Talk:Omega

message: 'Raw' in a New York accent is not sufficient for many people such as I, a 2nd language Queen's English (British) speaker. I find American English hard to envisage in itself. Perhaps another example? Or more than one? --94.192.80.191 (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there's a pronunciation section, I thought I'd put this here - is there any chance of adding an IPA English pronunciation (for both UK and US if they're different) to this page? I've noticed some pages on Greek letters have it (such as theta), while others don't. Sorry if this is in the wrong spot, this is the first time I've edited a talk page. Yurell (talk) 02:12, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

text: Until then, a better illustration can be given than 'British English raw', because the vowel of raw has raised to around [oː] for most British speakers  Gimson, A. C. An Introduction to the Pronunciation of English,  7.16/(5), p.118. London: Edward Arnold, 1986. .) , although still represented in many phonemic transcription systems as /ɔː/. A much better example would be either contemporary British or Australian 'short o' as in LOT elongated or doubled. It also occurs very frequently in North American English – I would argue it is most often heard from NAmE speakers and the overwhelming majority of them uses it in such a word as long [lɔːŋ] – but there it is always in free variation with other realizations such as [o̞ɐ] and [äː], which sound markedly different.--78.131.70.134 (talk) 15:12, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: I removed the line quoting Jesus from the Christian bible. It was unobjective and irrelevant to the Greek letter. If a section was added for popular culture refrences, it might fit better. Mequellios (talk) 02:34, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with this removal.  The English speaking world is largely Christian, and the connection to Jesus' declaration is one of the most significant aspects of the Omega in English.  I believe the prominence of this connection deserves mention in the ledge. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 04:10, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  The line was awkward and out of place in that particular paragraph. While not ideally written (that whole last part of that section is a bit of a mess), I've added the Christianity reference back in, with a bit more objectivity. Mequellios (talk) 08:46, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you.  I don't agree that the original text was awkward, but I like how you've reintroduced it. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 10:39, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal

message: What is "mathematical sans-serif bold italic p.ooo omega" supposed to be?  (Unicode U+1D7D4)
Every other reference I can find indicates that U+1D7D4 is MATHEMATICAL BOLD DIGIT SIX.  I don't think that belongs on this page. 128.2.127.25 (talk) 16:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That was some old vandalism that slipped through. Sorry for not noticing earlier. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is "6" there in unicode? 

message: “ꭥ” Unicode Character 'GREEK LETTER SMALL CAPITAL OMEGA' (U+AB65) in Latin Extended-E might be a good addition to the list at the bottom? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewmorrone1 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Small Capital Omega 

message: First off all, I always recommend that editors provide an explanation for why they are reverting in the edit summary, rather than leaving it blank and posting something else somewhere else. It saves time via the notification system, watch lists, etc. to have it on .
Anyway, regarding your follow up edits in the minutes that followed, what are you talking about? You refer me to an article about search algorithms, instead of policy. The source edit window that I've used for years includes Unicode characters. I've seen other experienced editors converting HTML entities to Unicode. I referenced MOS:MARKUP.  I just ran a simple test and found you to be wrong: ΩΩ
Please walk me through your stance a little more slowly, if you would, for my own edification. Otherwise, you're just looking wrong. — voidxor 21:16, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The ohm sign (U+2126, Ω) is a different character from the Greek uppercase omega (U+03A9, Ω).  They are canonically equivalent in Unicode, so software normalizes ohm signs to capital Omega, which is fine in most places, but in this article that discusses the actual character, it needs to show the actual character and not let the software normalize Ω to Ω.  [Which happened when I saved this comment.  The first character is ohm sign and the second is Omega.] — Omegatron (talk) 00:33, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  But are you sure that the Unicode encoding you're using in the article now is actually avoiding the silent regularization to U+03A9? When I look at the current html output, it looks to me as if the displayed character is still U+03A9. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:26, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Same. I copied both characters as output (say, from my comment above) into several of those Unicode lookup websites, which all say that both are the Greek letter omega. — voidxor 18:29, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omega "symbol" vs. the Unicode character