Editing Talk:2132: Percentage Styles

<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->

The only proper style for Britain and the US is ‘%65’. [[User:Aasasd|Aasasd]] ([[User talk:Aasasd|talk]]) 16:20, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
:O RLY? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.52|108.162.241.52]] 16:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

:: Yes. You don't write ‘65$’, do you? British/US standards should be followed properly and consistently. [[User:Aasasd|Aasasd]] ([[User talk:Aasasd|talk]]) 17:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

::: If there is any consistency, it is that unit follows numbers. 3', 2 m, 40 lbs, 2 l, and so on. Currency is the exception. --[[User:Klausok|Klausok]] ([[User talk:Klausok|talk]]) 10:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

::I've definitely seen %NN stated by style guides, but I almost never see anybody using it, because reading it aloud encourages saying it as "percent sixty-five". Oddly, people seem to have no trouble remembering to write $65 instead of 65$, despite the same "dollars sixty-five" vs "sixty-five dollars" vocalization issue. Perhaps it's because we often see things like $65.95 but %65.95 is used less often? Writing 65.95% is potentially ambiguous depending on how it's read out loud: "sixty-five point ninety-five percent" could definitely be misinterpreted very easily. 65.95$ is definitely not ideal, & $65.95¢ is somehow even worse. How about 65$.95¢?  ''';S''' 
::[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 17:08, 3 April 2019 (UTC) 
:::At https://ask.metafilter.com/7894/Is-the-form-of-100-instead-of-100-a-different-language-useage discussers encountered %NN but eventually decided it was a mistake spread by low literacy.  More common is "NNpc". [[Special:Contributions/172.69.63.47|172.69.63.47]] 20:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)


----
There's also 65/100, 65:100, <math>\textstyle\frac{65}{100}</math>, sixtyfive-hundreth, 0.65, and point sixty-five. Benny. 16:41, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

There's also 650‰ [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.41|172.69.33.41]] 16:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)  
:Wouldn't that be 650 hundredths? I've seen "and sixty-five ‰" a cheque before. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 17:08, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
::"650‰" is "650 per mille (per thousand)", and is precisely the same as "65%". [[User:RandalSchwartz|RandalSchwartz]] ([[User talk:RandalSchwartz|talk]]) 19:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Even lower than 65 per¢ should be 65 per penny. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 20:00, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

====
BTW, I can imagine the transcript of this one posing some challenge for screen readers. [[User:Aasasd|Aasasd]] ([[User talk:Aasasd|talk]]) 17:01, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
\´65
: On a second thought, I can also imagine people who use screen readers never hearing any difference between the writing styles listed in the comic. [[User:Aasasd|Aasasd]] ([[User talk:Aasasd|talk]]) 17:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

This may have come up because last Friday the A.P. Stylebook announced their changes for 2019, including a change to percent. https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2019/ap-says-the-percentage-sign-now-ok-when-used-with-a-numeral-thats-shift5/

== Missing ==

Compile here the missing styles:

* %65
* 65 pc, 65 pct, 65 pct., 65 cent
* sixty-five percent; sixty-five per cent; sixty-five per ¢
* sixty-five per hundred; 65 for every 100
* 65% percent; 65% per cent; 65% per ¢
* 65/100; 65÷100; 65:100; 65 x 1/100
* 65*10^-2; 65×10⁻²; 65×10^-2; 65*10⁻²; 6.5e-1
* 0.65; 0,65
* 65 per penny (wasn't this a joke?)
* almost 2/3rds
* 65¢^-1; 65¢⁻¹
* 65 pennies on the dollar; 65 cents on the dollar
* 13/20
* \SI{65}{\per\cent}
* LXV/C (Like the ancient Romans would write.)

[[Special:Contributions/162.158.79.191|162.158.79.191]] 19:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

:Also 6.5e-1. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 23:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

:Also simply 'cent,' which is used in property tax assessment in California. It's a pretty sneaky way to make the tax seem really small. --

Yeah, Randall dropped the ball on this one. I am disappoint. At the very least there should have been an entry where "per" was written as "/". Also since the cent sign is not on most keyboards but the dollar sign is, I would have expected "6500/$". Also, google agrees: https://www.google.com/search?q=6500%2F%24+in+cent^-1 :p [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.187|141.101.96.187]] 07:30, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I was waiting for 650‰ or even 6500‱. Maybe next time. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 23:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

What about 65/¢ or even sixty-five/¢? (sorry, this wiki doesn't use math markup ''at all'', so not even comments can contain it). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.37|172.68.50.37]] 10:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

= = Celtic = =
I suggest you remove the reference to "celtic". In modern English it's rarely pronounced "seltic" except in the names of a couple of sports teams. There is a substantial discussion of this online - just Google "pronounce celtic". Irish people are Celtic and  almost zero Irish say "seltic" - except in relation to Glasgow Celtic  football club. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.38.190|162.158.38.190]] 08:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
: oops!  I figured because I learned Latin and was the only person who said 'keltic' when I saw a sports team, that I was wrong! [[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.58|162.158.78.58]] 11:22, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
}][{4³²1

== Narrow non-breaking space missing ==
Randall disappoints tbh. The omly proper way would be 65&#8239;%. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.160|172.68.50.160]] 22:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
:In English, no. In German, yes. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.135|172.68.50.135]] 13:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

== C in Latin ==

“In Classical Latin, "C" is always pronounced like "K".” – that’s wrong. It depends on the school (and maybe also the country). Where I learned Latin, most ''c'' were pronounced like the German ''z'' (for example in Caesar). --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 13:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
: That's not classical Latin - that's vulgar Latin. The classical Latin C derived from the Greek gamma, and is pronounced like 'K' - you can even see the derivation in the shape of the letter. You are conflating vulgar with classical here. [[User:Hyperum|Hyperum]] ([[User talk:Hyperum|talk]]) 04:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

{{reply to|108.162.241.52}} IP 108.162.241.52, please do not """"correct"""" the pronunciation of kaiser (Caesar) to 'keezer' again. That isn't how Latin is pronounced. [[User:Hyperum|Hyperum]] ([[User talk:Hyperum|talk]]) 04:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

== centum vs. cent vs. penny ==

In this context, "cent" is an abbreviation for the Latin word "centum", meaning 100. In English, the word "cent" means 1/100th of a dollar, which is one of the three official versions of the currency of the United States. They are: dollars, dimes, and cents. Substituting cent (currency) for cent (abbreviation for "centum") is a malapropism. But "penny" refers to British currency, not American. The penny (plural:pence) was 1/240 of a pound until decimalization in the 1970s, and 1/100 of a pound thereafter. Americans often refer to a one-cent coin as a "penny", but this is just a nickname, not the actual name of the coin or the value of the coin. The name of the coin is one cent. Its value is 1 cent, which equals 1/10 of a dime, or 1/100 of a dollar. Changing centum --> cent--> penny would be a double malapropism.

This begs the question, how far can we push beyond the boundaries of reason? Indeed, that is the entire spirit of Randall's premise here. Why stop with a double malapropism? We could use centum --> cent --> scent. Heck, why not centum --> cent --> penny --> penne --> macaroni --> Marconi --> Tesla. Where do we stop? Common sense tells me I'm way over the line. But common cents tell me nothing.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.79|162.158.107.79]] 14:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
:My sarcasm detector has finally broke. [[User:Netherin5|“That Guy from the Netherlands”]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 14:32, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 \´65
 : On a second thought, I can also imagine people who use screen readers never hearing any difference between the writing styles listed in the comic. [[User:Aasasd|Aasasd]] ([[User talk:Aasasd|talk]]) 17:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
-:: [ID: A vertical scale titled "Percentage styles", with the label "Best" at the top of the scale. There are five markings, each with a different way to write "65%".]
-:: [The first marking is near the top. It is labeled with the numeral "65" and the percent sign.]
-:: [The second marking is just below, and labeled with the numeral "65" and the word "percent".]
-:: [The third marking is farther down the scale, at about a quarter from the top. It is labeled with the numeral "65", the word "per", and the word "cent".]
-:: [The fourth marking is at the middle of the scale. It is labeled with the words "sixty-five" followed by the percent sign.]
-:: [The lowest marking at the bottom of the scale is labeled with the numeral "65", the word "per", and the cent currency symbol.] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.233.173|172.70.233.173]] 04:57, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
 This may have come up because last Friday the A.P. Stylebook announced their changes for 2019, including a change to percent. https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2019/ap-says-the-percentage-sign-now-ok-when-used-with-a-numeral-thats-shift5/
@@ Line 89: / Line 82: @@
 This begs the question, how far can we push beyond the boundaries of reason? Indeed, that is the entire spirit of Randall's premise here. Why stop with a double malapropism? We could use centum --> cent --> scent. Heck, why not centum --> cent --> penny --> penne --> macaroni --> Marconi --> Tesla. Where do we stop? Common sense tells me I'm way over the line. But common cents tell me nothing.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.79|162.158.107.79]] 14:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 :My sarcasm detector has finally broke. [[User:Netherin5|“That Guy from the Netherlands”]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 14:32, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
-:There may be an infinite malapropism chain as well (an example of extending the above 6× malapropism to 15×: … → Tesla → Edison<ref group="*">For the next step: 1 edison is 100 A</ref> → ampere → volt → Volta → Don → John → Jones → joins → joint → joined → …), using names of physicists, units, rivers, verbs and given names. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.171|172.68.51.171]] 13:55, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
-<references group="*"/>