Talk:Post-war

Move (2007)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Spelling error in name, See: Websters Dictionary Postwar is spelled "postwar" See: FWIW Bzuk 02:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC).

This is probably a trans-Atlantic difference; see WP:ENGVAR. --Stemonitis 11:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I checked a wide range of dictionaries- all have it spelled "postwar." The only time it appears as "post-war" is in non-standard use. Wikipedia, for one, has post-war popping up along with a huge number of "over-hyphenated" words. FWIW Bzuk 12:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC).

The Oxford English Dictionary, the definitive record of the English language, lists "post-war" only. It is only "over-hyphenation" in your opinion; I would consider "postwar" a clear case of "underhyphenation". There are significant differences between American English and Commonwealth English, and this is one of them; WP:ENGVAR applies. --Stemonitis 12:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You may be right about the Oxford Dictionary definition but the overwhelming number of other dictionaries including the Chambers Reference Dictionary in England have the "postwar" spelling. I did a cursory Google search to find over 1,700,000 entries with the spelling given that way. This is another example of a word gradually changing its conventional spelling through acceptance by the majority of users. FWIW Bzuk 13:16, 20 August 2007 (UTC).

In my own writing, I would follow Fowler, and distinguish between the noun and the adjective. But I agree with Stremonitis here: leave it alone, or move to postbellum - now a redirect to a particular aftermath. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose per OED and what I've seen in books and newspapers. 132.205.44.5 22:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

• Move to Wiktionary, or move to "postwar period", so this article's subject can be a noun. The Canadian Oxford (2004) and New Oxford American (electronic, 2005) dictionaries both list "postwar", only, as an adjective. But please, add a reference or remove the speculation about when a postwar period ends. —Michael Z. 2007-08-20 22:24 Z

• Something does need to change, per Mzajac, because it's pretty hard for an adjective to be an encyclopedic topic. I doubt that the topic can be expanded upon at "post-war period", too, so I wonder if AfD isn't the way to go here. Dekimasuよ! 16:55, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. --Stemonitis 16:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

Move (2010)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: do not move. — ξ^xplicit 00:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

---

Post-war → Postwar —

• Hyphen superfluous; see any mainstream dictionary, eg, AHD, M-W. — ¾-10 19:42, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
• No references supporting move. Possible WP:ENGVAR issues here. — AjaxSmack 01:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't looked at the old discussion of this topic, above, when I quickly suggested a move yesterday. But I agree with Bzuk from 20 August 2007: "I checked a wide range of dictionaries- all have it spelled "postwar." The only time it appears as "post-war" is in non-standard use" […] "You may be right about the Oxford Dictionary definition but the overwhelming number of other dictionaries including the Chambers Reference Dictionary in England have the "postwar" spelling. […] This is another example of a word gradually changing its conventional spelling through acceptance by the majority of users." Anyway, not worth it to me to edit here more … this article should be a soft redirect to Wiktionary; it shouldn't even be a WP stub at all. — ¾-10 01:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose per notice above stating that the OED uses a dash. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 06:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose. AHD and M-W are both U.S. dictionaries. However, strongly agree that page should redirect to Wiktionary. Rennell435 (talk) 13:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Post-PC era which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

"Post-1945" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Post-1945 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 15#Post-1945 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Interstellarity (talk) 01:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Post-war Economics in the United States

I am going to add a section about post-war economics and consumerism in the US. After the war the economy took a major shift away from Government regulation into a free economy. Along with this mass production of houses, cars, and food skyrocketed completely changing "standard of living." I think it should be mentioned. - Harrison abbott (talk) 23:01, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

The economic changes are partially covered in the article on the Post–World War II economic expansion (including "a marked increase in consumerism" in many of the countries benefiting from this expansion) and partially in the section on Post-World War II prosperity: 1945–1973 on the wider article on the Economic history of the United States. In the matter of housing, the G.I. Bill made houses affordable to many veterans due to guaranteeing "low cost loans". "In 1947 alone, 540,000 veterans bought one [a house]; their average price was $7300. The construction industry kept prices low by standardization"... Dimadick (talk) 07:53, 26 October 2025 (UTC)