Talk:Five Ws

message: how is not a 'w'!!!!!!!!?
It has a 'w' in it though. It's like saying "writing" and "arithmetic" aren't R's - John F
It is spelled whow in this contest.Zginder 20:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, because in the context of a contest, it's short for "whowon?" k kisses 15:01, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: How?

message: Would "Which" be eligible as a "Wh" question in this list?
Which is more specific. -bm  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:6:3C00:DBA:E5D7:22B1:AAAA:7D44 (talk) 07:10, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about "Which" 

message: When I took journalism in high school (1971), we were taught the 4 W's and the H. "Why" was not included because it was considered subjective and not a statement of fact. Apparently journalism has become more subjective since then. Pity.
:When I think of 'why', I think more of causality, rather than of a value judgement.  So, in a story about the LA Riots, 'why' would address the motivations cited by the rioters, or in a story about some corporate merger, it would focus on the business' plans for the combined company.  Sometimes this area skirts close to the area of "should", but a good journalist can describe without bias or subjectivity.  Many stories are meaningless without explaining 'why' people have done things, and it seems it can be perfectly objective.  --Xyzzyva 22:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Journalism has not become more subjective. "Why?" has been a fundamental question of good journalists since at least 1913 when it was written down by Willard Bleyer, Professor of Journalism at the University of Wisconsin. I am guessing that the 1971 high school was attempting to teach the students that "Why?" should be used with care as it is important but can be a source of unintentional bias if not based in facts. B9 (talk) 22:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why 

message: There should be no why. Agreed!  Flinders 20:40, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the most definitive reference for "Why?" being part of the 5Ws is Professor Bleyer's book "Newspaper Writing and Editing". As for why "Why?" is part of the set, you'd have to look to Aquinas who cites Aristotle on Rhetoric, but that gets pretty far afield for this Wikipedia article. B9 (talk) 22:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  No why! 

message: It can't be a coincidence that all of these start with Ws, much less that all of them start with WHs and are pronounced like H. Can anyone explain this? Twilight Realm 00:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: None of the "Wh" words are pronounced as if starting with "H".  Powers T 18:19, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Who would have thought that someone would miss "Wh" pronounced as "H". Greyskinnedboy  Talk  19:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: According to our Wiktionary entry, they're all derived from the same Proto-Indo-European root ("when" is missing from the list there, but the entry also directs to the same PIE root), maybe we should add this? --178.26.171.11 (talk) 11:24, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The modern pronunciation is what makes the alliteration work. The ultimate etymology isn't really relevant. --Macrakis (talk) 17:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, but the modern pronunciation is a result of regular sound change, right? (I'm not a pro linguist, so someone may correct me) In this case, PIE *kw came to be represented in English by [ʍ] and later [w] (most dialects) but still written "wh-". Therefore it's not a coincidence that most of these words start with "wh-".Oh, I just saw that we even have an article about that special phoneme: Phonological_history_of_wh. There it says "Because Proto-Indo-European interrogative words typically began with *kʷ, English interrogative words (such as who, which, what, when, where) typically begin with ‹wh›." --178.26.171.11 (talk) 14:09, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: Cui bono should be one of these questions, too. Glatisant (talk) 09:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reliable source giving cui bono as an element of the 5 W's? --Macrakis (talk) 17:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cui bono 

message: What makes the name of this topic a proper name ("Five W's") rather than a common noun phrase ("five w's")? Jojalozzo 18:14, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper name? 

message: I have semi-protected this, due to its importance to more than one WikiProject, its visibility, and the recent spate of adding unsourceable or original content.  I am leaving the protection on through the Spring break or Easter holiday, to prevent vandalism by students. Bearian (talk) 19:12, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protection 

message: How do you pronounce "Ws"? Is it double-ues? Shcha (talk) 18:23, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: The Latin equivalents are referred to, but are not provided. ISTM that that would be worthwhile. And, then it occurred to me that more Indo-European equivalents, especially Germanic examples, could be included. The article Indo-European vocabulary lists who and what, but not the rest. Does anyone know of a short reference?    TomS TDotO (talk) 01:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wwwww. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  InvalidOS (talk) 16:56, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Wwwww" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: . Abhissmalizard (talk) 09:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Why? B9 (talk) 22:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which and will need to be added