Talk:Circa (word)

Recommendations
This article makes some awfully specific recommendations. Where did they come from? Melchoir 09:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Eight years later that is a good question.
 * Probably in a hatnote this page should point to guidelines and discussion concerning the use of 'circa', 'c.', and so on, in English Wikipedia. Anyway, the body of this article should not simply give EN.wiki editorial guidelines, but absence of references for any but the inter-language sentence makes that seem likely to me.
 * --P64 (talk) 18:03, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

'''== Seperate Circa Article? ==

Perhaps the latin word "circa" should be seperate page?

I made this into a disambiguation page, linked the latin bit to wiktionary, and deleted the overly specific (and likely false) dating recommendations. Elcocinero 20:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC) '''

2007-02-1 Automated pywikipediabot message
--CopyToWiktionaryBot 03:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Redirect
'I have reverted the redirect to the DAB page. I think that this article should stay because among other things it is linked to by 682 other articles. If consensus is to make it a redirect, I will obviously go with that, but I will insist that whoever does the redirect also cleans up all the double redirects per standard protocol instead of leaving them all broken. --After Midnight 0001 03:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, you have a point there. I redirected it, but I shall leave it in place now.  --Xyzzyplugh 21:48, 21 April 2007 (UTC)'

"around"
This article is nicely written, since it details the historical use, and not just the word's origins and definition. Circa literally means "around" in American English; I remember vaguely that in British English "about" carries the same concept of following a curve or circle. I added "around" since "about" isn't often used in this sense by Americans. Also, there could be links to circumference, circumvention, and other cognates. --75.161.66.243 06:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what part of the U.S. you're from, but that is an amazingly wrong generalization. In New England, at least, we say "about" frequently, probably more often, but use both. (I suspect the British use both as well, knowing several). Keep your crazy generalizations about language to yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.153.63 (talk) 11:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I also take issue with connecting this term exclusively with historical dates. Is it really the case that this term is used only in this context? I know that in other languages (e.g. German) the term is used interchangeably with other words that mean approximately. 92.225.35.43 (talk) 16:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Relevance of picture?
What is the relevance of that picture measuring time of the day with circa? Further there is no note on it's own description. Elncid (talk) 05:31, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I do not see any relevance. I am removing it. If someone puts it back, go ahead but please justify.Miguel Andrade (talk) 14:38, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

"in approximately"
It doesn't mean "in approximately". It means "approximately". One wouldn't say "born in approximately 1350" (would one?), but "born approximately 1350" (or "born around 1350"). The "in" is wrong, in my opinion.

My Collins Concise (1982) defines it as "approximately at the time of"; my Websters (1994) as "about" and my Oxforx Concise (2002) as "approximately". None says "in". Si Trew (talk) 12:37, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

{{Inappropriate comment
 * action=collapse
 * comment=

Inferiority complex
In English speaking countries, there is plenty of examples of published papers in which "about" is used instead of "circa". I am wondering why you Americans in recent years (almost only on the web), tend to use (likely abuse and misuse) words that are "lent" from Latin language, is this perhaps a sympthom of an inferiority complex or of a subtly hidden fascist ideology? 151.45.215.15 (talk) 19:12, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Among white peoples, luckily, Portuguese, Russians, Greek and some other East Europe nations don't use it.NT 01:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikolas Tales (talk • contribs)

}}

Slovak?
Isn't this formation also used in the Slovak language? Shouldn't this be added to the list of European languages in which it is used? 2600:1004:B118:340:4058:4ECE:F7B9:644 (talk) 00:26, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Placement of the abbreviation?
Is it okay to place the abbreviation and period immediately before the year? For instance c.2021? &#x27A7; datumizer   &#9742;  03:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

No, there has to be a space after the period. (for example c. 2021) -- Doc Dimaus (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2021 (UTC)