Timeline for Is an apostrophe with a decade (e.g. the 1920’s) generally considered “incorrect”?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2021 at 18:56 | history | edited | Sven Yargs | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Spelled out "OUP" as "Oxford University Press" on first occurrence.
|
| Aug 13, 2020 at 1:01 | history | edited | herisson | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Minor spelling/sentence structure fixes
|
| May 12, 2019 at 21:26 | comment | added | Sven Yargs | @JanusBahsJacquet: Most of the editing I've done over the years has been for publishers that follow either Chicago or AP on most points of style—so my immediate impulse when I see historical decades rendered in the form 1960's or human age decades rendered in the form 60's is to get rid of the apostrophe. I have no idea what the Words into Type people were thinking when they decided to specify one style for historical decades and another for age decades, but I agree with you that the decision seems a bit unhinged. On most matters, Words into Type is a fairly reasonable style guide. | |
| May 12, 2019 at 19:41 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | I just reread this answer and noticed how utterly self-contradictory the Words into Type quote is. They would apparently recommend monstrosities like “He was in his 60s in the 1960’s. That’s just indefensible nonsense! | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 23:48 | comment | added | Sven Yargs | @JanusBahsJacquet: In the publishing industry, NYT doesn't have the reputation for bizarre waywardness that (for example) The New Yorker does—but it is certainly unpredictable when it diverges from standard AP style (which is not all that often). | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 22:20 | comment | added | Janus Bahs Jacquet | More evidence that the people who write the NYT style manual are batshit bonkers and not to be trusted! | |
| Sep 9, 2016 at 16:55 | history | edited | Sven Yargs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added a missing hyphen to a compound adjective ("spelled-out").
|
| May 11, 2016 at 19:26 | history | edited | Sven Yargs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed a singular/plural problem in the final paragraph (guide --> guides) and some other small errors.
|
| Jan 15, 2016 at 23:28 | vote | accept | treeface | ||
| Jan 15, 2016 at 23:28 | comment | added | treeface | No idea where this answer came from and why it's suddenly become so popular, but it's a great answer. I'm switching the accepted answer to this one. | |
| Jan 13, 2016 at 18:03 | history | edited | Sven Yargs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improved (I hope) the first sentence of my answer.
|
| Jan 13, 2016 at 7:41 | history | answered | Sven Yargs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |