Talk:De jure
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the De jure article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Really confusing examples
[edit]The examples about the Ottomans and Egypt is really confusing and dated. It doesn't really clarify the point it should be more relatable. Eg. If the posted speed limit on a road is the De jure speed limit. But if everyone knows the cops don't patrol that street the De Facto speed limit is how fast our car can go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.181.106.116 (talk) 13:38, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Tone of article
[edit]Decided to add tone maintenance flag as the lead paragraph feels very anecdotal/unencyclopaedic to me, someone more knowledgeable might be better versed to review this and then remove as appropriate The capcon (talk) 18:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Colloquial Example
[edit]I know it's from a source, which makes it better, but the "colloquial example" sentence is awful. It's long, awkward, and confusing. How about, "I know it's a de jure broken escalator, but this de facto staircase is wearing me out."
"Nominally" and "de jure" overlap
[edit]How much of an overlap would there be between "nominally" and "de jure", or could one (I assume maybe the latter) be considered a more specific subset of the other? — al-Shimoni (talk) 01:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Italicization
[edit]A discussion affecting this article is in progress at Talk:De facto#Italicization. Certes (talk) 22:50, 12 October 2023 (UTC)