Talk:Slash (punctuation)

Slashification

Why is the Solidus slashified? In the moment there are inconsistencies all around due to this change. Pjacobi 19:22, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

See Talk:Solidus. All links to solidus should be fixed now to point to slash (punctuation) Nohat 19:42, 2004 Jul 9 (UTC)

Why additional unrelated punctuation

There is a large column containing a plethora of Punctuation symbols , word dividers, general typography etc. Why is that there? DGerman (talk) 15:48, 28 May 2017

De Morgan backslash

@Dingolover6969: Greetings! Regarding this revert: Whether U+2216 ∖ or U+005C \ has a greater slant is an accident of the particular font being used to display them. On my screen, the difference in slant is very slight to the point where's it's not really noticeable. What I do notice is that U+2216 is taller than the forward slash / so it looks mismatched. If we need to convey to readers the exact appearance of what De Morgan wrote, we should use a picture, not HTML, or add a textual description. I took a look at the Google Books scan, and the backslash division character is actually extremely wide and short, and does not closely resemble either of these characters, nor any other I could find in Unicode. The only reason there is a U+2216 separate from the ASCII backslash is to have the semantic meaning of the mathematical set minus operator, but that is not the meaning intended by De Morgan. Screenreaders, if they recognize this character at all, will probably read "set minus" or something similar out loud, which is incorrect in context, and unhelpful to readers who don't have an advanced understanding of mathematics. For these reasons, I would prefer to use U+005C in this article in the absence of a picture. -- Beland (talk) 03:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Well, you're right on all counts, there — although I had hoped that the short-wide appearance of U+2216 ∖ SET MINUS would be ubiquitous, given that the reference glyph in https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2200.pdf is like that. (I also think it's possible that U+2216 really is the same character as the line in this document, although they presumably wouldn't have called it a set minus, if the line was created in the same way as they would create the later set minus symbols, eg with the same piece of metal type. But this is an intractable question.) No further complaints from me; a U+005C backslash is close enough. Dingolover6969 (talk) 03:52, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Cool, I just switched the article back to U+005C. -- Beland (talk) 03:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

" ̷" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect ̷ has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 13 § ̷ until a consensus is reached. Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:37, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 8 July 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. I'd call this a SNOW move; even the nominator no longer supports the proposal. (closed by non-admin page mover) 1isall (talk | contribs) 04:55, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

---

• Slash (punctuation) → Slash
• Slash → Slash (disambiguation)Slash (disambiguation)

– Surely slash is PTOPIC for "slash", of the pages named slash we have. Dingolover6969 (talk) 09:40, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. Is the punctuation symbol the primary topic? If it is, that isn't the only factor to consider. Of the many meanings of the word, it is likely the most common usage amongst the subjects on the disambiguation page, but given how many meanings the word has, it is entirely possible that it is only the intended meaning in a minority of such cases. And I'd suspect that 'slash' as a verb, meaning 'a sweeping cut' or similar is actually the most common usage of the word in most contexts. We don't have an article on that, since Wikipedia isn't a dictionary, but that doesn't mean that people won't be searching for it. 'Slash (punctuation)' is concise and unambiguous. I can't see any benefit in the move. AndyTheGrump (talk) 10:47, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

  Oppose per Andy's analysis. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:42, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. Slash (musician) gets 3x the page views as the punctuation. And there is a very long tail of other entities known by that name. older ≠ wiser 11:39, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
• Support Pure pageviews is not how primary topics are determined. The punctuation mark has tremendously more longterm significance than anything else on the DAB page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:15, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

This isn't a discussion about the relative significance of topics, long-term or otherwise, it's about the best way to entitle and disambiguate articles. We make our choices for the benefit of readers, who are unlikely to care about our opinions regarding what we think they ought to be looking for. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:23, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

It's not "our opinion", it's the objectively most significant thing that could be primary topic. Which isn't a popularity contest. Popularity contests tend to favor singers. Wikipedia isn't a directory of singers, it's a general knowledge encyclopedia. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:35, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

This isn't a debate about general knowledge. Its a discussion about how we best serve our readers. If their more common reason for looking at Wikipedia is to increase their knowledge about a singer, rather than a punctuation mark, we should assist them by giving articles titles which minimise the risk of ending up at the wrong page. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

the objectively most significant thing?!? Seriously? by what criteria. Seems the fact that this is even being discussed suggests it otherwise. older ≠ wiser 13:51, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Even if 'objective significance' was something you could actually determine, it is an entirely inappropriate criteria. Titles and redirects are there to help readers find what they want, not what we think they ought to be reading. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:29, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose as nominator First of all, Slash_(musician) is the most common outgoing link on the current dab (wikinav). Secondly, I now think the dab lede should just be rewritten to mention the most commonplace slashes (Wiktionary: "A slashing action or motion: a swift, broad cutting stroke, especially one made with an edged weapon or whip" or "A mark made by slashing" or "Something resembling such a mark"), which we don't have a page on but which explain the rest of the dab page, and then move the three most central slashing pages up top (Slash_(musician), slash_(punctuation), and slashing_(crime)). I think that would be the most helpful way to arrange things. Dingolover6969 (talk) 14:53, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

  If someone has already supported it, you are not allowed to oppose. That is a withdrawal WP:SUPERVOTE. You are best off waiting for the discussion to run its course one way or the other. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:11, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Anyone is allowed to change their mind during a discussion. And explain why. There is no supervote involved, since Dingolover6969 isn't closing the discussion. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:15, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Right. I am familiar with the principle that as the nominator I don't have more sway over the discussion than any other editor; just wanted to make it clear that, as an editor weighing in, I had changed my mind since the nomination :) Dingolover6969 (talk) 14:09, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose per above. 162 etc. (talk) 16:30, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose for reasons stated above. The most common name for the symbol is "/" and that does go to this page, at least when typed into the search box. Spitzak (talk) 18:24, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose Nominator has withdrawn support, and the only remining support is an unsupported opinion about "longterm significance". We have many disambiguated targets for "slash" and it's not clear that any of them should be the primary topic per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Meters (talk) 18:39, 8 July 2026 (UTC)
• Oppose per usage of the musician and long-term significance of the likes of the crime etc. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:39, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.