Talk:International Organization for Standardization

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the International Organization for Standardization article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

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: Index, 1

Template:British EspañolOxford spelling

On 1 November 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to ISO. The result of the discussion was erromoved.

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1=

International relations: United Nations Unassessed Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations.

Organizations Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

devices in the following format:

[

 {"preTaxPrice":2775, "taxPrice":444, "fullPrice":3219, "model":"SM-G532M",
   "manufacturer":"SAMSUNG", "description":"Samsung G532 grand prime plus LTE black"},
 {"preTaxPrice":2775, "taxPrice":444, "fullPrice":3219, "model":"SM-G532M",
   "manufacturer":"SAMSUNG", "description":"Samsung G532 grand prime plus LTE gold"},
 {"preTaxPrice":4309.48, "taxPrice":689.52, "fullPrice":4999, "model":"SM-J700M",
   "manufacturer":"SAMSUNG", "description":"Samsung J700 galaxy J7 LTE gold"},
 {"preTaxPrice":3447.41, "taxPrice":551.59, "fullPrice":3999, "model":"X240H",
   "manufacturer":"LGE", "description":"LG X240 K8 LTE gold"},
 {"preTaxPrice":4309.48, "taxPrice":689.52, "fullPrice":4999, "model":"M250H",
   "manufacturer":"LGE", "description":"LG M250 K10 LTE black"}

]

"Iso" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Iso. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 3#Iso until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. eviolite (talk) 23:43, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of ISO

The short name ISO is pronounced as /ˈaɪsoʊ/ and not /aɪ ɛs oʊ/. This incorrect latter form is frequently encountered, especially in photography when referring to film speed ("ISO setting"). In fact there are many books and videos which refer to ISO as an initialism for International Standards Organization, also incorrect. See earlier discussion, especially FlippingBinary's comments. For this reason, I think it would be good to explicitly state that ISO is *not* pronounced as separate letters, but as one word to help deter these commonly held misconceptions. Syu5488 (talk) 03:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How many people work for ISO

Can someone add some rough estimate? Right now I don't know how many people work for ISO in total. I understand this is hard to measure but some approximate number would be fine + source. Right now I simply don't know and I came to wikipedia with that question. 2A02:8388:1600:A200:7F68:61BB:BDB:FB57 (talk) 04:08, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Iso role in international trade

What are the iso role in international trand in need the information for my monograph thanks 203.171.100.12 (talk) 05:35, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 November 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Per consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 14:24, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

International Organization for Standardization → ISO – Per WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:ACROTITLE: "Acronyms should be used in a page name if the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject". PhotographyEdits (talk) 13:36, 1 November 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 00:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Acronyms should generally be avoided unless they are almost exclusively used. Otherwise we'd be moving Royal Air Force to RAF. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:15, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think that ISO is more used than International Organization for Standarnization. 77.221.89.89 (talk) 16:28, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As is RAF. That's not the point I'm making. It's not almost exclusively used and the full title is well-known. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:37, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above comment. Station1 (talk) 05:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Move. The new name would be easier to understand and manage. 77.221.89.89 (talk) 16:31, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support move Were it not for a redirect placed on "ISO", I would've move the page a long time ago. I feel the opposers like a redirect on this than the plain obvious.Intrisit (talk) 18:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose same with the RAF comment. Lucifer in a maid outfit (talk) 22:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Necrothesp, some other organisations use ISO, to make it hard to determine exclusive use. Dank Jae 03:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.