Content deleted Content added
FreeFlow99 (talk | contribs) |
Undid revision 1213740343 by 2409:40E0:1040:65E3:8000:0:0:0 (talk) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject Typography|importance=mid}}
}}
== Merge with Superior Letter ==
Line 18 ⟶ 19:
:Though "superior letters" doesn't include numbers, which are more commonly used in modern English writing, from what I can tell, all superior letters are correctly described as superscript letters. (The clashing intros above still haven't been harmonized.) Though there are some differences in traditional typography depending on use (e.g. math equation vs. prose ordinal) these differences are described in [[Subscript and superscript]]. The section [[Subscript and superscript#Superscripts that typically do not extend above the ascender line]] notes that this also happens for some non-letters, so it is weird to have an article only for the letters that do that, when letterness is not the distinguishing characteristic. [[Superior letter]] has only 5k of readable prose, [[Subscript and superscript]] only has 14k, so these will easily fit together without being too long, especially when redundant prose is eliminated. Right now it feels to me like each of these articles only tells two-thirds of the same story. -- [[User:Beland|Beland]] ([[User talk:Beland|talk]]) 05:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
::I agree. Superior Letters are a use case of Superscript, and should be merged into this article, leaving behind a redirect. Letters can be underscored before being superscripted, to give 'Superior Letters', eg in Microsoft Word 365. [[User:FreeFlow99|FreeFlow99]] ([[User talk:FreeFlow99|talk]]) 12:34, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
== Other Script Positions ==
Line 88 ⟶ 91:
* [https://grammarist.com/usage/naught-nought/ Nought is conventionally used in British English for the number zero...In both British English and American English, naught is used in nonmathematical contexts to mean nothing.] -- grammarist.com
Should we update the article accordingly? [[User:Ebony Jackson|Ebony Jackson]] ([[User talk:Ebony Jackson|talk]]) 21:26, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Naught / nawt is generally only used in Northern dialects of British English, and not used in professional contexts, therefore ought not to be used in Maths. [[User:FreeFlow99|FreeFlow99]] ([[User talk:FreeFlow99|talk]]) 12:14, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
== Missing information on Mathematical subscripts below the line ==
Line 97 ⟶ 102:
This is where people would come to understand the apparent contradictory notations.
[[User:FreeFlow99|FreeFlow99]] ([[User talk:FreeFlow99|talk]]) 11:46, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
== Hatnote violates [[WP:LINK]]? ==
Specifically the section "In articles, do not link to pages outside the article namespace, except in articles about Wikipedia itself (and even in that case with care – see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid)." [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:38D0:2870:5C75:EB8B:61D6:C614|2600:1700:38D0:2870:5C75:EB8B:61D6:C614]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:38D0:2870:5C75:EB8B:61D6:C614|talk]]) 07:41, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
| |||