Talk:Autocorrection

New Sections

I have added sections on "Disadvantages" and "Practical Jokes". I have made no modifications other than these additions. --Hyperdeath 13:27, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

I created this page as a replacement for AutoCorrect because Text replacement is a more encompassing term (it includes global programs as well as the individual function in word processors). Autocorrect has been changed to a redirect to this page.

Better than having one article for AutoCorrect and one for global text replacement programs, no?  -- Run!  20:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I delisted this as CSD, as the other article redirects here. Feel free to relist the pair on RFD/AFD if anyone wants to pursue it, but this looks like a good solution. xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 02:39, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Speedy delete, please 194.83.71.244 14:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

If you want the article deleted, you'll need to add a speedy delete template. You'll have to back it up with an argument though.  -- Run!  16:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge discussion

I discovered this when trying to replace the link from Cupertino effect to spellchecker with a link to a more specific page, that there is too much overlap between the three short pages:

• Autocorrection (which I moved from text replacement which should really go to search-and-replace: is there a page for that? I have made a DAB)
• Autoreplace (which should be autoreplacement per WP:NOUN)
• Autocomplete (which should be autocompletion per WP:NOUN)

Merging all three seems to make sense. They are distinct but related and a single page would simplify the duplication in content. I don't know what the best name would be. jnestorius^(talk) 09:56, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

No to merge, because they are different programs. An autocorrect program does not learn new words, it just replaces what it thinks is wrong with the closest correct word. and it should ask before action. A good autocomplete program can be given a wordlist of correct words in one language and it also learns new words. If you write a word 2 or 3 times it is incorporated in a user wordlist for that language. In use you set it to the language you want to use, I am personally changing between English and Swedish, and when I start to write a word a box with alternatives shows up, with numbered alternatives. For example if I write rel a box shows up showing 6 alternatives, religious, relative, religion,relation, relatives, related. I push the number before the word I intended and I don't have to write the rest of the word. The program I use learns my habits, so it shows the words I often use at the top of the list. There are at least 3-4 autocomplete programs and at least one of them is freeware, the autocomplete article should list and compare these programs.

So we need at least two articles, autocomplete and autocorrect, and maybe autoreplacement as a more general term, as a disambiguation page. Autoreplacement, did you look for autocomplete or autocorrect? Roger491127 (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

It's not just an Apple thing

Many (if not most) Android software keyboard apps will by default automatically replace typos with what they guess is what you meant to say. And I wouldn't be surprised if other OSes and stuff had similar funcitonality. --TiagoTiago (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Difficulty of proof reading.

Proofreading is more difficult after autocorrection because it is easier to spot a misspelt word than a correctly spelt word which is the wrong word. QuentinUK (talk) 14:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

MOVING UNCITED MATERIAL TO TALK PAGE

Uncited material in need of citations

I am moving the following material here until it can be properly supported with reliable, secondary citations, per WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, et al. [ This diff] shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 00:33, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Lead

Some stand alone programs allow global text replacement across the operating system, and apply to text typed into any other application.

Any system such as developing a technique requires a learning curve to achieve mastery, but experience in developing a database of expressions has proven that to ensure most effective use of autocorrect, shortcuts must be easy to recall.

For example, the threshold of characters in the chosen word is no less than three (3) except when the 2-letter word is within a longer expression, e.g., "aamof" for "as a matter of fact".

One technique in developing a system of large database of terms is using prefixes and suffixes in the formation of a shortcut.

For example, using the suffix "z" [mnemonic: expandZ] for the "asapz" to expand to "as soon as possible".

Whether one requires either a robust or moderate exploitation of the autocorrect, this feature may be best used by first deleting the default terms that are supplied by the manufacturer. Those default terms typically include those words most commonly mistyped. Including those terms, e.g., "teh" for "the" invites careless and/or thoughtless actions whereas excluding them invites a learning process, or greater productivity.

Advantages

Additional options include recognizing words with two initial capital letters and correcting them (e.g. changing "EXample" to "Example"), capitalizing the first letters of sentences, and correcting accidental use of caps lock (e.g. changing "eXAMPLE" to "Example").

Input	Output
yuor	your
(r)	®
aboutit	about it
where;s	where's
*bold*	bold
_italic_	italic

The replacement list for text replacement can also be modified by the user, allowing the user to use shortcuts. If, for example, the user is writing an essay on the industrial revolution, a replacement key can be set up to replace "ir" with "industrial revolution", saving the user time whenever they want to type it. For users with the patience, this facility can even be used to create a complete keyboard shorthand system, along lines similar to those of Dutton Speedwords, but with short forms instantly replaced by full forms.

The list of terms within the default Microsoft AutoCorrect application in Microsoft Word can be replaced by words, terms, expressions, etc., other than the default set. Doing so in a wise, comprehensive and strategic manner can immensely improve the keyboarding productivity and accuracy in high-production work settings.

To get the most from the autocorrect routine, one may best exploit the fact that the most common words typed are the best candidates for which to deploy shortcuts. For example, using "t" for "the" ; "w" for "with" ; etcetera can maximize the keystroke-to-production ratio.

Disadvantages

Main article: Cupertino effect

In certain situations, automatic corrections can cause problems. This is particularly so in technical and scientific writing. For example, the biochemical cyclic adenosine monophosphate is commonly referred to as "cyclic AMP", which in turn is abbreviated to "cAMP". A text replacement function may regard this capitalization to be erroneous, and so change it to "Camp", which in the context of biochemistry is incorrect. Older automatic-correction algorithms can cause problems even in nontechnical writing; the Cupertino effect was an example: cooperation (which some dictionaries would not recognize unless hyphenated co-operation) became Cupertino.