Talk:Marcus Willis

Apostrophe after singular nouns ending with an "s"
Here are the likely others. Search Willis':-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/36759300

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3665875/Marcus-Willis-s-girlfriend-arrives-cheer-player-against-Roger-Federer.html  << the headline here "Marcus-Willis-s" has an extra s

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis/wimbledon-roger-federer-next-for-british-sensation-marcus-willis-after-amazing-victory-a7106566.html

Yes, I do accept that s can be added after the apostrophe to a word ending in s, but you need to accept that s does not need to be added. I wrote the sentence originally, so I choose no s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chelisuk (talk • contribs) 07:27, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

The point isn't that you wrote this or not, the point is that that majority of published style guides favour the use of the 's. It seems about 3 or 4 different people have already tried to edit this since I sent the list of style guides, and they all seem to agree. The use of the 's after a name ending is s is go avoid any ambiguity which can occur if a similar name exists without the S (for example, the names Carlo and Carlos - if you write Carlos' Band, then is the band that belongs to people named Carlo, or the guy named Carlos, or all guys names Carlos?). It's one of those things that many feel (and, it seems, based on comments from one editor, are taught) should always be in place regardless of what the last character of the singular noun should be. With very few exceptions.

Most of the style guides (if not all that I've read) state that if the 's is pronounced then it should be written. I certainly say "Willis's" - I pronounce the extra S, and thus agree that it should be written. Similarly with 'The Jones's house', "Jesus's sandals", "Strauss's music", etc.

Are you saying that you don't pronounce the additional S? Or do you imply the sound purely from the apostrophe but still pronounce it?

Another style guide of importance here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Possessives  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.112.150.11 (talk) 09:48, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

You have not shown that the majority of style guides favour your version. The Chicago manual is for american english, the eu guide is simplified english for non english speakers. Your Guardian reference says that both versions can be used. I have supplied three British references that use my version.

There have not been 3 or 4 people agreeing with you. There have been two mobile edits, suggesting a single person, likely causing mischief over an admittedly lame edit war. One of those edits was reversed by another person.

Carlos? Ambiguous? Everybody knows this is about Marcus Willis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Possessives states that both versions can be used which I have already accepted, but you have not. As such, I do not intend to continue with this discussion.

However, you can have the last word by writing to the BBC, Daily Mail & Independent to tell them they are wrong and should never write Willis'. When they have agreed with you, please print their reply on this Talk page. comment added by Chelisuk (talk • contribs) 17:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)