Talk:Ampersand

History and Time Period
The History section of the main article states that the ampersand can be traced back to the 1st century AD, yet the side bar shows the time period as ~100 to present. 101 was the start of the second century, and I doubt the intention was to say that ampersand usage started at exactly 100 AD. I imagine one place or the other needs to be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FakeAlvinT (talk • contribs) 13:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Image
I've replaced the JPG image (ew) with one that is hopefully better, in Adobe Garamond Pro. The "italic" ampersand is a bit different from the old image, though, so I worry that this is incorrect. I can replace it with one in a different typeface if this is the case. neckro 07:31, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I wish you would use a different typeface. The "italic" ampersand is really not typical. -- Dominus 12:40, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Usage
>Although common in handwriting before typewriters came into widespread use, the ampersand has lost popularity in recent years, and it has become standard in most contexts to write out the word "and."

It is certainly more often used in logotypes than in flowing prose, but this seems to suggest that it is no longer used at all. If someone can think of a way to write this, I'd appreciate it. --Mdwyer 16:32, 2005 August 31 (UTC)


 * "Use of the ampersand & and": a discussion on Blogdorf about the use of the ampersand.
 * It might well be usefull to expand on when and where the use of & is tolerated in formal use such as academic works and essays — Preceding unsigned comment added by Empty hat (talk • contribs) 03:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Stenographic characteristics of Tironian et
It reads, "However, while the ampersand was in origin a common ligature in everyday script, the Tironian et was part of a highly specialised stenographic shorthand," in "History" section of the current revision referring to. I noticed, however, that the referred page does not say that the Tironian et is a stenographic shorthand, but merely that the Roman ampersand and the Tironian et are different forms of shorthand which are developed independently.

Though I know that Tironian notes are developed for stenographic purposes and the description would be correct, I think it is better to replace the reference with another page or book that mentions about stenographic characteristics of the Tironian et.

I am now trying to translate this article for Japanese Wikipedia. I will omit the description in the translated article for the moment. ObladiOblada (talk) 04:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

song
i do not believe that there is a single mention of the song by tally hall which shares the same name, which i see to be a huge lack with this website and because of it wikipedia should clearly just be removed and banned from all internet browsings 2601:447:CA00:9950:E1C1:6C52:B310:9035 (talk) 02:54, 23 July 2023 (UTC)


 * It's on Ampersand (disambiguation) which is linked from this page. Spitzak (talk) 03:44, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Or on & (disambiguation). --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 07:36, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * thats a different topic altogether and if you wanted to look at that you could soooo like these people might not know that because certainly did not but now i will look into it 2600:1700:99B0:1F90:E594:3AAC:6D41:F223 (talk) 03:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I think I see what you had in mind to I replaced the combined hatnote into two distinct ones
 * So somebody who types "ampersand" looking for the song should able to see that it is "another use". --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * So somebody who types "ampersand" looking for the song should able to see that it is "another use". --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * So somebody who types "ampersand" looking for the song should able to see that it is "another use". --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)