Talk:de facto

This word is being deceptively rendered as if it is OK and acceptable when it is in fact or in reality a unlawful act.

The true meaning of the word means unlawful and definitely the opposite of de jure meaning lawfully constituted.

de facto means "by fact" or according to common practise, opposed to

de jure which means "by law" or by rule.

alt spelling
Following is copied from RFV notes.  PS. I should add that Australia seems to use both de facto and defacto, and does not differentiate between the noun and adjective sense. I even found one paragraph with both spellings.--Dmol 12:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * But wouldn't this then be an alternative spelling of only one of the senses? Or is it an Austrialian alternative for any of them? DAVilla 14:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Noun sense - a nonce, unusable outside of a too-specific context. --Connel MacKenzie 20:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)  I have added note that this is only used in Australia. I thought it was more wide-spread. Note that it is usually spelt without the space in the middle, both for a noun and for the adjective. Cites below, all from Australia ... he fathered children through his defacto, Bettina, while still married to his wife,  South Australian court papers. - Alderson drove with his brother-in-law, and others, including the victim, his defacto of some weeks,   and again crashed into the carport of his defacto’s house causing the carport roof to collapse, (Link is too long to work properly, on West Australian police website.)  He assaulted his defacto and the owner.  colluded in the production of fraudulent statements with his defacto and their daughter.   and a letter sent by the woman and her defacto demanding money (A US website, but quoting an Australian case).  but that she and her defacto had arrived in Ceduna on 22 August 1997.   A young mother and her defacto were jailed for killing eighteen months old Beanca  --Dmol 21:59, 27 October 2006 (UTC)  PS. I should add that Australia seems to use both de facto and defacto, and does not differentiate between the noun and adjective sense. I even found one paragraph with both spellings.--Dmol 12:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I had never heard of it before. Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 06:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

de facto
Basically definitions are vague or too specific. De facto president isn't special case of de facto, it's a standard case. "Actual" and "virtual" are massively inadequate too. Sometimes I think English is our most neglected major world language. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Basically I deleted it all and rewrote it as a single definition. < class="latinx" >Ƿidsiþ 05:25, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Lovely. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Abuse - Misuse - For non(not)-native English speakers
This Latin expression is being exagerately used out of its most appropriate and original context, that is Law and more precisely, History of Law ; as of 2006-2012, defacto and de facto are being used instead of "actual" or "actually" on some websites; please use either actual or actually instead of de facto in Wikipedia. Thanks. --Nikolas (talk) 09:55, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure this comment has any relevance, this page is for discussion the Wiktionary entry de facto, not the use of "de facto" on various Wikipedia pages. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I had never heard or read this word(s) before, you can find it only in the internet, and more specifically in en.Wikipedia, there are chances that it's a group of trolls doing this; I have plenty of books and magazines in English from mid-70s to nowadays, there is no "defacto-de facto" at all; the comments by Connel MacKenzie and Andrew massyn above apparently would support this. This part of the Wikimedia project could be used (and very likely it is) as a reference by non-English speakers, so I assume that my comments are in the right place --Nikolas (talk) 08:01, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * That's just your opinion, and you don't have the right to force that opinion on others. Even if you did have that right... you wouldn't be able to. Also, you're wrong, just wrong, isn't limited to a legal context anymore. You're somewhere between naive and just plain lying. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * It's only your opinion, feel free to troll the world, it doesn't scare me; time will put everything as it should be.--Nikolas (talk) 12:24, 20 October 2012 (UTC)