conclude anything in the way it was stated in the lede.--Airborne84 (talk) 02:12, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Haelle, Tara. "One Or Two Spaces After A Period? That New Study Can't Tell You". Forbes. Retrieved 2018-08-23.

Main Reason Commonly Given for Double Spacing Is Not Mentioned

It's to prevent confusion with internal abbreviations where the dot is to be followed by a single space, for example "Mr." or "Dr.", especially because those very common abbreviations are almost always followed by a capital letter. This confusion is mentioned in the section on how computers deal with the distinction but should also be featured in the "Controversy" and "Effects on Readability and Legibility" sections. 68.196.3.202 (talk) 16:44, 25 January 2020 (UTC)captcrisis[reply]

questioning the correctness of the "en quad" being the standard sentence space

The "en space" or "en quad" is in my recollection the standard word space, and the "em space" or "em quad" is the typical sentence space, which is backwards from the page text. Can someone corroborate or rebut this? 41.80.175.9 (talk) 12:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:URFA/2020

A few sentences are not sourced. And the "Controversy" section may be removed and its content moved elsewhere? A455bcd9 (talk) 11:21, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section seems fine to me

There's a tag on the controversy section saying the negative information should be integrated into the rest of the article, but it seems to me it does a fine job of covering the controversy neutrally. I think the tag should be removed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:55, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I assume the tag was added due to WP:CRIT, but I don't see a better way to handle it here. –CWenger (^ • @) 16:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it; if anyone thinks it should stay we can discuss it here. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:00, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Haelle, Tara. "One Or Two Spaces After A Period? That New Study Can't Tell You". Forbes. Retrieved 2018-08-23.

[1]

Revision as of 16:57, 26 November 2022 edit CWenger (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 20,656 edits →Controversy section seems fine to me: Reply Tag: Reply ← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:00, 26 November 2022 edit undo Mike Christie (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors 69,993 edits →Controversy section seems fine to me: Removed the tag Next edit →
Line 95:		Line 95:

	:Agreed. I assume the tag was added due to [[WP:CRIT]], but I don't see a better way to handle it here. <span class="nowrap">–[[User:CWenger\|CWenger]]</span> ([[User talk:CWenger\|<big style="font-family:Webdings;">^</big>]] • [[Special:Contributions/CWenger\|<big style="font-family:Webdings;">@</big>]]) 16:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)		:Agreed. I assume the tag was added due to [[WP:CRIT]], but I don't see a better way to handle it here. <span class="nowrap">–[[User:CWenger\|CWenger]]</span> ([[User talk:CWenger\|<big style="font-family:Webdings;">^</big>]] • [[Special:Contributions/CWenger\|<big style="font-family:Webdings;">@</big>]]) 16:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
			::I've removed it; if anyone thinks it should stay we can discuss it here. [[User:Mike Christie\|Mike Christie]] ([[User_talk:Mike Christie\|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Mike_Christie\|contribs]] - [[User:Mike Christie/Reference library\|library]]) 17:00, 26 November 2022 (UTC)