Help! Quick question...

[Marc Joan]

Just wondered if anybody knew which of the following is most broadly accepted as the correct format:
1950s or nineteen-fifties?
The former generates a red squiggly underscore in some systems, the latter sometimes looks unwieldy.

 

[Brian Clegg]

I would always put 1950s myself. If a publisher has a house style that's different, they can change it.

 

[Katie-Ellen]

Many Happy Returns, Brian. Summat popular science-ish in your honour.

 

[Meerkat]

It is either "the fifties" or "the 1950's." It is never spelled out as "nineteen-fifties."

Source: Words into Type (the editing "bible").

 

[Marc Joan]

Thanks! Apostrophe duly noted oops

 

[Brian Clegg]

Sorry, I have to disagree! As I mentioned, this is a house style thing, but the general feeling is with modern publications that this kind of apostrophe use (also CD's) is dated and unnecessary. Stick with 1950s! See here in the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/04/top-10-books-women-in-the-1950s (and many other places).

 

[Karen Gray]

I'd use the numbers (1950s) x

 

[Marc Joan]

Ok all. I think the consensus is 1950s, while acknowledging that some editors will want to change it to suit the look of their publications. Thanks, everyone.

 

[AliG]

Found this; huge help. I was getting gummed up with time. Ungummed now. http://theeditorsblog.net/2013/01/13/numbers-in-fiction/