Talk:Spelling of disc

Solid state drives
Are they solid state disks or discs? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.127.6.125 (talk) 07:16, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You took the words right out of my mouth. --Trakon (talk) 05:11, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * They don't contain any disks (or discs), so technically they're neither -- just "drives". 79.183.69.152 (talk) 12:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Good point (no disks, just drives), which is interesting because probably the only reason the word "drive" was applied to memory devices to begin with (such as hard drives) was that they contained rotating parts. Which means that the coining of the term "flash drive" is a probable instance of the natural development of a misnomer. Not that that means that the vocabulary will be revised—just that it "suggests a meaning that is known to be wrong". Quercus solaris (talk) 20:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. The spelling differences are the topic of the article, which means that the preference for choosing a variant isn't an issue here. Dekimasu よ! 06:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC) Disc or disk (spelling) → disc — spelling difference in title is unnecessary. The article should go by the more common "disc" spelling. —Reginmund 06:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

clarification
in his article it talks about a disc jockey beign one of records, yet in the article on Disk Jockeys it says disc is for CDs and disk is for records... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.171.199.63 (talk) 10:36, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

This Wiki is
Totally pointless! What kind of encylopaedia will you ever find this in??? Stop littering Wikipedia with rubbish.

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.


 * Support: The spelling difference in the title is unnecessary. Reginmund 06:29, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Disc or disk (spelling) and Disc or disk are different articles at present, and Disc redirects to the latter of these. So this appears to be a merge request, and should be relisted as a merge (or relisted as a simple move if the listing is in error). Andrewa 07:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The spelling difference in the title is the subject of the article. It's not just about "the spelling of 'disc' (sometimes known as 'disk'", but rather why the word is sometimes spelled "disc" and other times "disk". --zenohockey 19:09, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support, as per Reginmund. – Axman (☏) 15:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

I thought Wikipedia used just one variant spelling of words in titles? That was my understanding anyway. – Axman (☏) 15:18, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. Says who? - is this a case of the thought police coming along?

Evidence that 'disk' was the earlier English spelling
The article states that 'disk' arrived in the 17th Century and 'disc' in the eigtheenth. Is there any more detailed evidence of this? I have found other references stating that *both* spellings arrived in the 17th Century from the French 'disque' (rather than from a direct germanic link) but nothing more specific than that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.62.109.164 (talk) 09:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * What Germanic link? In German it is `Scheibe'.
 * --193.171.200.107 (talk) 09:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Grow up people - there are two spellings, there are few or no rules to differentiate them (it's not a case of UK and USA spellings, or new and old spellings) - this is a worthwhile article, to at least point out that both are valid and that care is needed.


 * Wiktionary has it that `disc' is English and 'disk' is American.
 * --193.171.200.107 (talk) 09:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Not really true at all, or at best a gross simplification. As a 56-year-old who grew up in Britain but had many contacts with American usage over the years and who later immigrated to the U.S. I can say without hesitation that it is much more complicated than one being a preferred British spelling and the other the preferred American spelling.  This isn't anywhere near so simple as "color" vs. "colour" or "center" vs. "centre."  In my experience, when talking about a phonograph record then "disc" is the most common spelling in both countries, perhaps more prevalent in Britain, but "disk" has also been quite widely used in America.  For example, look at many of the promotional records sent out to radio stations in the U.S. over the years and you'll see some stamped as "disc jockey copy" and others as "disk jockey copy," sometimes at the preference of the company and sometimes changing with the same company over time (e.g. some 1940's and early 1950's MGM promotional records used "disk" while from the late 1950's onward "disc" became the norm).
 * The digital CD also uses "disc" far more often in both countries since that is the spelling which Sony and Philips used in their original marketing: "Compact Disc." That was, perhaps, influenced by the fact that the original development of the CD was for audio and since phonograph records most commonly used the "disc" spelling by that time there was a logical association for keeping the predominant spelling.
 * With computers it's far less clear-cut. Look at various references from the 1950's/1960's and both spellings are quite widespread, including in American publications.  Over the years, "disk" seems to have become the clear winner in both the U.S. and the U.K., especially since the advent and gradual adoption of the floppy diskette in the early 1970's, since "discette" would have looked awkward, so even though the term "diskette" came into use some years after the first computer-related use of disc/disk, it undoubtedly had an influence on the spelling of the latter.  But I remember that even into the 1980's there were some British publications which happily used "diskette" when talking about floppies, but retained "disc" for other types of disk/disc drive.  So that is perhaps one area where for one rather short period of time it could be argued there was a British preference (but only by some) for "disc" over "disk" in computer usage.   It's similar to the "-ize" vs. "-ise" endings of words - Some people regard the former as being purely American, but that is far from the case.
 * When it comes to disk/disc in general use, I don't believe there is anywhere near so much agreement between users in either country as to the predominant spelling, with both being found quite commonly.  72.204.13.203 (talk) 04:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Meaningless gibberish removed
Had to take out this sentence from the first paragraph - "Disc with a hard 'c' is for software. Disk with a hard 'k' is for hardware related disks."

No idea what kind of misbegotten assumption this was based on, but it makes zero sense. Both "discs" and "disks" are hardware devices that can be used to store software. 82.80.137.100 (talk) 01:54, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Transliteration of "kappa"
"'...(note that kappa in Greek is usually transliterated by c rather than k)'"

Is it true that kappa is typically transliterated as a "c"? The information at the article "kappa" has a slightly different take. Zujua (talk) 11:39, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

It was true, once. Nowadays tis not as much, but for the many, many words and names that have ingrained C spellings. Firejuggler86 (talk) 21:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

I do not think that word means what you think it means.
How on Equestria is "it'd better be about CDs, DVDs, or eyeballs if it's spelled with a 'c'" a mnemonic?

A mnemonic is not what you're trying to remember; it's a clever way of storing information to make it easier to recall. The "mnemonic" here is just a list of things to remember, without any rhyme or reason (both figuratively and literally speaking) to aid in recognition or recall. TricksterWolf (talk) 18:45, 31 December 2014 (UTC)


 * But how is it even an aid? And where is the evidence that anyone uses it? I'm going to remove it. Adpete (talk) 00:46, 22 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi. I missed the posting of the 2014 comment at the time. The word means exactly what I think it means and exactly what you said (we agree): "a clever way of storing information to make it easier to recall." The phrase is a mnemonic because it's much easier to remember "it'd better be about CDs, DVDs, or eyeballs if it's spelled with a 'c'" than it is to remember all of the components of "For ophthalmologic terms, use disc (eg, optic disc); for other anatomical terms, use disk (eg, lumbar disk). In discussions related to computers, use disk (eg, floppy disk, disk drive, diskette) (exceptions: compact disc, videodisc)." As the article on mnemonics says, a mnemonic device "is any learning technique that aids information retention. Mnemonics aim to translate information into a form that the brain can retain better than its original form.... such as ... short poems, acronyms, or memorable phrases." Nota bene the latter; emphasis mine. A mnemonic doesn't have to be a rhyme, poem, acrostic, or acronym. A memorable phrase is a mnemonic, too. CDs, DVDs, and eyeballs are all about looking at things and watching things, and there's only 3 list items to remember instead of 6 to 10, depending on how you count the things mentioned in the AMA quote. You guys are talking about this with a tone kind of like "Geez, how could you think X?"—but to me, typing out the explanation, it feels like, "Isn't this already obvious without an explanation?" I think we're even, in terms of incredulity. As for who uses it, well, if you edit documents in the health care field and are charged with knowing AMA style, then you eventually will likely have occasion to broach the subject. If you never do such editing, then no, you will not come across it. Quercus solaris (talk) 00:49, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * You've (sort of) answered my first question, but haven't answered my second: where is the evidence that anyone uses it? Without evidence (i.e. a reference), it should be removed. Adpete (talk) 06:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * @TricksterWolf hii 2409:4051:208D:5C96:0:0:EF8:40A4 (talk) 08:23, 23 February 2022 (UTC)