Talk:The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage: Difference between revisions

By /

 

Line 9: Line 9:

{{Image requested}}

{{Image requested}}

{{Infobox requested}}

{{Infobox requested}}

{{old move|date=7 November 2025|destination=New York Times Manual of Style|result=not moved|link=Special:Permalink/1321099094#Requested move 7 November 2025}}

== notability ==

== notability ==

Line 16: Line 18:

== Requested move 7 November 2025 ==

== Requested move 7 November 2025 ==

<div class=”boilerplate mw-archivedtalk” style=”background-color: var(–background-color-success-subtle, #efe); color: var(–color-base, inherit); margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted var(–border-color-subtle, #AAAAAA);”><!– Template:RM top –>

{{requested move/dated|New York Times Manual of Style}}

:”The following is a closed discussion of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <span style=”color: var(–color-error, red);”>”’Please do not modify it.”'</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]] ”’after”’ discussing it on the closer’s talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.”

The result of the move request was: ”’not moved.”’ <small>([[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions#Closure by a page mover|closed by non-admin page mover]])</small> [[User:Jeffrey34555|Jeffrey34555]] ([[User talk:Jeffrey34555|talk]]) 19:18, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

—-

[[:The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage]] → {{no redirect|New York Times Manual of Style}} – This proposed title is much more [[WP:CONCISE|concise]], making the title easier to understand and enables readers to know better what the article is about. I don’t think stating the whole [[WP:OFFICIAL|official title]] is necessary as the “and Usage” part doesn’t give much extra information from generic documents of a similar type. Removing “The” from the title means you don’t have to type an excessive amount of letters, alleviating the cumbersomeness of the current title while retaining some — yet valuable — parts of the subject document’s title.<br>Alternatively, “New York Times Style Guide” would be an even better title as it is more concise but that’s not my preference as it disregards the official title of the policy document, I don’t think a seperate request of that could gain consensus either. [[User:Qwerty123M|Qwerty123M]] ([[User talk:Qwerty123M|talk]]) 02:18, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

[[:The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage]] → {{no redirect|New York Times Manual of Style}} – This proposed title is much more [[WP:CONCISE|concise]], making the title easier to understand and enables readers to know better what the article is about. I don’t think stating the whole [[WP:OFFICIAL|official title]] is necessary as the “and Usage” part doesn’t give much extra information from generic documents of a similar type. Removing “The” from the title means you don’t have to type an excessive amount of letters, alleviating the cumbersomeness of the current title while retaining some — yet valuable — parts of the subject document’s title.<br>Alternatively, “New York Times Style Guide” would be an even better title as it is more concise but that’s not my preference as it disregards the official title of the policy document, I don’t think a seperate request of that could gain consensus either. [[User:Qwerty123M|Qwerty123M]] ([[User talk:Qwerty123M|talk]]) 02:18, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

Line 23: Line 29:

*”’Oppose”’ The nomination is based around the idea that a shorter title makes life easier for Wikipedia editors, which is not how [[WP:COMMONNAME]] works at all. [[User:162 etc.|162 etc.]] ([[User talk:162 etc.|talk]]) 17:50, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

*”’Oppose”’ The nomination is based around the idea that a shorter title makes life easier for Wikipedia editors, which is not how [[WP:COMMONNAME]] works at all. [[User:162 etc.|162 etc.]] ([[User talk:162 etc.|talk]]) 17:50, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

*”’Oppose.”’ The nom’s reasoning is faulty. I agree with the ‘oppose’ statements above. —[[User:Myceteae|<span style=”font-family: verdana; color: navy;”><b>Myceteae</b></span>]]<span style=”visibility:hidden; color:transparent; padding-left:2px”>{{zero width joiner}}</span>🍄‍🟫 ([[User talk:Myceteae|<span style=”font-family: verdana;”><i>talk</i></span>]]) 17:59, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

*”’Oppose.”’ The nom’s reasoning is faulty. I agree with the ‘oppose’ statements above. —[[User:Myceteae|<span style=”font-family: verdana; color: navy;”><b>Myceteae</b></span>]]<span style=”visibility:hidden; color:transparent; padding-left:2px”>{{zero width joiner}}</span>🍄‍🟫 ([[User talk:Myceteae|<span style=”font-family: verdana;”><i>talk</i></span>]]) 17:59, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

<div style=”padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em”>The discussion above is closed. <b style=”color: var(–color-error, red);”>Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!– from [[Template:Archive bottom]] –>

</div><div style=”clear:both;” class=></div>

This piece reads like an advertisement for the New York Times Style Guide. All of the references are the book itself. I‘m recommending deletion unless there’s a compelling argument for notability. NewkirkPlaza (talk) 12:02, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer’s talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 19:18, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage → New York Times Manual of StyleNew York Times Manual of Style – This proposed title is much more concise, making the title easier to understand and enables readers to know better what the article is about. I don’t think stating the whole official title is necessary as the “and Usage” part doesn’t give much extra information from generic documents of a similar type. Removing “The” from the title means you don’t have to type an excessive amount of letters, alleviating the cumbersomeness of the current title while retaining some — yet valuable — parts of the subject document’s title.
Alternatively, “New York Times Style Guide” would be an even better title as it is more concise but that’s not my preference as it disregards the official title of the policy document, I don’t think a seperate request of that could gain consensus either. Qwerty123M (talk) 02:18, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. First, our article is The New York Times, not New York Times, so this title is consistent. Second, writing style and usage are not synonymous. Third, WP:SUBTITLE says that we make book article titles concise by omitting the subtitle, not shortening the official name. Fourth, you don’t have to type an excessive amount of letters is not a valid consideration under WP:AT. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:30, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: It’s not New York Times, it’s The New York Times. Just like if it was the Toronto Star, then we’d use Toronto Star Manual of Style instead of The Toronto Star Manual of Style. I agree with everything voorts said above. MediaKyle (talk) 11:37, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Must Read

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Exit mobile version