# Talk:Akzidenz-Grotesk

Information used was from the book The Elements of Typographic Style by Robert Bringhurst, The Complete Manual of Typography by James Fellici and Berthold Fonts

Just wondering why it's called Accidents Grotesque? --24.249.108.133 19:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
It is Akzidenz, not Accidents, though Accidenz is found in earlier versions. It means a jobbing" sans-serif. Job printing includes the less glamorous stuff: forms, tickets, cards. THre is not a direct exact german to English translation. This is a nice link if you are still curious: http://typophile.com/node/17643
CApitol3 19:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

What is this "Akzidenz Grotesk" movie that the ticket shown is for? I can find no info on the web. Presumably it isn't just the youtube short, is it? Jonathan Badger

The ticket belongs here, if anywhere. It is a parody of the Helvetica movie. CApitol3 20:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Chris Marshall states definitely that Transport is a "modification" of this font - [1] .  Is he a sufficiently reliable source for us to put this in the article?  Tevildo 23:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Chris has withdrawn the claim. Tevildo (talk) 08:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it is one line to long, I know it is picky but Helvetica has its own page. We should delete "Miedinger sought to refine the typeface making it more even and unified". It's irrelevant. 
Just a thought. Day Barnes (talk) 03:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Akzidenz Grotesk is a progenitor of Helvetica, a strong relationship exists between the subject of this article and the typeface Helvetica. We have room for this line, and quite a few more if pertinent. CApitol3 (talk) 19:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Understood and the line before the sentence in question already states Helvetica's lineage. All i'm suggesting is that the we don't need Miedinger's reasoning, which should, and already is covered on the Helvetica entry. I'm certainly not going to take this any further, i don't like editing other people's entries. I just thought I had a valid point that Helvetica's inspiration is already stated. Job done, move on, we don't state Frutiger's or Baum's rational for Univers and Folio. Just because it is true and we have space isn't reason enough, it's whether it belongs. Examine your heart, i think you know i've made a wonderful and valid point, plus i don't like the way the sentence steals Akzidenz's thunder. Day Barnes (talk) 01:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Around the turn of the millennium the corporate typeface of the investment bank Credit Suisse First Boston was Akzidenz-Grotesk. JDAWiseman (talk) 10:30, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

"The Pro family offers extended language support for Central European, Baltic and Turkish as well as Welsh, archaic Danish and Esperanto". I am a Dane and I am not sure what archaic Danish is. Of course Dansih has evovlved a lot through the last 1000 years, but we have not deleted some strange letters in that time. Danish 500 years ago was written with the same letters as today, except that a few has been added, most lately Å in 1948. About 150 years ago we had both Ø and Ö but both letters are accessible in normal western European code pages. And it is probably not runes that are meant by Archaic Danish? I assume Polish language has had trouble with a certain character, l with a slash, but I am surprised that Esperanto should suffer this?Ditlev Petersen (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Good find. My guess (and it's just a guess) is that this list of languages is created automatically by checking characters against a list by the font generation software. So the software has been programmed to 'report' what languages the font supports and it announces archaic Danish is one of them. Why anyone would bother to set this up I don't know... Some typefaces such as Junicode do have specific settings for unusual languages like medieval Latin, but that's a font intended for academics. But it's irrelevant for 99% of readers, and I've cut the whole section.  Blythwood (talk) 18:28, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Akzidenz-Grotesk. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.typophile.com/node/17643
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:21, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Akzidenz-Grotesk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060518120415/http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/24218.html to http://www.creativepro.com/story/news/24218.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100812094946/http://www.rockriver.redcross.org/media/Brand_Standards.pdf to http://www.rockriver.redcross.org/media/Brand_Standards.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120806041920/http://www.fonts.com/font/berthold/akzidenz-grotesk-next to http://www.fonts.com/font/berthold/akzidenz-grotesk-next
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110814192057/http://www.fonts.com/font/berthold/akzidenz-grotesk/ to http://www.fonts.com/font/berthold/akzidenz-grotesk
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Please please please, consider these two excellent articles by Indra Kupferschmid. I'm not an expert and will try to edit the main article.
Part 1 http://kupferschrift.de/cms/2012/04/ag/
Part 2 http://kupferschrift.de/cms/2017/10/ag-2/
--216.221.58.252 (talk) 01:12, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Hey, not sure what you mean here–we do cite those articles and they've been included as a source in the article for over a year now. What about Professor Kupferschmid's work do you feel is not reflected in the article? (Just to explain, I've moved your comments down to keep this talk page in chronological order.) Blythwood (talk) 17:09, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Akzidenz-Grotesk/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 20:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
I find this interesting and well-written at first glance. Will post my comments soon. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 20:32, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Sainsf, thanks and will watch this page. Blythwood (talk) 20:55, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
Lead
No need for a ref in the infobox if the fact is cited in the main text
Per WP:MOSLEAD, the lead should be longer and proportionate to the article length, touching upon all major aspects of the article. Presently I don't see all the important points (say the names of all the versions) summarized well in the lead. This needs a good rewrite.
Akzidenz indicates its intended use ... for sans-serif typefaces at the time. This is quite an important detail, especially as the name might look strange to many readers. This should not be mentioned just in the lead.
Resolved, I hope, although I don't think the names of all the versions could be practically fitted into the lead. I've added an etymology section.
Design characteristics
Link 'san-serif' on first mention in the article (excluding the lead)
Done
You can link 'German'
Done
Inline citation needed for the last line of the 3rd para
I couldn't find an obvious single citation for this, but effectively it's just a preview of sections 7-8, especially 8.2: that a lot of people have created digital fonts based on Akzidenz-Grotesk since it's popular and public domain. I've put "as discussed below" to make that clear.
As is normal in typefaces cut during the metal type period When exactly was this period?
Rephrased. What I meant was that this is standard in all manufacture of metal type (which was done from Gutenberg up to, say, the 1950s, with use of metal type continuing into the 1980s or so without significant further product development). But as that's a mouthful I've simply linked to metal type.
History
Probably link 'foundries'?
Done
Berthold literature Berthold is not mentioned since the lead. It should be mentioned by the full name on first mention in the main text.
More of an intro of who they are added. The only major thing that needs fixing now is the intro, which I'm drafting at the moment.
Recent research by Eckehart Schumacher-Gebler, Indra Kupferschmid and Dan Reynolds Who are these people? Try adding their professions (Same for Reynolds and Florian Hardwig, Seeman's Handbuch der Schriftarten)
Professor Indra Kupferschmid, who has researched the early use of sans-serifs in Germany Per the above point this should actually go into the first mention. Actually take the full name on first mention and introduce the person.. take just the last name in later mentions.
I've described all of them as 'historians', which I think is an acceptable basic summary, although they have different primary professions: Schumacher-Gebler is primarily a printer, Kupferschmid a professor of graphic design and Reynolds a font designer with a doctorate in history (specifically of font design). None have Wikipedia articles, although Kupferschmid has one on the German-language Wikipedia, which I've linked to.
shadowed sans-serif ('Schattierte Grotesk') Template:lang-de could be of good use here and wherever we have German terms.
Fixed: all quotes in German now templated.
"Accidenz-Gothisch" blackletter Duplicate link. Also 'Bauer foundry of Frankfurt'
Fixed
confusion may have occurred with fonts held by Berthold that the Theinhardt foundry licensed Not a problem but is a long list of refs that necessary here? Ref. 19 is actually repeated
Yeah, need to think about what citations are right here. Essentially, a lot of writers (understandably) copied this information which turned out to be false, and you see it on a lot of websites and books. So I wanted to really throw in every relevant citation I could here in case I dropped dead and some well-meaning person reading the article decided it needed to be "fixed" to correct the "mistake". I've now rephrased the section to make it a bit clearer, too.
Mid-twentieth-century use
From the name of the section, does it not belong in 'History' since it is in the past?
Good point. Converted "history" to "early history".
Duplinks: Karl Gerstner, Monotype Grotesque, x-height
Fixed
Link Paul Shaw on first mention
Fixed
Introduce Eskilson
Done, although doesn't have an article
Maybe link Haas foundry?
Done
Post-metal releases
First line and the last line of the section need citations
First line done, last line removed as it's discussed both further up and further down the article
Duplinks:  Günter Gerhard Lange, Karl Gerstner (just say Gerstner)
Fixed
Distinctive characteristics
Not sure if big blanks are ok in an article to accommodate pics, though I personally don't see any issue in it
Yes, we're a bit lucky here for pictures: this style of minimal poster isn't considered eligible for copyright, so I wanted to throw a few pictures in. I think it's the best option
Duplinks: Helvetica, apertures
Fixed
Characteristics of this typeface are Are all the bullets after this sourced properly? Maybe add citations right after this line
Now fixed
the 't' of the Schmalhalbfett weight 'Schmalhalbfett' is in lower case on first mention
Fixed
Versions
Berthold Schriftprobe 473 What exactly is this?
Good point. Fixed
In the bullets, is it customary to write the features in capitalized case (like 'Light Extended')?
Yes. See e.g. here or here.
Other weights were added...ultra-bold 'Akzidenz-Grotesk Super'. Needs an inline citation
Fixed
No caption for the pic in Akzidenz-Grotesk Buch?
Added
The first para of Akzidenz-Grotesk Schulbuch and the last part of Akzidenz-Grotesk Next need inline citations
Fixed
Duplinks –  Günter Gerhard Lange (Akzidenz-Grotesk Buch, Akzidenz-Grotesk Old Face; also don't take the full name once the person has been mentioned by the full name earlier), Helvetica (Akzidenz-Grotesk Buch), Futura and blackletter style (Akzidenz-Grotesk Schulbuch)
Fixed
Similarities to other typefaces
Duplinks – Helvetica, Univers, Folio, Erik Spiekermann
Fixed
Notable users
Maybe link Arizona State University?
Yes, done
General comments
Per WP:CAPFRAG a few captions should not have a period at the end (if they are not complete sentences)
Yes, done
That's all from me. A comprehensive, well-written article :) Sainsf (talk · contribs) 13:17, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Sainsf, thank you so much, this is great feedback. I'm going to think about the intro-I think I may add a section called "etymology" at the top as "Akzidenz" doesn't neatly translate into English. I'm going to comment under each of your suggestions as a checklist of resolving each issue. Blythwood (talk) 02:02, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
An etymology section sounds great. Take your time with the writing but keep updating this page. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 03:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
@Blythwood: Hi, no activity here since a week.. any update? Cheers, Sainsf (knock knock · am I there?) 06:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sainsf, yes, sorry, I've been a bit sidetracked by other things this week. I plan on getting the rewrites done tomorrow. Blythwood (talk) 22:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Sainsf, I think I've finished the rewrite now. Blythwood (talk) 21:09, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Great job :) All changes look good. Ready for promotion. Sainsf (knock knock · am I there?) 21:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Sainsf, wonderful! Thanks for the valuable advice. Blythwood (talk) 22:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)