Talk:Keyboard layout

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Keyboard layout article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 6 months

New Standard Keyboard was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 16 October 2010 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Keyboard layout. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Writing systems Mid‑importance

	Writing portal 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.

Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Workman": origin of the name of this layout?

Why is it called Workman? Equinox ◑ 21:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://workmanlayout.org/

"I call it the Workman Keyboard Layout in honor of all who type on keyboards for a living. And considering that today is Labor Day, I think it’s perfectly fitting." Wasibut (talk) 12:41, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Naming the two sections for Latin-script keyboard layouts

In the past these headings said "QWERTY-based Latin-script keyboard layouts" and "Non-QWERTY-based Latin-script keyboard layouts". At some point someone removed the "QWERTY-based", which seems to have led to confusion as to what goes where. Do we want to restore the old headings, or maybe adjust them to fix the issues "QWERTY-based" may have? To me the current situation seems silly, at least. Arcorann (talk) 01:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Arcorann: I was I who changed it because it is a fundamental category error, based (I suspect) on a failure to appreciate the world outside the Americas. Is AZERTY a QWERTY-based keyboard? of course not, but it does have the same evolution. Same goes for all the national keyboard styles for languages written in Latin script.

Perhaps we can do better than Conventional Latin-script keyboard layouts ("Traditional"?) for the most widely used style v Other Latin-script keyboard layouts for novel layouts such as Dvorak – but "QWERTY-based" is just wrong.

I have some sympathy for your point though: for example the InScript keyboard for Sanskrit could be described as "QWERTY based" because each key has both a Latin and a Sanskrit function – and the Latin layout is QWERTY. But that is more an accident of history than a ergonomic design choice.

Why do you consider the current situation "silly"? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I posted the sections were headed "Latin-script keyboard layouts" and "Other Latin-script keyboard layouts", which doesn't seem to differentiate clearly what the difference was between the two sections. As it is now it's a bit better, though it might need a bit more tweaking (do we want to put PÜŞUD with the other "conventional" layouts, for example). Arcorann (talk) 02:27, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but "Conventional Latin-script keyboard layouts" and "Other Latin-script keyboard layouts" is still not great. Would "Traditional Latin-script keyboard layouts" and "Novel Latin-script keyboard layouts" work better? (and yes, agree re PÜŞUD.) --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SIL Romaja

@Pastachis, I would like to inquire as to why you are removing the SIL Romaja section, after previous edits by @Whinty, @Menturner, and @Alikee were reverted by myself and another editor. The reasons so far have been:

• No edit summary (Whinty, Pastachis)

• SIL Ramaja is a fake layout (Menturner, Alikee)

• It doesn't work on PC, mac, or linux (Alikee)

From my perspective this does not seem like an appropriate removal, as none of these reasons are substantiated as of present, so please explain your reasoning in further detail.

Tenshi! (Talk page) 22:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its not made by SIL, dosn't belong in a encyclopedia.
It dosn't even work with keyman, and the website is user-made.
You can't instal it in any way, should be removed from wikipedia.
Its vandalism of Keyboard layouts page.

(comment by Reartz; moved from interior of TenshiSWR's comment by ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 14:35, 1 June 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Tenshi Hinanawi: Putting aside any cases of suboptimal editing from new editors, Google/Bing shows <=5 pages which mention "SIL Romaja", including this article. The github ref clearly fail WP:RS. The Keyman site of the second ref does belong to SIL Global, but does not mention "SIL Romaja", only "Korean Phonetic. The About page states "Keyman is now a free and open source keyboarding platform which allows anyone to write a keyboard layout for their language". In other words, from [1] this is clearly a site which facilitates user-generated content. Thus, I endorse removal in the absence of RS demonstrating that this layout is at least WP:NOTEWORTHY. (PS: Would you mind using "Tenshi Hinnawi" rather than "TenshiSWR" in your signature? Using {{u|TenshiSWR}} errors on pings) ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 14:41, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I agree that this fails WP:V and should be removed, but I will note that this specific section has been targeted by socks in the past. Also, my last signature here is a redirect because I was previously known as TenshiSWR until I requested a rename to Tenshi Hinanawi. Tenshi! (Talk page) 15:07, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody added it back as Dubeolsik Phonetic... I deleted it again. --Kjoonlee 01:44, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thats not true. Its realy called Dubeolsik Phonetic

Its available on android keyboard apps too: Heliboard, Florisboard and FUTO keyboard.

You won't delete it... Clumpost (talk) 13:22, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For reference this layout is called Korean Phonetic or Dubeolsik Phonetic, never romaja or sil.

Its a HANGUL ONLY keyboard, for korean learners. It works on Windows, mac, linux, ios, android and web with keyman from sil.

" SIL Ramaja is a fake layout" - only the name was incorrect. its-> korean phonetic / dubeolsik phonetic.

" It doesn't work on PC, mac, or linux" - the korean phonetic didnt but dubeolsik phonetic.does on all platforms with keyman, and in windows with autohotkey (Han key =SC138) and android with heliboard, florisboard and futo keyboard.

"Its not made by SIL" - its by a Koreanologist during 4 years, including Hunminjongum analyses, hangul mechanization studies and yin and yan.

"It doesn't even work with keyman, and the website is user-made."- false, it works and in keyman web version, official website.

"You can't install it in any way?" - You can! And it works! 50% faster... that's why it's relevant. Clumpost (talk) 13:50, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever it is called, see Wikipedia is not a ... means of promotion. If and when it becomes well-known and described in third party reliable sources, then certainly it can be included. But otherwise it is just the latest of many attempts to introduce a better keyboard. So no, we can't include it. Yet. --14:17, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

No source for "Modifier Blickensderfer" layout.

I've tried looking for one myself, but I can't seem to find any information about the 2012 "Modified Blickensderfer" layout by Nick Matavka mentioned in this article. Searches with the name of the layout and creator's name bring up no results.

The only mention of this layout seems to be on Wikipedia, and the image of the layout, at least, seems to have been uploaded by Matavka themself. It seems likely to me that this section ought to be removed, but I'd rather a more experienced editor take a look first. Lunkli (talk) 04:59, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The original is cited significantly at its article, and it would certainly benefit this article to scour those citations for one or two that might be appropriate here, but there's nothing on the modern adaptation, so it can be removed as WP:OR. Van Isaac, GHTV^contr_about 07:04, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish F takes too much space

Turkish F layout takes too much space on layouts page, probably deserves its own article. SteveAGaskin (talk) 13:52, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree, these sections should only be brief summaries. WP:think of the reader who is most likely to be using a phone screen.

I'm not convinced that it is notable enough for its own article, so if anyone can suggest a safer home? Probably ok but better be safe if we can. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:00, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have split the material out into a new article, Turkish F-keyboard. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:05, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted major deletion edit

Hi @SteveAGaskin

I have reverted your edit where you removed multiple sections of the article. It is more appropriate to discuss the sections in this talk page before making such disruptive edits. Kingsacrificer (talk) 19:31, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The material that Steve removed was a wp:UNDUE WP:CFORK of other articles: the behaviour of particular keys is not a layout issue. Nevertheless I have advised Steve for future reference that it is wiser to announce an intent to make such a large deletion in advance and invite comment. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:45, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]