Manual of Style

This page falls within the scope of the Wikipedia:Manual of Style, a collaborative effort focused on enhancing clarity, consistency, and cohesiveness across the Manual of Style (MoS) guidelines by addressing inconsistencies, refining language, and integrating guidance effectively.Manual of StyleWikipedia:WikiProject Manual of StyleTemplate:WikiProject Manual of StyleManual of Style articles This page falls under the contentious topics procedure and is given additional attention, as it closely associated to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style, and the article titles policy. Both areas are known to be subjects of debate. Contributors are urged to review the awareness criteria carefully and exercise caution when editing. For information on Wikipedia's approach to the establishment of new policies and guidelines, refer to WP:PROPOSAL. Additionally, guidance on how to contribute to the development and revision of Wikipedia policies of Wikipedia's policy and guideline documents is available, offering valuable insights and recommendations.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40

Archive (capitalization)

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

I am not sure whether the capitalization is correct here. Should it really be all lower case as stated on Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#Section_headings? It looks weird to me. --Ysangkok (talk) 12:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• IMO, all of the section headings should be changed from title case to sentence case. GregJackP Boomer! 01:14, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An argument has started on the St Paul's Cathedral article about whether words such as "chapter" and "dean" ought to be capitalised. My view is that these should be treated as generic nouns and job titles and, therefore, should not be capitalised. While it can be correct to capitalise "dean" when used as part of a proper name, such as "Dean of St Paul's", when referring to "the dean" it is my view that the word is not capitalised. Another editor has quoted the opening of the MOS guidelines that "words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in sources are treated as proper names and capitalized in Wikipedia" and is apparently arguing on the basis of St Paul's Cathedral sources which I do not consider meets the requirements of "consistently". The key words in the MOS introduction seem to be "consistently capitalized" and a specific organisation's own inhouse style of using "vanity capitalisation" for such things does not meet this criteria in my view. Organisations often capitalise words (such as in "the University", "the College" and "the Cathedral") in their own publications which should not be when not used as part of a proper name. As there is some possible ambiguity in the MOS guidelines on this kind of matter I would appreciate some other editors' views on these matters. Thanks. Anglicanus (talk) 11:10, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are absolutely correct. Don't forget "the Company" and "the School". An organization's own web page is usually worthless for deciding whether to capitalize. Chris the speller ^yack 14:18, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. GregJackP Boomer! 14:47, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As do I. Deor (talk) 14:55, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. If interested, some so far not very productive discussion has been started by the other editor here on my talk page. I am not inclined to give any weight to the Cathedral Measures' argument given how such legal documents routinely capitalise these kinds of words even when contemporary English style is otherwise. Anglicanus (talk) 15:52, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do a lot of things on legal documents that I would never do on WP. That argument holds no water here. GregJackP Boomer! 20:11, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chiming in with my support. An absurd amount of vanity capping is attempted in various forms on WP, and it needs to be nipped in the bud. It's particularly rampant with animal breeds, but I've found it very difficult to make any headway in that area. It often boils down to which sources are considered authoritative, and of course each side of the argument can claim whatever it wants in that regard. The Style Guide's "rule" is wishy-washy and untenable, as far as I'm concerned. Krychek (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As with the discussion immediately above, there has been an unproductive discussion here about capitalising "the Trust", "the Society". MOS:INSTITUTIONS says:

• Names of institutions (George Brown College) are proper names and require capitals. The word the at the start of a title is usually uncapitalized, but follow the institution's own usage (a degree from the University of Sydney; but researchers at The Ohio State University).
• Generic words for institutions (university, college, hospital, high school) do not take capitals:

Incorrect	(generic):	The University offers programs in arts and sciences.
Correct	(generic):	The university offers programs in arts and sciences.
Correct	(title):	The University of Delhi offers programs in arts and sciences.

• Political or geographical units such as cities, towns, and countries follow the same rules: as proper names they require capitals; but as generic words (sometimes best omitted for simplicity) they do not.

Incorrect	(generic):	The City has a population of 55,000.
Correct	(generic):	The city has a population of 55,000.
Correct	(title):	The City of Smithville has a population of 55,000.
Correct	("city" omitted):	Smithville has a population of 55,000.
Correct	("City" used as proper name):	In the medieval period, the City was the full extent of London.

I propose to clarify the guide's intent here by changing the subsection title to "Instutitions, organizations, companies, etc.", and by borrowing from The Economist 's style guide (changes in purple):

• Full names of institutions, organizations, companies, etc. (United States Department of State are proper names and require capitals. Also treat as proper names a shorter but still specific form, consistently used in reliable sources (e.g., US State Department or the State Department, depending on context).
  • The word the at the start of a title is usually uncapitalized, but follow the institution's own usage (a degree from the University of Sydney; but researchers at The Ohio State University).
  • If you are not sure whether the English translation of a foreign name is exact or not, assume it is rough and use lower case (e.g., the French parliament).

• Generic words for institutions, organizations, companies, etc., and rough descriptions of them (university, college, hospital, high school) do not take capitals:

Incorrect	(generic):	The University offers programs in arts and sciences.
Correct	(generic):	The university offers programs in arts and sciences.
Correct	(title):	The University of Delhi offers programs in arts and sciences.

• Political or geographical units such as cities, towns, and countries follow the same rules: as proper names they require capitals; but as generic words and rough descriptions (sometimes best omitted for simplicity) they do not.

Incorrect	(generic):	The City has a population of 55,000.
Correct	(generic):	The city has a population of 55,000.
Correct	(title):	The City of Smithville has a population of 55,000.
Correct	("city" omitted):	Smithville has a population of 55,000.
Exception	("City" used as proper name for the City of London):	In the medieval period, the City was the full extent of London.

Comments? Ground Zero | t 12:38, 5 August 2015 (UTC) Amended Ground Zero | t 23:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I like it. I would also like it if it specifically included "company". Chris the speller ^yack 13:49, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good suggestion -- done. Ground Zero | t 13:52, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Needs work: I definitely agree with the If you are not sure whether the English translation of a foreign name is exact or not ...' addition. But I have several issues with this otherwise.
  1. The debate at Talk:Mid-Norfolk Railway is simply pointless. There is no actual question what to do in this case, on Wikipedia, under MOS: Do no capitalize "the trust" or "the society". There is no wiggle-room there. That said, if it takes some clarifications to stop editwarring of that sort, so be it, as long as it doesn't introduce additional problems.
  2. The Economist's like all news style guides is a poor choice of model. News style is only semi-formal writing, and it tends to show too much deference to the style demands of external entities and informal usage.
  3. As a case in point, this is too vague: 'or something pretty close to it, e.g., State Department'. This would permit capitalization of anything faintly similar to something's real name, and directly contradicts the 'not sure whether the English translation of a foreign name is exact or not' directive you want to add. Rather, we should use: 'or shorter but still specific form, consistently used in reliable sources (e.g., US State Department or the State Department, depending on context)'. Sentence might need to be reordered to flow better, e.g. 'Full names of institutions, organizations, companies, etc. (United States Department of State are proper names and require capitals. Also treat as proper names a shorter but still specific form, consistently used in reliable sources (e.g., US State Department or the State Department, depending on context).
  4. London is not magically special. The existing rule is written the way it is for a reason. The capitalized usage is used, consistently in reliable sources, to refer to a) city governments as entities distinct from cities as geographical locations, and b) officially incorporated jurisdictions with exact boundaries as opposed to wider metropolitan areas that are conventionally thought of as part of those cities in a more general sense. New York City in the conventional sense is not the same as the City of New York in either of those enumerated senses. If you think clarification is needed, this should probably work:
     Correct      ("City" used as proper name, e.g. for the City of London):     In the medieval period, the City was the full extent of London.
  5. While we're at it, we should fix something. This leads to a never-ending torrent of style warring: 'The word the at the start of a title is usually uncapitalized, but follow the institution's own usage'. This should be changed to 'Do not capitalize the at the start of a title, except as provided for at #Capitalization of "The".' (We can then drop the two university examples, too, which add nothing useful to the guideline.) We need this change because virtually every organization internally capitalizes everything to do with itself, rendering this MOS rule moot at worst, and subject to endless WP:WIKILAWYERing and WP:GAMING at best. Our extant entire section about The Hague, etc., is already adequate in this regard, but is being undermined by the 'follow the institution's own usage' wording which incorrectly tries to summarize it; MOS is directly contradicting itself.

 — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  21:09, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1 - I thought it was clear too, but you can see how one user just did not get it.

2, 3 - amended as suggested. Thanks. That is an improvement.

4 - actually, London is sui generis in this regard. "The City" is universally used to refer to the square mile of the ancient city, rather than the much bigger modern city, and is also used as a toponym to identify the UK's financial industry, like "Wall Street" in the US or "Bay Street" in Canada. Are there any other examples of where "the City" is used so widely in the capitalized form?

5 - there is always a danger of scope creep in these discussions. If you don't mind, I am going to start another discussion below on this issue -- it will make it easier to keep the issues separate.

Thanks, Ground Zero | t 23:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I will concede on London. I was arguing a point I don't actually want to make here. Momentary brainfart, arguing for the news style and op-ed/editorial practice in local journalism of referring to the publisher/writer's local metropolitan center as "the City" in context. While this is a legitimate usage in those contexts (and quite common; New York City, San Francisco, and many other cities are referred to this way), it's not an encyclopedic usage, because our context is global. So, I strike my objection.

We still need to address use of "the City" as shorthand for "the municipal government of the City of X"; that shorthand is very, very common, especially with regard to political, regulatory, and legal matters. It's wrong to write that, e.g., "the city pursued a noise ordinance enforcement action against the venue in 2014"; that means that the population of the city did it, which is clearly not the intended meaning. By contrast "the city reacted to the ordinance with a series of violent protests in 2014" refers to [a subset of] the population, not the city government (it might well have been against it!), and not the inanimate geographical area. We would do the same with "the State" vs. "the state" when referring to a US state government vs. a state's population or vs. a state as a geographic area, too, though we need not spell that out, since a City-as-legal-entity example gets the point across.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  04:47, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

While we're at it, we should fix something. This leads to a never-ending torrent of style warring: 'The word the at the start of a title is usually uncapitalized, but follow the institution's own usage'. This should be changed to 'Do not capitalize the at the start of a title, except as provided for at #Capitalization of "The".' (We can then drop the two university examples, too, which add nothing useful to the guideline.) We need this change because virtually every organization internally capitalizes everything to do with itself, rendering this MOS rule moot at worst, and subject to endless WP:WIKILAWYERing and WP:GAMING at best. Our extant entire section about The Hague, etc., is already adequate in this regard, but is being undermined by the 'follow the institution's own usage' wording which incorrectly tries to summarize it; MOS is directly contradicting itself.

 — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  21:09, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - I don't see how an organization's vanity capitalization of "the" is any different from capitalizing its whole name, or using camel case or some other affectation. Ground Zero | t 18:11, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right, and some further rationale: It should be about what independent, reliable, secondary sources tell us with regard to these specific topics, as with other content matters. This is really more of a WP:NPOV/WP:UNDUE issue (albeit a minor one) than a MOS issue; MOS shouldn't here be inserting a content "rule" to favor subject preferences, in a way that conflicts with WP:CORE. This actually closely mirrors arguments elsewhere that much of WP:IDENTITY needs to move into one of the content guidelines, for the same reasons, with MOS retaining only the style-related aspects of that material (e.g. how to avoid awkward use of pronouns). This will almost certainly happen as a result of the huge RfC at WP:VPPOL. It also closely mirrors another CORE-related change, to preferring, e.g. Deadmau5 and the like, despite MOS:TM's general "prohibition" of unique stylings, but only when the vast majority of reliable sources use that styling. These are directly parallel cases. It's "The Hague" and The New York Times, vs. the Hague and the New York Times because these are exceptions to normal orthography that the real world overwhelmingly tell us are exceptions, not because the city council of Den Haag or the board of directors of the NYT shake their fists about it. While our WP:MOSCAPS#Capitalization of "The" section doesn't go into this stuff, it's actually written already in a manner that's consistent with this policy interpretation, while the sloppy 'follow the institution's own usage' addition at issue here is not.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  04:28, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]