Template talk:U:en:less and fewer

• Template:usage less fewer

• Author: —GraemeMcRae^talk 20:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Description: provides the text of the "usage notes" section for one or more words.

less vs. fewer: The correct usage hinges on knowing whether the noun modified is of a type that can be counted.

Rationale for using a template: If two or more words are being compared, then the text of that comparison should appear in the entries for both words. So it makes sense to write a template, in a standard form, to house the text that appears in both places. The bold proposal being made here is to create one template for each set of usage notes, with the name of the template being the lowercase word, usage, followed by a blank-delimeted list of words being discussed in the text. This approach eliminates the need to make changes in two places, and, for those of us who care about changes made by others, the need to check up on them to make sure they remembered to make the change in both places.

Self-edit feature of this template: Because this is a Wiki, it should be accessible for all to edit and improve. Hiding text away in templates might tend to make that more difficult, to the point that potential editors might be unwilling to hunt down the text in the Template namespace, and then make the necessary changes. For this reason, a self-edit link is provided in the template so that upon viewing any article in which the template is included, any user may click the "Edit usage" link, and make changes he deems appropriate.

• Usage:

==Usage notes==
{{usage less fewer}}  <!-- Click the [Edit usage] link to make changes to the included text --> 

The purpose of the comment that says "Click the [Edit usage] link..." is to help people who might click the [Edit] link generated by the section header. If they do that, they'll see just the template, {{usage less fewer}}, not the text inside the template. Hopefully, they'll hit the back button, and then click [Edit usage] to edit the text. That's the idea, anyway, so it is recommended that this comment be placed next to the template as a hint to potential editors.

Deletion debate

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

This seems to be neither a template or good usage notes. At absolute best, it should be on less and fewer (as text) and cleaned up rather a lot as its too long, and self confessed POV. Mglovesfun (talk) 07:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Invalid. Whoever writes new usage notes for less and fewer can decide whether or not they wish to use the template. At such a time, the deletion of this template will be uncontroversial. (This is really a WT:RFC in disguise, right?) Conrad.Irwin 11:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

What's invalid? My reasoning, or the template? I'm just saying we don't need a template that only appears on two pages (right now, one as it happens). Mglovesfun (talk) 11:59, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, we do. It enables someone to better two entries at once. Compare template:color-colour (verb), which exists for the same reason, and is also for use in only two entries. Yes, the nominee may need cleanup, but I think it's a keeper.​—msh210℠ 19:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok move to cleanup. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Kept. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Proposed edit to template

Although commonly used, the traditional rule is that using less for countable numbers (e.g. "She had less employees than in previous years") is incorrect. Less traditionally applies to quantity (indicating a smaller size or smaller uncountable amount) while fewer applies to countable numbers (the traditionally correct usage being "She had fewer employees than in previous years").

In some sentences, either word could be used but with different meanings:

1. Their troubles are fewer than ours, meaning "Their troubles are not as numerous as ours"
2. Their troubles are less than ours, meaning "Their troubles are not so great as ours"

References

• 1972, William Strunk & E. B. White, The Elements of Style, p. 51

• • Er -- I object to this (entirely prescriptivist) usage note, and I especially object to citing Strunk & White in support of anything we want to be taken seriously. Less is used to mean fewer: it's been happening as long as English has been recorded, from Old English onwards. Pointing out that some people dislike it is fine; saying it's wrong is not. Ƿidsiþ 09:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
  • I too object to the proposed prescriptivism, I don't see what is wrong with the current wording. Thryduulf 14:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I have expanded on the existing template which I found too terse using some ideas from the passage above. Conrad.Irwin 14:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

While the revised wording is better than that proposed above in terms of descriptiveness, it is not as accessible as the previous version. Although it adds more information, I don't think the value of that addition is such that we should make it harder to understand. Also, given this discussion, I don't think changing the live template without proposing the new wording here first was the most polite thing to have done. Thryduulf 15:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Hrm, I was aiming to make it more accessible, but it is obviously a subjective thing - the previous also fell down for contradicting fewer (adjective or determiner), and the unsubstantiatied "some dialects". I would invite people to make changes more proactively, discussions have a tendancy to dissolve leaving only the air of "it should change" rather than an implemented solution. Conrad.Irwin 16:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)