Talk:colorize

colorise

Even if "colorise" exists in some books, it cannot be called a correct spelling. Color is a US-exclusive spelling and in the US you use always the -ize spelling except for some verbs. In the Commonwealth you use always colour, but either with -ise or -ize. So "colorize", "colourize" and "colourise" are correct forms. Maybe "colorise" exists, but that does not mean it's a correct form. --Zinoural (talk) 19:11, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

We describe words as they are used, not as they are "correct". See descriptive, prescriptive. Equinox ◑ 19:13, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Then you should add a note, that this form is a misspelling. No dictionary lists it. --19:24, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

The 'u' is dropped traditionally for words like this when the suffix -ise/-ize is added. Hence glamorise/glamorize is much more common in British English than glamourise/glamourize. For this reason, the u-less version of colorise/colorize is preferred by Oxford dictionaries. Nevertheless, there is not complete agreement among British authorities for this word. For example, some inconsistently prefer keeping the 'u for colourise and dropping it in decolorise, and Chambers prefers keeping it always.--86.31.121.72 11:51, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Similarly, nobody in the UK writes e.g. "humourous" or "glamourous": those are not traditionally correct spellings anywhere. Even Brits write humorous and glamorous. I think the previous poster is correct about the Latin connection. Equinox ◑ 03:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Further to my note about dropping the 'u' traditionally, I have removed the word 'traditionally' from the page and replaced it with 'frequently'. This is because the word has had a muddled history, and the earliest version of it according to the OED actually has the 'u' (from the 16th century). 'Traditionally' therefore does not seem appropriate, although as said, there is a well-established habit of dropping the 'u' in this word in British English.--86.31.121.72 21:07, 5 May 2015 (UTC)