Talk:Davy Jones's locker

message: viz.
Another suggestion is that it comes from "Deva Lokka", a Hindu goddess of death. [1] Although Deva is undoubtedly a Hindu term for a goddess, it is not clear that there was such a figure as "Deva Lokka".
there isn't anything that comes close phonetically to "dev lokka". 
there is a term called devlok, which means abode of gods but how that can be same is davy jones is baffling. I think someone just got confused.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.225.88 (talk) 18:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed utterly wrong comment

message: I was a bit incensed to find that someone has removed the sentence(s) of mine on Dewi and Shoney, without at least considering to tell me why via talk?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvis Rofhessa (talk • contribs) 04:53, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I took a look at what you added see that it was an extraordinary claim that was not backed up with extraordinary references (or any references at all). Encyclopedic content must be verifiable and so should cite sources. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 20:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why sentence(s) removed 

message: Apart from the obvious references made in Pirates of the Caribbean (which are historical whack), could someone find any sources at all that title Davy Jones being the captain of the Flying Dutchman? As far as I know, the two are completely different legends. I suggest the line:
"There was a man by the name of Vanderdecken, original owner of the Flying Dutchman, Jones' ghost ship. There was an actual David Jones, who was a pirate on the Indian Ocean in the 1630s,[4] but most scholars agree that he was not renowned enough to gain such lasting global fame.[3] " is removed from the article. --81.206.214.43 (talk) 15:44, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relation to the Flying Dutchman 

message: The term is usually spelled "Davy Jones's Locker" -- and indeed this is the spelling used in the first line of the introduction.  How does one change the name of the article simply?  quota (talk) 08:25, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The first line has been corrected. When a name or a word ends with an "s", as in Jones, the possessive form only needs an apostrophe, not an extra "s". As in "the boss' desk" (meaning the desk belonging to the the boss). For an example of this rule applied to names, see Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. - Boneyard90 (talk) 05:50, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That is not the case.  Despite Wikipedia policy, and despite the opinion of those who think they know, or so-called experts who claim to know otherwise, the omission of the possessive 's' for singulars ending in 's' is an archaic form, and Fowler's A Dictionary of Modern English Usage is somewhat derisory towards it, stating its usage is these days reserved for poetic or reverential reference, in addition to use for classical subjects (the last of these is particularly spurious, in that it requires knowledge beyond that of linguistics itself, in order to determine that a subject is one which is deemed to be classic in nature).  Americanisims appear to have a tendency to adhere to archaic forms of English, such as variance of spelling, if only in order to distinguish itself from the language of their former "colonial masters" - so it is not surprising that in the US there is a preference for s' over s's.  In fact s' is only truly appropriate when the terminal s of a noun indicates a plural.  Hence, Jones's is the correct possessive form for a singular named Jones - whereas Jones' would indicate possessive of a group of individuals named Jone.  (The plural possessive of Jones is Joneses'.)  Additionally, those who are determined to use Jones' as a singular possessive should also use the same form when a noun ends in x or in ce (for instance "Knox' father" or "conscience' sake").  JohnArmagh (talk) 17:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: What a convoluted rationale for justifying a lazy spelling error. It's all pretty moot, because as was pointed out, Wikipedia policy favors the "archaic form". Boneyard90 (talk) 17:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing at all convoluted about it.  The "lazy spelling error" is Jones'.  Jones's is the correct form.  And Wikipedia policy is actually essentially that the majority form employed in an article is the standard for future edits to that article. JohnArmagh (talk) 21:48, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I like how you say that American English has "a tendency to adhere to archaic forms of English". That's awesome. I usually hear people saying that British English is the "original English". If American English holds on to the "archaic forms", would that mean it has a higher degree of - shall we say - "authentic" English? Boneyard90 (talk) 04:43, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The "original English" was the language spoken by the Anglo-Saxon immigrants to Britain in the 5th Century.  It is no longer spoken.  British English is a language which has evolved since that time - and during the majority of that time there was no standard spelling - and that was the case when the American colonies achieved independence.  Since that time British English adopted a standard of spelling and grammar to which the US was not obliged to adhere.  Additionally the vast majority of immigrants into the US during its post-independence development in the 19thC were from non-English-speaking regions - particularly Germany and the Hispanic regions (indeed, the German influence is apparent in the US accents of those areas with the heaviest influx of German people).  JohnArmagh (talk) 11:02, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I strongly support JohnArmagh. Where the possessive makes an extra syllable, only "-s's" is correct and "-s'" is irritating. Moonraker (talk) 07:11, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I've done it. Ordinary Person (talk) 09:31, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

text: For evidence, may I submit Slang and Its Analogues (1891), compiled by John S. Farmer of the Strand, London, who spells it both "Davy Jones' Locker" and "Davy Jones's Locker", so it would appear that either spelling is acceptable. That being the case, the more widely used form should be used as the article title. —howcheng  {chat} 17:31, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, the "more widely used" is the title as it is now. Google search "Davy Jones' Locker", minus "Wikipedia", turns up 488,000 hits; "Davy Jones's Locker", minus "Wikipedia", turns up 95,200 hit. "Common name" supports the title now in use. Boneyard90 (talk) 18:16, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Support move to "Jones's"—The naming of articles and the determination of the common name are more complex than you suggest, per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:TITLE. WP:SET also explains that "a search engine test can be very effective and helpful, or produce misleading or non-useful results." In the case of this article, almost all the sources in this article use "Jones's." We're not merely looking for the most common usage by the general public; instead, "Wikipedia generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)" (WP:UCRN). A great number of search engine results are NOT from reliable sources. Holy (talk) 21:47, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of article is wrong? 

message: Is this article a serious one?  It reads (particularly any reference to the Welsh) as a spoof of Wikipedia.  Do any of the contributors who make reference to the Welsh have any knowledge whatsoever of Welsh culture?  Most of the popularly known pirates do happen to be Welsh and the name Davy (Dafydd/Dewi) Jones is Welsh.  Therefore, One might expect a bit more knowledge about Wales in an article on a figure called Davy Jones.
Do you know of any sources we could use to help improve this article? A section with welsh history would be interesting and add to this pageMeatsgains (talk) 21:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this article meant as a spoof? 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Punch Davy Jones's Locker.png will be appearing as picture of the day on January 15, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-01-15. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng  {chat} 21:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Punch Davy Jones's Locker.png]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: Both "Davy" and "Jones" are specifically Welsh. Before the 18th century "David" was a moderately unusual English name. The English cognate of "Jones" is "Johnson".--Wetman (talk) 19:08, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welsh 

message: Who is Davy Jones? 86.97.34.82 (talk) 16:20, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is Davy Jones? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Davy Jones' Locker. 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/20130702145620/http://pro-rock.com/index.cfm?page=discography&view=lyrics&albumid=5&lid=80 to http://www.pro-rock.com/index.cfm?page=discography&view=lyrics&albumid=5&lid=80
*Added  tag to http://en.spongepedia.bimserver2.com/index.php?title=Davy_Jones%27_Locker
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:06, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Just means "land lover" i.e. "non sailor" - it may be an insult thrown at a greenhorn, but it doesn't mean "greenhorn". Vince Calegon 18:33, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landlubber =

message: At present most of the article length is given to examples of references to DJL in media works. When I removed them all, it was reverted and I was told to "obtain consensus," but the editor who reverted did not bother to state here why they believe that the examples are beneficial to the article. I dispute that "consensus" exists to have these in the article. Such examples are generally added as a form of drive-by "tagging" by anonymous or limited-activity editors without regard for editorial standards such as sourcing, coherence and significance, and as they grow, they attract still more anonymous editors who incorrectly suppose that this is the way an encyclopedia article gets written.
There is a consensus, established through RFC, that mere existence of a pop culture reference does not make it appropriate to mention in an article. Some reliable source should have commented on how the example reflects on the article subject. (See WP:TRIVIA.) I have retained such examples when cleaning up pop culture lists. However, examples that merely point out that a particular sequence of words were said somewhere are useless, and I will remove them here as I have removed them in many other articles. Anyone who wants to keep them can explain here why doing so would be consistent with the RFC consensus. 73.71.251.64 (talk) 21:14, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop culture examples 

message: The article mostly talks about the folkloric figure. Shouldn't the title reflect that? Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 21:31, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename to "Davy Jones (folklore)"?