Jump to content

Talk:Alternate history

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Tazzik Salarian in topic Removal of Mormon History

'Alternative', not 'alternate'.

[edit]

'Alternative history' is an exclusively British English term according to this article, when in fact it is simply correct English, as any good dictionary will attest.

Hear hear! 'Alternate' is nonsense. It means that history 'alternates' between two or more states, which it does not.

The title of the page should be 'Alternative history' and in the first sentence it should be noted 'often incorrectly referred to as Alternate history '. --217.42.52.22 (talk) 13:39, 21 February 2017 (UTC)H. A. LynchReply

Doesn't matter. "Alternate history" is what it's called in American English, and that's what the article used when it was first started. See Talk:Alternate history/Archive 3#Alternative vs Alternate for a 2015 discussion, and links there to previous discussions on the subject. - BilCat (talk) 13:51, 21 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Here we go: it was not 'first' started, it was started. Just once. It was never started a second time. And it certainly matters to literate people. 'Alternate' is nonsense. It means that history 'alternates' between two or more states, which it does not.
Google books shows both are used, almost as much as each other.Doug Weller talk 09:17, 1 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
Rightly or wrongly (wrongly) the term Alternate History has become the most widely used and understood form - Google's Ngram based on Google Books shows that since 2000 alternate history outnumbers alternative history 9 : 1, and Alternate is used by a UK academic in a Liverpool University Press publication. Martinlc (talk) 08:37, 13 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Removal of Mormon History

[edit]

The words of one man alone to discredit an entire historical section. There is no evidence that solidly disproves the Book of Mormon's events are false. Therefore, we should not discredit an entire series of events over the words of one man. There is proof that these events are real. The archaeological findings of ancient altars in Arabia match Book of Mormon geography (Nahom), and the existence of metal plates and cement use in ancient America discovered after the Book of Mormon supports that this text is true.-Trex473 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trex473 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 10 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

But there were no metal plates or cement in ancient America and yo won’t find any non Mormon sources saying they were or at least no non-fringe sources. Doug Weller talk 18:56, 10 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
Can you provide any citations to academics writing for peer-reviewed history publications outside the purview of the LDS Church that would support your claims? signed, Rosguill talk 18:58, 10 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

It does not belong in this article, The article is about works of imaginative fiction which the authors know are false. The Book of Mormon is presented by its author/transcriber as fact, and is a contribution to the historiography of the continent. Inclusion here on the basis of a single biographer's (idiosyncratic) use of the phrase is WP:UNDUE. Martinlc (talk) 09:01, 13 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Agree. Regardless of debates on authenticity, its self-presentation as non-fiction means it does not belong as an example of "Alternate history." Also worth noting that the Wikipedia article for Book of Mormon does not contain the phrase "Alternate history" anywhere. Tazzik Salarian (talk) 19:40, 2 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Jonbar hinge which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:05, 10 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 May 2026

[edit]

In the Definition section, add a space between “film” and “2012” 11pro12 (talk) 09:14, 13 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Done meamemg (talk) 14:24, 13 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Edit request 15 May 2026

[edit]


  • −
    These works typicall feature a point of divergence
    +
    These works typically feature a point of divergence
    :
  • Why it should be changed: typo
  • References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button): n/a

Timmeh (talk) 08:13, 15 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Already done Day Creature (talk) 14:58, 15 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

References