This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Isidore of Seville is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
User:Carlstak—the logical connection I'm still missing is that the Oxford style guide represents British English in toto, as opposed to being one style guide that uses British English, ergo em dashes are therefore not valid British English. If this is the case, it absolutely should be mentioned in MOS:DASH or elsewhere in the MOS. Remsense ‥ 论19:30, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As a comparison, Strunk's Elements of Style says only to use commas or dashes for parenthetical statements, not parentheses, but that doesn't mean parenthetical statements in parentheses is invalid American English. Remsense ‥ 论19:45, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, I don't think it's a question that should be decided by comparison, especially with Strunk's Elements of Style, not all of whose language prescriptions have been well regarded by grammarians or students of writing in English. Some of them have been elegantly demolished by more than one author.;-)
I don't have time to check just now, but I believe that the WP style guide may have formerly mentioned this, and that someone has removed it (I could be mistaken). If that is the case, I agree that it should certainly be mentioned in MOS:DASH. In my experience, em dashes are not ordinarily used this way in British literature, and if so, we should not use it in our articles written in British English. Carlstak (talk) 20:11, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be looking.;-) I appreciate your civility. I'm doing a bit of work on another article at the moment but will consult the WP gods. Carlstak (talk) 22:30, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
