Talk:United States customary units

message: Can anyone point to the exact source for this naming of the metric system as the "preferred" system of the United States?  I cannot find that anywhere, included the text of the bill itself (though it's possible that I'm fatigued).
https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/document/0055/1669179.pdf  Wuapinmon (talk) 20:18, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest using a version of the law that is searchable rather than images. Also, the version I linked to is the current United States Code, eliminating the possibility that the word "preferred" had been amended out of the law. Jc3s5h (talk) 20:43, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

text: Easy readable source example can be found at Cornell Law School as well. Good overview and more references at NIST Metric Policy Ws1920 (talk) 08:06, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: "preferred"

message: Use of Reddit as a source in this article is being discussed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Reddit as a source. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:53, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Reddit as a source?

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Freedom units. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  PamD 11:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Freedom units" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Freedom unit. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Doug Mehus  T·C 22:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Freedom unit" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: In the "Length" section's table, it looks like all the cells under the "Divisions" header needs to be shifted up one row. "12 p." is on the same row as "1 pica (P.)" instead of "1 point (p.)". The same applies to the remaining rows. I'm not sure if the "SI equivalent" column needs adjusting, so I'm mentioning it here. The table in the "Volume" section has the same issue, so all tables should be checked. Jroberson108 (talk) 13:00, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe or there might not be any Divisions (subdivisons) for a point (typography). -Fnlayson (talk) 16:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table cells shifted 

message: 1st, standard layout is to hash out alt names in the lede or in a Name/Names section IMMEDIATELY after the lede. That bit should go up and the alt names should be bolded.
2nd, per the redirect discussion above, freedom or Freedom units should be restored as a slang name (probably with a link to the etymon Freedom fries) assuming that reliable sources can be found using it in the wild. G-d knows it's popular enough in informal conversation on Youtube, Reddit, and Twitter. I assume—given all the informality and pseudogonzo 'personality' modern journalists try to inject in their work—it's leaked over into bits of the NY Times, New Yorker, &c. or adjacent blogs. Sure, if it hasn't fully transitioned, we'll have to wait for the . From the first page on Google, NIST is at least talking about the term, even if not using it themselves.
3rd, as already discussed in the archives, these are English units. The label may be unhelpful but it's not wrong or mistaken in any way, as the current POVy treatment maintains. (Calling this system "imperial" is of course wrong since that's a completely separate formalized system but the US conventional units are simply a separate development of traditional English units and that name continues in current use for it, even if we park different content under that name here.)
4th, given that there has been years of discussion on these topics and especially that some people are misunderstanding or mistakenly disparaging some of them, though, we shouldn't treat these names as  anymore. We should provide at least one governmental or fairly authoritative private source (leading newspaper style guides, SAE publications, &c.) for each of them. — LlywelynII 03:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Names

message: the US system is the Imperial System of Measurement, because there wasn't a standard definition of Imperial System of Measurement 150 years ago, despite efforts (by some people) to make them uniform, so the two are the same, depending on your source of information about a measurement2601:647:4000:12E0:50BC:2C5:6C96:D0DE (talk) 01:44, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Following the Weights and Measures Act of 1824, the defined Imperial units were implemented in the United Kingdom, the British Empire and elsewhere, in a process of legally imposed standardisation that accelerated, and was accelerated by, the Industrial Revolution and the UK's development into - for a while - the world's pre-eminent industrial power. The suggestion that if standardisation didn't happen instantaneously, it never happened is absurd, as is the failure to consider the differences between the imperial and US customary measurement systems. NebY (talk) 15:02, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The US "customary units" is the Imperial System of Measurement, as there was no consensus or widespread adaption of the "standardized" British Imperial Units in 1820