Talk:Microsoft Word

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Microsoft Word 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 (index): 1, 2, 3, 4: 3 months

Apple Inc. Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics 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.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Top-importance).

Microsoft: Windows High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft 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.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Microsoft Windows (assessed as Top-importance).

Microsoft Windows: Computing High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows 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.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as High-importance).

Software: Computing High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as High-importance).

The content of Normal.dot was merged into Microsoft Word on 7 June 2017. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Very opinionated comments in this article

There are numerous sections here that read like a diatribe, with no sources given and very opinionated comments. This is particularly true in "Layout Issues" and "Issues with Technical Documents." I recommend the sections be rewritten to have a more NPOV. Andacar (talk) 03:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Layout Issues paragraph is also outdated from my point of view. It describes problems of pre-2010-versions, which are not interesting to the Wikipedia reader.

The paragraph Issues with Technical Documents really reads like a revenge edit of an angry word user. It would need better sources, showing that the frustration is a widespread problem worth noting here.

I would suggest deleting both paragraphs. WikiBrendy (talk) 12:18, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added requests for citation to Microsoft Word § Issues with technical documents. It had one external link to a Microsoft Community forum post, which I turned into a reference. Guy Harris (talk) 19:18, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Character encoding.

Character encoding is a fundamental concept and should be mentioned. Similar comment on the Doc talk page. I don't know enough about MS Word to write something useful. Hopefully someone can. =8~) Thx, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 17:16, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming

My edits against vandalism were reverted. In 1983, Microsoft Word was launched with the name Multi-Tool Word. Then, in 2003, it was changed to just Word. This is what I was trying to cite, but I put the source in the wrong place. SouthParkFan100 (talk) 20:37, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is not "vandalism", and you have not provided any source. REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 20:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it was vandalism. Look into it yourself. SouthParkFan100 (talk) 20:41, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VANDNOT REAL_MOUSE_IRL talk 20:52, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m sorry. It won’t happen again. I’m new here so I was very confused. SouthParkFan100 (talk) 21:39, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]