Talk:International System of Units/Archives/08/2013

Capitalisation of Unit Names
Unit names that are peoples names are NOT capitalized, even thought the associated symbols are. For example, the capitalization in the sentence
 * "The unit of pressure, that pascal, named after Blaise Pascal, is denoted by the symbol "Pa".

The reference is here and can be found in context here.

Martinvl (talk) 21:31, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Mention US status in everyday life?
Should the article "International System of Units" mention that the use of SI units is secondary to United States customary units in the everyday life of ordinary people? If so, what would be a good source to cite for this fact? Jc3s5h (talk) 22:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is important to know the degree to which SI is used, thoiugh I am not convinced that one should mention Burma/Mynar and Liberia since there are indications that these countries are converting to the metric system. For this reason, one should mention that the US is the only industrialised country that does not use the metric system - this source has the quote "The United States is now the only industrialized country in the world that does not use the metric system as its predominant system of measurement". IMO, there is no need to get hung up over what is meant by "industrialized" - all reasonable definitions will give the same result. Martinvl (talk) 04:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I assume that this is not intended as a joke? Throughout most of Africa, practically all of Europe, and most of Asia and Oceania, SI units of distance, volume, mass, pressure etc are customary and increasingly becoming so. In many of those countries either the people don't even know about civilised units like stones per acre for pressure, or furlongs per fortnight for speed, or if they do, their children don't, and they tend to react with hilarity or disbelief when told. Aren't these people ordinary enough for Alaska or Kansas? I bet the population of China alone exceeds the entire world population of errr... ordinary folks using US (or imperial, if you prefer) units. Now, I have no objection to there being references in the article, in suitable contexts, to minority systems of units, but I would be very punctilious in requiring thoroughly supported and validated references for any claims made in their justification. JonRichfield (talk) 06:15, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The point of mentioning the situation in the US would be that because the US is an important economy and tourist destination, it would be useful to inform people from other countries that they cannot rely on ordinary Americans being proficient at using SI in ordinary daily life. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is important to discuss, although obviously not in such an oversimplified way. For example I think most everyone in the US is more-or-less equally familiar with a liter as a gallon, because they have bought 2-liter bottles of soda etc. As for what source has a good discussion, I dunno. --Steve (talk) 03:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - Please fix the question to match the section title, perhaps "in the everyday life of ordinary people in the United States." Until that is fixed, the answer is "no". From Metrication: "Today, the American public and much of the private business and industry still use U.S. customary units despite many years of informal or optional metrication." Joja  lozzo  02:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Further Comment There are still lots of road signs in miles in the UK and Ireland. I don't think that the statement is true yet.JSR (talk) 18:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * In the United Kingdom, yes, but the Republic of Ireland (RoI) switched to km/h in 2005. Distances in the RoI are being switched to kilometres as they reach the end of their useful lives. Martinvl (talk) 05:55, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - I can't help with references. I agree that "it is important to know the degree to which SI is used" around the world. But remember that articles shouldn't just reflect the present, but the history. So you could say "this country adopted SI units in 19**, but people still use than and this imperial units in everyday life". I oppose writing "ordinary people", it's derogatory. --NaBUru38 (talk) 15:56, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Would you be happy using the phrase "outside the worksplace" instead of "ordinary people" (with appropriate grammatical changes of course). Martinvl (talk) 16:34, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It's curious (well, interesting) how over time semantics change (which is quite natural): neutral terms become vulgar or derogatory, men's names become women's names and the like, driven by various factors such as a tendency to euphemism and political correctness. I support the use of a more specific term than "ordinary", or dropping it, as being essentially meaningless. The suggested phrase "in everyday life" carries the intended meaning far better, also more accurately than "outside the worksplace". — Quondum 18:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - No idea on references, but I'd recommend focusing on specific countries/areas to be more accurate. Remember that this is the English Wikipedia, so consider focusing on predominantly English-speaking countries/areas. You can't generalize to "ordinary people"; it'd be better to say something along the lines of "However, XX percentage of citizens in _________ prefer the U.S. customary measurements. In fact, the U.S. customary units are more prominent in the speedometers of ____-made cars, as well as on milestone markers and in maps." • Jesse V.(talk) 18:17, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, mention it. Here are a couple sources:, . Sources also provide good model for how to discuss the subject. -—Kvng 19:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Support - Assuming this proposal applies only to language about the USA. Ebikeguy (talk) 13:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)