This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter. Writing systems Mid‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. English Language This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Language, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the English language 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.English LanguageWikipedia:WikiProject English LanguageTemplate:WikiProject English LanguageEnglish Language ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

I just want to expand upon the (mostly) revert that I performed earlier before someone reverts the revert. I noticed that all of the external links were deleted along with other informative text on the article.

The Quikscript community is rather small and those links (especially the "Quikscript Outpost" and the groups.io one) are really important for those who want to easily seek out and expand their knowledge of the Quikscript alphabet. I have no idea when Wikipedia decided that all .xyz websites were considered bad but I've visited FriedOrange's site before and it was legit back when I visited it. I've cut that website out of the revert simply because I wasn't allowed to put it back in. However, I tried finding the version of this article that was most informative and gives first-time viewers a comprehensive synopsis of the alphabet. Thanks. 24.177.245.104 (talk) 00:49, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I must ask why this article is entitled "Quickscript" when the alphabet's name is clearly displayed in the original pamphlet to be spelt "Quikscript"? Perhaps this article should be re-spelt correctly, with a redirect from "Quickscript"? --84.12.152.78 14:06, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. The Jade Knight 07:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned this up. I'll need to change the title with a redirect as well but. martianlostinspace 15:17, 1 April 2006 (UTC) Name change, cleanup done, double redirects checked for!martianlostinspace 15:29, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this should be the other way round because Wikipedia is supposed to be written in traditional orthography. The pamphlet-manual mentioned above actually spells it "Quickscript" with "ck" all the time. It's only that ornamental logotype on the title page that dropped the "c". But nowadays this spelling seems to be more common in secondary sources, which is not surprising given that it appeals to reformists. It also has the advantage of being less ambiguous as there are few other things called Quickscript. Nevertheless, both spellings are in use, sometimes even mixed in free variation like on the Omniglot page. I believe the current name is acceptable by virtue of being WP:ESTABLISHED so I'm not proposing to move it back, but I wanted to point out that the original argument for the move was based on a mistaken premise. – MwGamera (talk) 16:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is 1-2 official publications (ie. books) of this. The official manual, I think, is about 28 pgs, which was Kingsley's own manual for it. It has been referred to here as an external link, but anyone think it would be worth copying the whole lot to Wikibooks?? (A word of warning though: the PDF document has all the text as graphics-- ie.. you cannot actually search for words, so if it's going to be moved, you'll need either very good OCR, or lots of time!!) If it's been published 40 years ago, now free online, hardly anyone's going to object to copywright, or anything I think. martianlostinspace 10:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to see this at Wikibooks, and I think it would be a great addition. OCR wouldn't be that difficult, but I don't see any reason not just to upload the individual pages as images.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  06:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An effort to type out the entire manual is currently underway at the Read Alphabet E-mail group. It stays true to the original with a few minor changes (such as using quickscript letters inline instead of referring to their names/numbers). I'm not sure about the status of this project. Look in the archive for a post made on 7 July 2006. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Read_Alphabet/ --145.116.0.51 20:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you dispute this, go ahead, but I can't see anything wrong with it.martianlostinspace 14:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quikscriptmanual.pdf is unavailable due to 404. Please check other links as well.--89.218.21.13 (talk) 06:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've fixed it to use the {{wayback}} template. The other links all work. -- Quiddity (talk) 17:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some dates would be useful. Jackiespeel (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Quikscript. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20040411160737/http://www.omniglot.com:80/writing/quikscript.htm to http://www.omniglot.com/writing/quikscript.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:09, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]