Talk:abbr.

abbr. vs. abbr
Is it necessary to have two pages abbr. and abbr? They are essentally the same word, but the content differs. A redirect maybe? Altenmann 17:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Lemmatised as . †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 02:20, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * WT:AEN would suggest the period-less form should be the lemma. That recommendation predates my edits to that content, though, and I'm not sure if there was a discussion earlier. If the status-quo is for the period form, then maybe the policy should be updated. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 04:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The New Penguin Dictionary of Abbreviations lists only undefined: (on page 5). A convention of which I was aware is that periods are included for truncated forms (like from ), whereas they are omitted for contracted forms (like    from ). †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 07:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC) [edited] †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 23:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Sounds good, I'll update WT:AEN. --Bequw → ¢ • τ 22:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * US "authorities": Garner's (2009) prefers periods but mentions that periods generally are on the decline. AP Stylebook (2002) seemed to often prefer them but deferred to WNW on specific cases it didn't cover. Chicago MoS (1993) advocated the move away from "fussy punctuation", including periods in abbreviations, but didn't seem to think the revolution had already occurred. Moreover, all of the examples showed periods, specifically, abbr.. DCDuring TALK 00:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Striking. The entries were never tagged, and the nominator doesn't seem to be doubting their accuracy. If anyone doubts that one or the other form exists, please tag and re-list it. —Ruakh TALK 21:45, 20 October 2010 (UTC)