Talk:Collation

message: Which is first, bbb or bbba? Where does bbbbbbbbbba fall in? Is there a rule for this kind of thing? I tried to read the article on lexicographical order, but couldn't understand it.Qutorial (talk) 17:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Which is first?

message: How widely accepted is the sort of Spanish "ch" and "ll" as if they were two letters? The linked page credits the Royal Spanish Academy; do Spanish-speakers outside Spain follow their lead? Vicki Rosenzweig, Thursday, June 20, 2002
::Yes, I would say any circumspect dictionary follows suit. It is strange, isn't it? Something as a letter that doesn't have its proper lexicographic place. Pallida  Mors 22:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Spanish "ch" and "ll"

message: When I briefly did a stint as a library assiant ~1985, I was taught that in the dollation of last names 'Mc' always alphabetized as 'Mac'. Thus 'McCarthy' comes before 'Mary'. Is this practice still standard and is this the right place to reference it? JRP 16:44, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In Scotland, where surnames beginning in Mac, Mc or M‘ (the last should use a "turned comma" Unicode U+2018) are common, they are sometimes treated as all one letter (as they are variant representations of the same 'word'), which is deemed to come between L and M. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 185.74.232.130 (talk) 11:41, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Mc

message: I merged alphabetical order into this page, as was suggested on the duplicates page. Alphabetical order contained was consisted mostly of example and there was very little non duplicate information, so I thought a simple redirect would do. I added the mention of Roman numerals, contained in the alphabetical order article but not in Collation to the Numerical sorting of strings category. Comments and criticism welcome as usual; I know I tend to be  pretty radical with my merges. --Phils 16:27, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This is indeed a bold merge. One potential problem is that the sense of 'collation' used by textual critics (say) has nothing to do with 'alphabetical order' (one of the redirects that leads to this page). But perhaps that would best be solved by creating a new article entitled "Collation (textual criticism)". Something to do. Oldhamlet 18:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with alphabetical order 

message: This is probably not the place to ask (I am new but keen) but is there a way of converting articals containing long lists into alphabetical order ... I am thinking of eg the special page magazines in UK where there is a list of around 1000 magazines in seemingly randomAbtract 09:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Alphabetical order within Wikipedia

message: I really think the library and the computer science meanings are not quite the same. There is a common ground, for the characters a library uses must be converted to a form that a  computer can sort. But there are many ways of doing that, not necessarily algorithmically (e.g. "filed as" --we'd call that a 'filing title"  To decrease the labor involved, lbrarians--like every one else--try to accept as much of the computer character set order as possible. Similarly it is the librarians, not the computer scientists, who are particularly concerned with the filing order in other languages--including the uncomfortable fact that some of them have different incompatible rules. (whereas librarians do not have to deal with non alphabetic symbols. 
My suggestion is that this article should be divided, (tho there will be seome duplicate content) and the different meanings at the top are significant enough for a formal  disamb. page. DGG 08:31, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: seconded.  There is no space on the existing page for collation as in sorting printed pages into page order for binding as it immediately launches into collation orders and algorithms  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.68.15.100 (talk) 13:51, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the wonders of electronic text is that you can also insert material, and in general easily reshuffle or reorganize things. To say that "there is no space on the existing page" since it "immediately launches into" something is quite meaningless. A possible impediment to discussing collation in the article from a librarian's viewpoint is the lack of citable reliable sources; given such, there is no problem. However, for most uses, a more important consideration than convertability to a form that a computer can sort is what ordering principle is helpful to a human reader in looking up an entry or lemma. Given such an ordering principle, we can instruct librarians and computers alike to sort the material accordingly.  --Lambiam 23:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: as a librarian

message: The article Alphabetical order is largely identical to the section in Collation of the same name, dealing not only with the  order of the letters of the alphabet, but also with more general collation issues. It is a waste of energy to maintain two versions of the same information.  --LambiamTalk 17:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: I would like to know, how are foreign words, which include various diacritics, treated in English language lists? There is a List of country names in various languages, and the alphabetical order of various language alternatives of the same name does not seem to follow any rule as far as the diacritics is concerned. What is the correct order eg. for Armenia, Armênia, Armènia, Arménia and Armenía? Jan.Kamenicek 11:11, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign words in English lists 

message: My feeling is that the stubby Collating sequence article is not worthy of an existence on its own, but should be merged into this article (which could use a more informal introductory overview section of the various issues).  --LambiamTalk 09:17, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it could make sense to keep Collating sequence separate, and move Alphabets derived from the Latin: Collating sequences there... FilipeS 23:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Collating sequence stub to here 

message: What I want to know is why the alphabet is in the order it is. Why is it ABC.. etc and not TGS.. or any other order. 222.155.172.13 07:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Latin alphabet. FilipeS (talk) 23:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order 

message: Although the article makes reference to "the thirty-letter alphabet of Spanish", with only three more than its 26-letter English counterpart (rr not technically being considered a letter) wouldn't the correct number of letters be 29? See: Spanish_language#Writing_system.  Martin.fish (talk) 01:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of Letters in Spanish

message: Would this be the right page to discuss some of the interesting social side-effects of traditional alphabetical order?  I'm thinking of things like the rush to name one's company "AAA-1 Construction" or what-have-you so that it is first in the phone book, or the phenomenon of increased votes for political candidates who appear earlier on the ballot.  (Harper's Index once published a statistic suggesting that an alarming number of people simply tick the first box on a ballot without reading the whole list.)  I'd also be interested in seeing anything that's been published on the psychological effects on schoolchildren who are consistently picked first or last for projects, presentations, and the like. --Hapax (talk) 18:02, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Social effects of alphabetical order

message: How are dictionaries/rosters ordered in Chinese?
:By pinyin (for PRC China). That is - Chinese spelled in Latin letters, and then ordered by standard Latin alphabetic order (with a few peculiarities, reflecting the nature of Chinese characters). e.g. 汉语 comes before 黑色 which comes before 去过　because their pinyin forms are hànyǔ, hēisè and qùgùo (and H comes before Q, and ha- comes before he-). This also has the effect of listing some characters twice, because they may have more than one pronunciation in different contexts. If you don't know how to pronounce a character, you have to look it up by its radical in an index (usually at the start). Some dictionaries are ordered differently, but in the PRC this is the most common way to do it. - Estoy Aquí (talk) 12:31, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Chinese

message: People familiar with Chinese characters are aware that a person looks up a character with an unknown pronunciation by finding the radical, then counting the number of strokes in the remaining part of the character. However, when two characters have the same radical and the same stroke count, what determines which character is listed first? --69.171.160.211 (talk) 02:43, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radical and stroke ordering with Chinese characters 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Sort key. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 26#Sort key until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 22:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Sort key" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]