Talk:Copperplate Gothic

Typography Stub‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography 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.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

New specimen and caption

Hi Jossi, I have restored the new specimen and caption, it shows a larger, fuller specimen, and the caption includes everything in the infobox. The box seems to add a lot of visual noise without adding any information not presently in the caption. It also reduces the specimen. Best, Jim Hewll 02:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CApitol3. The infoboxes are becoming standard for most typefaces. Consider restoring it. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 03:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jossi. I can see an argument for standardization but I do not see what the boxes add. The rules (graphic lines) add a lot of competing presence with the type specimens. I am trying, along with several other typographer-designers to somewhat standardize the specimens so that they show a common large lowercase a character for comparison, a complete lowercase character set at a size that has some presence on even a laptop monitor, the typeface name set large and consistently, and a specimen word that captures the flavor either of the typeface's time of introduction, or a commonly seen application of it. We are also trying to get more solid historical information and a brief, objective, discussion of physical characters, with at least one reference. The infobox's content (designer, date of introduction, and foundry) is solid, but can be found in the caption, and should be in a succinct wikified introductory sentence. I live in Boston, there are a couple of us here trying to clean this up, and add some new articles on major faces not here, a woman in NY has started doing it, and an American guy in Japan is using the specimen as a template too. I will share your thoughts with these people. Please let me know if you still feel the box needs to come back. Thanks. Jim CApitol3 12:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point. Great initiative. Let me know if I can help as well. I have worked on some typography and book design articles before. If can have the template I may be able to help with creating specimens as well. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @

Controvery, says who?

I have added a "controversial" section in both the main entry and the external links section, because I feel it's important to accurately explain the current design climate regarding Copperplate. Since they are clearly labeled as controversial, I believe this should help clear up any issues regarding neutrality. Pinkfairywand 16:28, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So far this is ancedotal conjecture. In order to keep this text I believe you need to cite a third-party source, perhaps a typography or graphic design journal that supports your claim. I am not attempting to be mean hee Pinkfairwand. I am trying to keep the article encyclopedic. CApitol3 17:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Flickr link has iamges of type that is not Copperplate Gothic. I have removed it. CApitol3 17:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sans-serif

I'm a typography amateur, so I'll ask the rest of you: Is it my imagination, or does copperplate gothic have vestigial serifs? / Per Edman 09:43, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]