text:
Talk:intentional walk

intentional walk
Rfv-sense. The verb "to intentional walk". The example uses "intentionally walk", however I suspect this might be attestable as a nonstandard variant. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Cited, using five of Google Groups' six Usenet hits for "intentional walked". (The sixth is from the same newsgroup as two of the others, and didn't seem to add anything special.) But overall it does seem to warrant some sort of "rare" or "nonstandard" tag. —Ruakh TALK 12:27, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Passed. Thank you, citer. —msh210℠ 17:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

 * This one is pretty ugly. I should elaborate; as a lifelong baseball fan I can say with certainty that while the noun is intentional walk: the verb form is intentionally walk:.  What you found on Google groups and on Usenet are people who don't really understand how English works. -  21:43, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's a "set phrase", the noun being used as a verb. This happens quite often, albeit usually with single word nouns, not two words nouns like this! This is why I suggested a tag. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:40, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I disagree. If it makes sense for a pitcher to "walk" a batter (verbing the noun "walk"), then it can make sense for a pitcher to "intentional walk" a batter (verbing the noun "intentional walk"). It's not how I would say it, but I'm sure there are many people who understand how English works, but who nonetheless say things differently from how I would. —Ruakh TALK 22:42, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

 * walk:, being a transitive verb, should be modified by adverbs. If a pitcher walks someone in an intentional manner, they have been walked intentionally.  When walk: is used as a noun it should be modified by adjectives.  If a there is a walk which was thrown intentionally, it is an intentional walk.  In the baseball rulebook it is called an intentional base on balls, which is not helpful to us.  I am not saying we shouldn't include it, but since there is ample writing on the subject of baseball in periodicals and in books, can't we find a few cites which are from edited and published work? -  19:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Or just edited, at least? Or written by someone with two names? There's only one really good example here, showing that it was deliberate. For all we know, the others could all be written by the very same person. Not that I believe that, necessarily, though I would say independence is nonetheless suspect. DAVilla 04:32, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

 * (Unstriking due to contention about the attestedness.) The 1991 quote from "clarinews" (a username, I strongly suspect, that actually represents a service of ClariNet) is actually seemingly by UPI (yet Google News isn't pulling it up, which makes me wonder). The 1994 Jonathan Schmitt quote is from an .edu account, and the e-mail username is schmittj, so it's probably his real name. That's two independent cites, if you like that analysis. And the other hits almost certainly represent at least one more person. —msh210℠ (talk) 17:18, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Restruck after some investigation. Also removed the "rare" label as it's anything but. DAVilla 06:33, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:intentional walk


text:
torroncino

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) small nougat

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: torroncino


text:
disproportioned

Adjective

 * 1) Badly proportioned; disproportionate.

title: disproportioned


text:
Talk:Goofy

Goofy
Needs attributive cites. --Yair rand 00:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * What about ? Not exactly an attributive use in the strict sense that would require "goofy people", but rather close to it. Interestingly, the found hits use "goofy" with lowercase "g".
 * What searches have you used in your attempt to find attributive uses of "Goofy"? --Dan Polansky 13:45, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Goofy got his name from goofy, which is presumably from goof, which probably preceded goof. In writing only the capitalized form is likely to reflect attributive use of the proper noun. One of the characters most distinguishing features was his "goofy-sounding" voice. Just as in Donald Duck, that might be the kind of thing that generated attributive use that was of the proper noun. If there were a copyright-free sound clip of the Goofy laugh (Note the attributive use.) or an imitation of it, that would be a useful ostensive definition. DCDuring TALK 14:54, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops; you are right; the capitalization is crucial. --Dan Polansky 15:01, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Needs attributive cites with a widely-understood meaning. Citations which support the definition “of or pertaining to Goofy” don't qualify. —Michael Z. 2010-03-09 21:55 z

RFV failed, entry deleted. —Ruakh TALK 17:46, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Goofy


text:
tagliafuoco

Etymology
.

Adjective

 * 1) fire resistant, fireproof

title: tagliafuoco


text: telefonagli

title: telefonagli


text: shalm

title: shalm


text:
удила

Noun

 * 1) bit (metal in horse's mouth)

title: удила


text: σχεδίου

title: σχεδίου


text: σχεδίων

title: σχεδίων


text: σχέδια

title: σχέδια


text: σχεδίας

title: σχεδίας


text:
Talk:ailihphilia

ailihphilia
Usual garbage, I just want to check before deleting. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

 * In fairness this gets six hits on Google Books, two of which are usable (if you allow Ailihphilia). So I think it merits at the very least a whole month. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:56, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Yeah,, , , and all definitely use it, whilst this one is unclear. It satisfies the CFI, but the way it’s used clearly requires that it be marked as a nonce word. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 18:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

RFV failed, entry deleted. I clicked on Doremítzwr's links, and despite his statement that it satisfies the CFI, I'm not convinced. I did put one of them on the citations-page, though. —Ruakh TALK 07:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:ailihphilia


text: σχεδίες

title: σχεδίες


text: σχεδιών

title: σχεδιών


text: étirements

title: étirements


text:
Talk:paternal half brother

paternal half brother
And several ones of the same theme, such as paternal cousin, paternal uncle, paternal aunt, paternal grandmother, paternal grandfather and. Sure paternal: is enough? And for maternal: maternal cousin, maternal uncle, maternal aunt, maternal grandmother, maternal grandfather and maternal half sister. Really strong delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Adding maternal half brother. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It kinda seems a shame to delete them after seeing how much work the translators have gone through to tackle these terms. (The Chinese family tree in particular is a nightmare.) However I fail to see how any of them can be justified when they are so obviously SoP. Tooironic 22:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * So, reluctant delete. Tooironic 22:39, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Useful and interesting. Keep. You cannot show how deleting these would improve the project. Deleting does not save storage space and serves no useful purpose. —Stephen 05:24, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Surely you can't be suggesting that we keep everything, including SoP's? I don't think anyone thought that deletions were to save a few bytes of the virtually unlimited storage space. --Yair rand 05:59, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No one has offered any rationale for deleting useful, thoughtful, and well written and formatted entries such as these. We know why we delete garbage, copyvios, threats, and so on, but no good reason for files such as this. As for SoP, it should not be the justification for deleting anything. If an entry is SoP and has nothing else to recommend it, then it should go; but just because it’s SoP, that should not count against it if it has some saving grace, such as being a set term or if it has educational or informational value, or, as in this case, it is contains linguistic that probably cannot reasonably be preserved and made useful and usable in some other way. SoP is only bad when that is all there is. —Stephen 06:37, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I could not agree with Stephen more. < class="latinx">Ƿidsiþ 06:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand perfectly, but I kind of think you could justify keeping almost any article that way. I dislike keeping stuff that doesn't meet CFI (and these are a mile short) just to add translations. This is a dictionary, not a translation project. But point duly noted. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:20, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * All set phrases should be kept, because there is at least one interesting thing that should be mentioned: the fact that it's a set phrase. This fact cannot be guessed, and it's important to know it when you use the language. A dictionary is also useful when you try to build sentences, not only when you try to understand sentences. And remember that set phrases are not considered as words by typographers, but that, very often, they are considered as words by linguists. Lmaltier 07:12, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Previous discussions: Talk:maternal_uncle, Beer_parlour_archive/2007/November. -- Visviva 12:25, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Delete — hippietrail 04:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I shall point out that I wasn't actually aware of these discussions... and indeed there are some fraternal and sororal entries too. At some point, the reader has to be able to add two words together and understand what they mean. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * These seem to have failed, does anyone want to disagree? Mglovesfun (talk) 20:40, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Deleted the redundant three-word paternal half brother, maternal half sister, maternal half brother, but kept the two-word ones to accommodate very complex Chinese family tree that I am familiar.--Jusjih 01:29, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:paternal half brother


text:
Talk:pack heat

pack heat
SOP: pack v. (16) + heat n. (7). —Michael Z. 2010-06-03 19:13 z
 * "pack" ~ "carry"; "heat" ~ "rod", "gat", etc. Delete. DCDuring TALK 22:32, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah kill it . Mglovesfun (talk) 22:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Keep as a set phrase... you don't pack a piece or carry heat. — [ R·I·C ] opiaterein — 23:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep as a set phrase. The meaning is not obvious from the two separate words, each having several meanings.--Dmol 01:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You certainly can pack a piece, that's pretty common, as for carry heat, no idea. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Set, idiomatic phrase. "Pack" has many meanings and that makes it even more ambiguous. Moreover, it has a second (slang) meaning not listed: to appear to have a bulging crotch. ---> Tooironic 13:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd really like it if folks brought more than their narrow experience base to these discussions. We have numerous corpora and criteria to use for determining whether a term is a set phrase. Claiming without a shred of evidence that this is a set phrase when some particular alternative words have been pointed out as valid substitutes reduces this process to mere voting and makes me wonder whether participants are using anything other than whimsy. I had thought that lexicography had progressed beyond armchair introspection.
 * We have also already discredited the preposterous argument advanced by those who should know better without support of any kind that polysemy of any term in a collocation makes it worth including. Without qualification that argument would mean that the more we refine our definitions, the more collocations we would automatically include. I'm tired of doing citation work against preposterous claims of idiomaticity when mere unsubstantiated assertions seem to be accepted. DCDuring TALK 14:32, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 1. What are these "corpora and criteria" that can determine whether something is or isn't a set phrase? Enlighten me! 2. The "preposterous argument" that polysemy makes something worth including is, however silly, explicitly allowed for in the CFI. < class="latinx">Ƿidsiþ 14:41, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * See English set phrases for a discussion of operational definitions of "set phrase", ie, suggesting criteria.
 * We don't keep set phrases that aren't idiomatic. Lmaltier has always argued keeping set phrases no matter what they mean. I've always counter-argued that if we keep them, we can skip the definition as there's no need for one. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:56, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Again though, I think we disagree on what idiomatic: means. But look Martin, a dictionary isn't just there to explain what a word means, it's there to record that a word exists. Consider duvet cover: above, its meaning is very obvious, but it's not obvious that we would say "duvet cover" and "pillow case" but not "duvet case" or "pillow cover". These common collocations have transparent meanings but their existence is not predictable. That is part of what a dictionary does, and that's part of what "idiomatic" means. I don't know how this should be codified in the CFI, but it should be. < class="latinx">Ƿidsiþ 18:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Re 2, see the "bank parking lot" example in the CFI. There is polysemy, but because there is use of the phrase, albeit rare, with both of the feasible meanings, the word is deemed not inclusible. —msh210℠ 15:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, but that doesn't seem to be the case with pack heat:. < class="latinx">Ƿidsiþ 15:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * See . —msh210℠ 17:16, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. It's vanishingly rare, but it obviously exists. So that makes this inadmissible? < class="latinx">Ƿidsiþ 18:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. Bank parking lot is inadmissible because all feasible senses actually exist. We have to ask whether all feasible senses of this actually exist. (I'd guess so.) What's feasible is subjective. I, for one, think that it's feasible to say pack heat for pack (to put in a suitcase or the like) + heat (hotness), to mean "put a source of heat in a bag, as to take on a camping trip". If we agree that that's feasible, and if we find that it's never used that way, then I suppose the CFi would have us keep this entry. —msh210℠ 18:39, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that bare assertions are not helpful, but I don't know if the available corpus tools have the answer either. My experiments with MI and similar measures were not encouraging; I'd be interested if you've found a metric that gives usable results.  Quantitative analysis would seem especially tricky for  intersections of polysemous terms like "pack" and "heat"; a satisfactory frequency-based analysis would require that all of the irrelevant senses first be excluded.  To do that without picking through thousands of KWICs by hand, one would need a very sophisticated word-sense disamiguation program (of the sort that is probably still years/decades in the future).  So the best we can manage for now, I fear, is intersubjectivity.
 * Unfortunately, the state of discourse on Wiktionary seems to have actually deteriorated of late (something I would scarcely have thought possible before). On the wiki as in life, sincere inquiry requires a certain level of mutual trust.  The snide and insulting behavior that has become so widespread here recently can lead even sincere and intelligent contributors to retreat behind false certainty.  Likewise, as this mindset takes hold, it becomes ever harder to justify taking time for thoughtful reflection/analysis that will probably just be ignored.  YMMV. -- Visviva 15:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I am skeptical of the given sense of "heat". I have encountered this sense nowhere except in the phrase "pack heat", and the only example given for this sense uses "pack heat". I expect the sense can be verified, and perhaps there's a case for inclusion even if it can't.  But at best this seems like a classic case of a term that is understood within a narrow speech community, while being understood by the broader community only in a specific phrase. If true, that makes this phrase significantly non-compositional.  The existence of a rare independent sense is not sufficient grounds for deleting a common phrase IMO.  I believe we have passed terms under these circumstances in the past.
 * Checking the first page of results for : : 68 hits for "heat", but AFAICT this sense appears only in "packing heat" (1x). : 8 hits for "heat", but this sense appears only in "packing heat" (2x).  : 10 hits for "heat", but this sense appears only in "packing heat" (1x).  : 15 hits for "heat", but this sense appears only in "packing heat" (1x).  : 10 hits for "heat", but this sense appears only in "packing heat" (1x).  : 1 hit for "heat", only in "packing heat".  : 4 hits for "heat", but this sense appears only in "packing heat" (1x).  Two magazines and one duplicate are omitted, but these also contained no independent uses for "heat" in the putative sense.  As a sanity check, there is also no use of this sense in the first page of results for "carrying heat", or in the 3 COCA hits for "carrying heat".
 * Based on the above, unless it can be shown that the relevant sense of "heat" is not only real but comparably widespread, IMO we have to regard "pack heat" as a distinct lexical unit, and therefore keep this entry. -- Visviva 15:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Google Books: "carrying heat" gun has 5/10 relevant hits on the first page. OED has quotations including “I fogged away with my heat until I pooped that dummy,” “I won't use this heat, if I have to,” and to turn on the heat meaning “Cover One with a Gun (v. phr.).” This heat (also heater) has literal and figurative shades of meaning including “agitation,” “pressure,” “violence,” “gunplay,” and “a gun.” —Michael Z. 2010-06-04 18:02 z
 * keep, per Ƿidsiþ, Visviva, etc. What Visviva calls distinct lexical unit is what linguists often call word. May I add that this phrase seemed very strange to me, I had to read the page to understand it. Lmaltier 18:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Interesting, thanks. It still seems to me that this sense of "heat" is far less widespread than the phrase "pack heat".   gives about 507 hits, almost all of which are in this sense, while  gives 46, of which about half seem to be in this sense; that suggests a ratio of about 20:1, but I think even that is understating it, since authors are much more likely to need to use "gun" in the context of "carry heat" in order to clue their readers in to the intended meaning.  Assuming the b.g.c count of ~2700 for "packing heat" can be relied on, that suggests that only about 1 in 5 uses even mentions "gun" on the same page or in the title; thus the ratio of "pack heat" to "carry heat" could be closer to 100:1.  On a personal level, if someone (implausibly) were to ask me "are you packing heat," I would immediately understand their meaning; if they asked "you got any heat on you," I would be confused and perhaps think they were asking for a light.  Of course, none of this may be relevant to the question of whether this entry and others like it add value to the dictionary.  Certainly it is more likely that someone confused by this phrase will look at pack and/or heat for answers. -- Visviva 22:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Lemming check: OneLook shows only Urban Dictionary as having "pack heat" as an entry. Not even Wordnet views this as a semantic unit. DCDuring TALK 20:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The OED includes it (under sense 9a): "to pack heat: to carry a gun". < class="latinx">Ƿidsiþ 05:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Slang dictionaries are also of some lemmingological interest in this case. Cassell's gives it an entry, as does Partridge.  The Shorter Slang Dictionary actually refers the reader from "heat" to "pack heat" for the lemma entry.  Interestingly these vary on the date of first attestation (1920s according to Cassell's, 1930 according to Partridge), which suggests there is room for us to add some value by nailing down the earliest findable uses.  (I am without OED access, so can't speak to what they may have.)  -- Visviva 22:02, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I have taken the trouble to provide cites at Citations:pack heat that provide counterexamples to the unsubstantiated claim that this is a set phrase.
 * 1) Determiners may be inserted (eg, some, any, no, the)
 * 2) Adjuncts may be inserted (eg. serious, heavy, automatic, semi-automatic)
 * 3) "Pack" can be at once used with "heat" and other complements (eg. knife, drugs)

 * Contrary evidence would need to be more quantitative. Because of the polysemy it is difficult to use the readily available corpora for quantitative tests. DCDuring TALK 21:09, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The evidence presented is contrary to the claim that it is a set phrase:. There may be other grounds for arguing that it is idiomatic that other lexicographers haven't yet accepted. DCDuring TALK 21:12, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Keep. The possibility of inserting determiners or inserting adjuncts does not run counter to the meaning of set phrase (grammatical sense 2) any more than the splitting of a phrasal verb would make it any less a phrasal verb. The term set phrase does not mean "completely and universally invariant unit".  And yes, I have provided examples.  In any case, the expression is extremely idiomatic, with many possible meanings of the components, but only one combination of those possibilities is usually meant. --EncycloPetey 03:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Keep: This was a well-established definition until User:Diego Grez and I noticed that it was tagged under the wrong word form. It is an idiomatic phrase in that "heat" in "packing heat" means something different than "heat" generally does. Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 02:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. There's no way a poor foreigner like me could figure this out. --Hekaheka 04:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If this was wikipedia, this would be a a candidate for a SNOW close Purplebackpack89  (Notes Taken) (Locker) 15:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Abstain, since I've never heard of it, I'm badly placed to comment. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

 * kept. Hah, senses 16 + 7. --Rising Sun talk? contributions 23:55, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:pack heat


text:
Talk:how many

how many
SOP. See also my comments under [[]], just above. —msh210℠ (talk) 10:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. DCDuring TALK 16:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Strong keep, just as above under [[]]. --Anatoli 23:26, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. We need some kind of COALMINE-like policy for multiword entries that have so many single-word translations. --Yair rand (talk) 23:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Keep. Phrases such as how many, how much, and how long, are idiomatic and have an important place in any language. If it were SoP, you would be able to translate it into virtually any language just by looking up the translations of the parts...but this will not work, because it is not SoP. For instance, "how many" in Spanish is not "cómo muchos". —Stephen 23:58, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, conflicting senses (or interpretations) of . Anything that can have an 'unexpected' translation can be idiomatic in that sense. FWIW CFI never tries to explain what idiomatic means, so that's a good get out clause. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:01, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure CFI explains what idiomatic means (for purposes of inclusion. What it means in its dictionary definition doesn't matter). It devotes an entire section to what idiomatic means: [[Wiktionary:CFI]]. The main thrust of that section is in its first sentence: "An expression is “idiomatic” if its full meaning cannot be easily derived from the meaning of its separate components." —msh210℠ (talk) 12:24, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. I don't agree, in general, with Stephen G. Brown's definition of — even translating something as simple as "I saw it" requires knowing a great deal about the target language's grammar (word order, verb tense/aspect/mood/evidentiality/agreement/etc., noun and pronoun case/definiteness/number/gender/etc., which pronouns are droppable, etc., etc., etc.) — but  and  seem like no-brainers to me. —Ruakh TALK 03:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * You haven't explained your reasons for keeping the entry, Ruakh. BTW, isn't it amazing in how many languages how much and how many are translated as single words? I just can't think of them as SoP. --Anatoli 03:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I said it seems like a no-brainer to me, how much more reason do you want? :-P  But yeah, one factor is probably how they're single words in the other languages I speak. (But there's more to it than that. The other languages I speak also all have single words or hyphenated compounds meaning "the day before yesterday" and "the day after tomorrow", but said still seem SOP to me. "How much" and "how many", by contrast, really feel like set phrases to me, question words almost on par with "who" and "what" and "how". Technically they can be explained as sums of parts, since  and  both accept modification by degree adverbs, and one of 's uses is as the interrogative degree adverb, but I don't think speakers think of them that way. At least, this speaker doesn't.) —Ruakh TALK 22:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * But most speakers don't consciously think of such words at all. And students of language may be the worst ones to "introspect". Until such time as we can read exactly what actually happens inside user brains, we could use some kind of more criteria that don't involve either introspection or imagination. Many here may live to see the day when there is some actual science to determining whether there is a difference between combien: and how many: or how much: in the minds of equivalent native speakers. DCDuring TALK 23:14, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm a big admirer of your advocacy of developing and following good criteria; but when we lack clear criteria, I have to fall back on introspection. Sorry! —Ruakh TALK 02:14, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Very Strong keep. It's a pure idiomatic expression. Once again: think of the foreigners who are learning Shakespeare's language. How a Frenchman, a Spaniard, an Italian, a German, etc. could guess that the English how many means in their respective languages, combien, cuánto, quanto, wieviel? Apart from that, let me remind that these foreign words can be translated in two manners in English : with how many, but also with how much, depending on the meaning. Therefore, deleting how many would be a terrible mistake. --Actarus (Prince d'Euphor) 10:55, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I think idiomatic as long as you don't speak English. Perhaps keep and add to Category:English non-idiomatic translation targets. But delete any [how + adjective]. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:53, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * At least in German, wie+viel suggests "how much" almost immediately. Equinox ◑ 21:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

 * 1) Keep I did not understand why you want to delete it Pamputt 12:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Kept. DAVilla 07:00, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

RFV discussion: September 2018

 * Rfv-sense L3 Pronoun "unspecified amount"
 * Rfv-sense L3 Pronoun "what amount"

Anyone able to figure out how there might be a pronoun use? - Amgine/t · e 21:06, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

 * I have cited what I think the editor probably meant. Kiwima (talk) 23:50, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

 * Re "how many are the evils..." and "how many are those...": the citations do not appear to fit "unspecified amount". These cites are expressing "there are very many of these; they are numerous". Equinox ◑ 17:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Two of the three cites for the "unspecified amount" definition incorporate it in rhetorical questions, which introduces some ambiguity; one of the four cites for the "what amount" definition is also a rhetorical question.
 * I think both definitions are wrong: the word number (countable) should be substituted for amount (uncountable). DCDuring (talk) 21:45, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Why don't you take a stab at improving the definitions? Kiwima (talk) 23:08, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Does no one have any opinions on such things anymore? DCDuring (talk) 20:09, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

 * I do get it that it's annoying for you to find a bunch of cites and then have them criticised, but as long as I think they don't match the definitions I'm going to do so. I open more RFVs than I resolve but (IMO) that's because we have a lot of bad entries that can't actually be adequately cited. I don't do it to waste people's time. Equinox ◑ 22:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

 * An I agree that the definitions are lacking. I was mostly digging up cites that illustrate use as a pronoun, as opposed to a determiner. In this particular case, I don't particularly have a better definition, and thought maybe someone else could work on producing one that matches the cites. Kiwima (talk) 23:40, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The other dictionaries that have this either have what number as a def. or a non-gloss definition. Most other dictionaries have an appropriate sense at how which works no matter whether it precedes determiners, adjectives, or adjectives. I wonder how many of the translations given in the entry fit translations of all three of the usage examples I have added. DCDuring (talk) 00:24, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I was thinking maybe when you see the definition of cuanto, you would see what it shows more
 * Or you would understand the meaning more. — Osbri (talk) 10:36, 9 September 2018 (ET)
 * are you thinking of uses like "take how many you want"? I hear that kind of thing. Helenpaws (talk) 04:43, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I think I was thinking that or something like that

Or maybe I was thinking “how many you see” Or “you have how many”. — Osbri (talk) 19:09, 10 September 2018 (ET)
 * I need a little help in clarifying the examples. As I read them the first two seem wrong.
 * ?"take how many you want"
 * "Take as many as you want", "Take however many you want"
 * "How many you see?"
 * "How many do you see?"
 * Is "you have how many" a question, which would be good colloquial usage, or a statement, which would be wrong? DCDuring (talk) 09:33, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I think “you have how many” might show a question. Maybe “how many” might have what “what” or “many” might have
 * Or have some meaning or function that “what” or “many” might have. What might some of you think? — Osbri (talk) 15:48, 15 September 2018 (ET)

 * RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 03:23, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

RFD discussion: September 2018–June 2019
The second sense under the Pronoun L2 seems duplicative of the determiner sense claimed to be a translation hub. DCDuring (talk) 04:19, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you want to remove it completely or can it be turned into a translation hub? I think the translations are the same. 83.216.80.232 05:47, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

 * No consensus to delete: No deletion votes other than nominator and no votes or comments of any kind in 8½ months Purplebackpack89 19:14, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with this closure. bd2412 T 01:07, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

how few
Why not add also how few ?--Backinstadiums (talk) 15:45, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:how many


text: δρεπανιού

title: δρεπανιού


text: δρεπανιών

title: δρεπανιών


text: δρεπάνια

title: δρεπάνια


text:
filológia

Noun

 * 1) philology

Noun

 * 1) philology

title: filológia


text:
intelligenciahányados

Noun

 * 1) intelligence quotient

title: intelligenciahányados


text:
buzgóság

Noun

 * 1) zeal

title: buzgóság


text:
aforizma

Noun

 * 1) aphorism

title: aforizma


text:
békekongresszus

Noun

 * 1) peace congress

title: békekongresszus


text: kullen

title: kullen


text: Template:bn-personal pronoun

title: Template:bn-personal pronoun


text:
flexibilitás

Etymology
Borrowed from. With ending.

Noun

 * 1) flexibility

title: flexibilitás


text:
idegengyűlölet

Noun

 * 1) xenophobia

title: idegengyűlölet


text:
degradálás

Noun

 * 1) degradation

title: degradálás


text:
elektrifikál

Etymology
From, from. With the verb-forming suffix.

Verb

 * 1)  to electrify to communicate or supply electricity to

title: elektrifikál


text:
halálhír

Noun

 * 1) death rumour
 * 2) death notice, news of death a brief notice of a person’s death, as published in a newspaper
 * 1) death notice, news of death a brief notice of a person’s death, as published in a newspaper

title: halálhír


text: σύνθεσης

title: σύνθεσης


text: συνθέσεως

title: συνθέσεως


text: συνθέσεων

title: συνθέσεων


text: συνθέσεις

title: συνθέσεις


text:
euforikus

Adjective

 * 1) euphoric

title: euforikus


text:
agyvelőgyulladás

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) encephalitis

title: agyvelőgyulladás


text:
emléknap

Noun

 * 1) memorial day, remembrance day

title: emléknap


text:
আমরা

Pronoun

 * 1) we

title: আমরা


text:
gólyahír

Noun

 * 1) kingcup, marsh marigold

title: gólyahír


text:
immanens

Etymology
From, from. With ending.

Adjective

 * 1)  immanent

title: immanens


text:
তুই

Etymology
Ultimately from.

Pronoun

 * 1)  you

title: তুই


text: URBI

title: URBI


text:
úszóhártya

Noun

 * 1) web (on animal feet)

title: úszóhártya


text:
cikória

Etymology
,, (compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬), from , , from. .

Noun

 * 1)  chicory
 * 2)  root chicory
 * 3)  endive
 * 1)  endive
 * 1)  endive

title: cikória


text:
urbiscript

Proper noun

 * 1)  A scripting language used to orchestrate C++ (and other) components in robotics software

title: urbiscript


text:
exporttilalom

Noun

 * 1) export ban

title: exporttilalom


text:
tilalom

Etymology
From the same stem as.

Noun

 * 1) prohibition, ban

title: tilalom


text:
bowlingozik

Verb

 * 1)  to play bowling

title: bowlingozik


text:
আপনি

Etymology
From.

Pronoun

 * 1)  you

title: আপনি


text:
húsfogyasztás

Noun

 * 1) meat consumption

title: húsfogyasztás


text:
űrhajószemélyzet

Noun

 * 1) spacecraft personnel

title: űrhajószemélyzet


text: Category:Mende script languages

title: Category:Mende script languages


text:
citromsav

Noun

 * 1)  citric acid

title: citromsav


text:
istenség

Noun

 * 1) divinity, godhead, deity

title: istenség


text:
gerillaháború

Noun

 * 1) guerrilla war

title: gerillaháború


text:
gerilla

Etymology
Borrowed from.

Noun

 * 1) guerrilla

Noun

 * 1) a guerilla

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) guerrilla guerrilla fighter

title: gerilla


text:
Demirkazık

Etymology
From.

Proper noun

 * 1) Polaris (star)

title: Demirkazık


text:
apoplexia

Etymology
Borrowed from, from , from ; +.

Noun

 * 1) apoplexy

Noun

 * 1) apoplexy

Etymology
From, from , from ; +.

Noun

 * 1)  apoplexy loss of consciousness

title: apoplexia


text:
Kuzey Yıldızı

Proper noun

 * 1) the North Star, Polaris

title: Kuzey Yıldızı


text: alulexponált

title: alulexponált


text:
jégkorongozik

Verb

 * 1)  to play ice hockey

title: jégkorongozik


text:
ótvaros

Adjective

 * 1)  impetiginous, having ringworm

title: ótvaros


text:
ejtőernyős

Noun

 * 1) paratrooper

title: ejtőernyős


text:
overnourished

Etymology
.

Adjective

 * 1) Excessively nourished.
 * 2)  Overweight.
 * 1)  Overweight.
 * 1)  Overweight.
 * 1)  Overweight.

Translations

 * Finnish: yliravittu
 * German: überernährt
 * Irish: róchothaithe

title: overnourished


text:
তোরা

Pronoun

 * 1)  you

title: তোরা


text:
paricalcitol

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)  An analog of calcitriol (the active form of vitamin D) that is used for the prevention and treatment of.

title: paricalcitol


text:
foclóirí

Etymology 1
From.

Noun

 * 1) lexicographer

title: foclóirí


text:
তোমরা

Etymology
Cognate with 🇨🇬.

Pronoun

 * 1)  you

title: তোমরা


text:
pathomechanism

Noun

 * 1)  pathological mechanism; the mechanism by which a pathological condition occurs

Related terms

 * biopathomechanism

title: pathomechanism


text:
আপনারা

Pronoun

 * 1)  you

title: আপনারা


text:
음악가

Noun

 * 1) musician (person who performs or writes music)

title: 음악가


text:
peripartum

Etymology
, thus "around [the time of] birth"

Adjective

 * 1) That occurs around the time of labor and childbirth (parturition) (typically, within a few weeks before, intrapartum, or within a few weeks after).

title: peripartum


text: Category:Inscriptional Pahlavi script languages


text: Fritüre

title: Fritüre


text: monteurs

title: monteurs


text:
monteuse

Etymology
From.

title: monteuse


text: monteuses

title: monteuses


text: nudités

title: nudités


text:
phosphohistone

Noun

 * 1)  A phosphoprotein related to histone.

title: phosphohistone


text: créationnistes

title: créationnistes


text:
posttransplantation

Adjective

 * 1) Following transplantation

title: posttransplantation


text: Ginko

title: Ginko


text:
preobese

Adjective

 * 1) Describing people who are not yet, but will become obese

title: preobese


text:
primigravity

Noun

 * 1) The condition of being primigravid.

title: primigravity


text: proconvertases

title: proconvertases


text: 유고슬라비아

title: 유고슬라비아


text: lagons

title: lagons


text: Karamel

title: Karamel


text: Communiqué

title: Communiqué


text: didactiques

title: didactiques


text: kremig

title: kremig


text:
Kudret

Etymology
From.

title: Kudret


text: crèmig

title: crèmig


text: poissons-chats

title: poissons-chats


text: toréadors

title: toréadors


text:
Talk:whereby

Who are these "careful writers"? And who let the prescriptivist in? Perhaps some actual examples of usage for those wild, irresponsible writers among us would be helpful.

Whereby (Comment #2)
The prescriptivist verbiage under the Usage heading is ripe for deletion. I'm generally averse to deletionism, so I hesitate to pull the trigger myself. I'd rather someone equip the verbiage with a credible reference to some published piece of prescriptionism. --Kent Dominic (talk) 15:58, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

"nonstandard" example sentence?
The example given for the "nonstandard" definition (#3) strikes me as simply an additional example of the "standard" definition (#2), "by which":

"This is an electronic system whereby executives are issued with small bleepers."

I read this as having the exact same meaning as "This is an electronic system by which executives are issued with small bleepers."

So if there indeed is a "nonstandard" contemporary usage then I think it needs a much better example sentence. -12:07, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:whereby


text: exodes

title: exodes


text: Schuhkrem

title: Schuhkrem


text: Schuhkreme

title: Schuhkreme


text: méfiances

title: méfiances


text: Schuhcrème

title: Schuhcrème


text: Sezen

title: Sezen


text: Emek

title: Emek


text: queues-de-cheval

title: queues-de-cheval


text:
Emel

Etymology
Borrowed from.

Statistics

 * According to the 2010 United States Census, Emel is the 37180th most common surname in the United States, belonging to 600 individuals. Emel is most common among White (94.0%) individuals.

title: Emel


text: réunifications

title: réunifications


text: Elik

title: Elik


text:
капиталовложение

Noun

 * 1) investment (a placement of capital in expectation of deriving income or profit from its use)

title: капиталовложение


text: Seçkin

title: Seçkin


text: Sonnenkrem

title: Sonnenkrem


text: Sonnenkreme

title: Sonnenkreme


text:
réunifier

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to reunite, reunify

title: réunifier


text: Sonnencrème

title: Sonnencrème


text: Naz

title: Naz


text:
Narin

Proper noun

 * Alternative form:
 * Alternative form:

title: Narin


text:
garbage in, garbage out

Proverb

 * 1)  If input data are not complete, accurate, and timely, then the resulting output is unreliable and of no useful value.
 * 2) * 2008, Roger K. Lewis, "'In Architectural Design, Brains and Talent Trump the Best Software," Washington Post, 19 July (retrieved 26 July 2010):
 * The old caveat "GIGO"—garbage in, garbage out—is as valid in architectural design as in any other computer-aided activity.
 * The old caveat "GIGO"—garbage in, garbage out—is as valid in architectural design as in any other computer-aided activity.

Usage notes

 * Even though the word garbage is chiefly American English, garbage in, garbage out may also be used in British English.

Translations

 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Danish:
 * Finnish: roskaa sisään, roskaa ulos
 * French:
 * German: GIGO, Wer misst, misst Mist.
 * Greek: εισερχόμενα δεδομένα εξερχόμενα δεδομένα
 * Italian:
 * Japanese:
 * Khmer: ទុកមិនចំណេញ ដកចេញមិនខាត
 * Korean:
 * Portuguese:
 * Russian: му́сор на вхо́де — му́сор на вы́ходе
 * Spanish: basura entra, basura sale

title: garbage in, garbage out


text: Nazan

title: Nazan


text: Négligé

title: Négligé


text:
в первую очередь

Adverb

 * 1) first, first of all, first and foremost, in the first place, in the first instance, primarily before anything else in importance or precedence

title: в первую очередь


text: redéfinitions

title: redéfinitions


text:
Holzscheit

Noun

 * 1) log (split wood used as firewood)

Usage notes

 * For notes on gender and plural see the simplex.

title: Holzscheit


text: zodiacaux

title: zodiacaux


text: zodiacales

title: zodiacales


text:
Kachelofen

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) tiled stove, cocklestove

title: Kachelofen


text:
इथियोपिया

Etymology
.

title: इथियोपिया


text: valemus

title: valemus


text: valetis

title: valetis


text: valebo

title: valebo


text:
knistern

Etymology
From,. Also a Central German and Dutch word; compare 🇨🇬 (but modern 🇨🇬 probably from German). Eventually.

Verb

 * 1) to sizzle; to crackle; to creak;

title: knistern


text: valebis

title: valebis


text: valebit

title: valebit


text: valebimus

title: valebimus


text:
Nazım

Etymology
From, from.

title: Nazım


text: valebitis

title: valebitis


text: valebunt

title: valebunt


text: valebam

title: valebam


text: valebas

title: valebas


text: valebat

title: valebat


text: valebamus

title: valebamus


text: valebatis

title: valebatis


text: valebant

title: valebant


text: valuisti

title: valuisti


text: valuimus

title: valuimus


text: valuistis

title: valuistis


text: accorazioni

title: accorazioni


text: accrezioni

title: accrezioni


text: adeguazioni

title: adeguazioni


text: affascinazioni

title: affascinazioni


text: affascinamenti

title: affascinamenti


text: affatturazioni

title: affatturazioni


text: valuerunt

title: valuerunt


text: amalgamazioni

title: amalgamazioni


text: altercazioni

title: altercazioni


text: ambulazioni

title: ambulazioni


text: asseverazioni

title: asseverazioni


text: abbiezioni

title: abbiezioni


text: abbominazioni

title: abbominazioni


text: abituazioni

title: abituazioni


text: ablaqueazioni

title: ablaqueazioni


text: accettilazioni

title: accettilazioni


text: acclimazioni

title: acclimazioni


text: adizioni

title: adizioni


text: valuero

title: valuero


text: adunazioni

title: adunazioni


text: affrancazioni

title: affrancazioni


text: affricazioni

title: affricazioni


text: aggeminazioni

title: aggeminazioni


text: aggiunzioni

title: aggiunzioni


text: allogazioni

title: allogazioni


text: amozioni

title: amozioni


text: ablegazioni

title: ablegazioni


text: valueris

title: valueris


text: addecimazioni

title: addecimazioni


text: assiomatizzando

title: assiomatizzando


text: anellazioni

title: anellazioni


text: annegazioni

title: annegazioni


text: assiomatizzante

title: assiomatizzante


text: annominazioni

title: annominazioni


text: assiomatizzato

title: assiomatizzato


text: appellazioni

title: appellazioni


text: assiomatizzati

title: assiomatizzati


text: appertizzazioni

title: appertizzazioni


text: approbazioni

title: approbazioni


text: assiomatizzata

title: assiomatizzata


text: arctazioni

title: arctazioni


text: assiomatizzo

title: assiomatizzo


text: arrogazioni

title: arrogazioni


text: assiomatizzi

title: assiomatizzi


text: arterializzazioni

title: arterializzazioni


text: valuerit

title: valuerit


text: ascoltazioni

title: ascoltazioni


text: assiomatizza

title: assiomatizza


text: assiomatizziamo

title: assiomatizziamo


text: assiomatizzazioni

title: assiomatizzazioni


text: assiomatizzate

title: assiomatizzate


text: attrizioni

title: attrizioni


text: assiomatizzano

title: assiomatizzano


text: assiomatizzavo

title: assiomatizzavo


text: avvezioni

title: avvezioni


text: assiomatizzavi

title: assiomatizzavi


text: aziendalizzazioni

title: aziendalizzazioni


text: assiomatizzava

title: assiomatizzava


text: valuerimus

title: valuerimus


text: assiomatizzavamo

title: assiomatizzavamo


text: barattazioni

title: barattazioni


text: assiomatizzavate

title: assiomatizzavate


text: pietre tombali

title: pietre tombali


text: assiomatizzavano

title: assiomatizzavano


text: assiomatizzai

title: assiomatizzai


text: barbicazioni

title: barbicazioni


text: assiomatizzasti

title: assiomatizzasti


text: barbicamenti

title: barbicamenti


text: assiomatizzò

title: assiomatizzò


text: assiomatizzammo

title: assiomatizzammo


text: bevizioni

title: bevizioni


text: assiomatizzaste

title: assiomatizzaste


text: valueritis

title: valueritis


text: bevimenti

title: bevimenti


text: assiomatizzarono

title: assiomatizzarono


text: assiomatizzerò

title: assiomatizzerò


text: binazioni

title: binazioni


text: assiomatizzerai

title: assiomatizzerai


text: biorizzazioni

title: biorizzazioni


text: assiomatizzerà

title: assiomatizzerà


text: assiomatizzeremo

title: assiomatizzeremo


text: birifrazioni

title: birifrazioni


text: assiomatizzerete

title: assiomatizzerete


text: assiomatizzeranno

title: assiomatizzeranno


text: bitumazioni

title: bitumazioni


text: valuerint

title: valuerint


text: assiomatizzerei

title: assiomatizzerei


text: traslocatori

title: traslocatori


text: assiomatizzeresti

title: assiomatizzeresti


text: traslocatrici

title: traslocatrici


text: assiomatizzerebbe

title: assiomatizzerebbe


text: assiomatizzeremmo

title: assiomatizzeremmo


text: torroncini

title: torroncini


text: assiomatizzereste

title: assiomatizzereste


text: assiomatizzerebbero

title: assiomatizzerebbero


text: assiomatizziate

title: assiomatizziate


text: aziendalizzando

title: aziendalizzando


text: valueram

title: valueram


text: assiomatizzino

title: assiomatizzino


text: aziendalizzante

title: aziendalizzante


text: assiomatizzassi

title: assiomatizzassi


text: aziendalizzato

title: aziendalizzato


text: assiomatizzasse

title: assiomatizzasse


text: aziendalizzati

title: aziendalizzati


text: assiomatizzassimo

title: assiomatizzassimo


text:
characteristical

Adjective

 * 1) characteristic

title: characteristical


text: aziendalizzata

title: aziendalizzata


text: assiomatizzassero

title: assiomatizzassero


text: aziendalizzo

title: aziendalizzo


text: aziendalizzi

title: aziendalizzi


text: aziendalizza

title: aziendalizza


text: valueras

title: valueras


text: aziendalizziamo

title: aziendalizziamo


text: aziendalizzate

title: aziendalizzate


text: aziendalizzano

title: aziendalizzano


text: aziendalizzavo

title: aziendalizzavo


text: aziendalizzavi

title: aziendalizzavi


text: aziendalizzava

title: aziendalizzava


text: aziendalizzavamo

title: aziendalizzavamo


text: aziendalizzavate

title: aziendalizzavate


text: valuerat

title: valuerat


text: barbicando

title: barbicando


text: aziendalizzavano

title: aziendalizzavano


text: barbicante

title: barbicante


text: aziendalizzai

title: aziendalizzai


text: barbicati

title: barbicati


text: aziendalizzasti

title: aziendalizzasti


text: barbicata

title: barbicata


text: aziendalizzò

title: aziendalizzò


text: barbico

title: barbico


text: aziendalizzammo

title: aziendalizzammo


text: barbichi

title: barbichi


text: aziendalizzaste

title: aziendalizzaste


text: barbica

title: barbica


text: aziendalizzarono

title: aziendalizzarono


text: barbichiamo

title: barbichiamo


text: valueramus

title: valueramus


text: barbicate

title: barbicate


text: aziendalizzerò

title: aziendalizzerò


text: aziendalizzerai

title: aziendalizzerai


text:
barbicano

Adjective

 * 1) having a gray beard

title: barbicano


text: aziendalizzerà

title: aziendalizzerà


text: barbicavo

title: barbicavo


text: aziendalizzeremo

title: aziendalizzeremo


text: barbicavi

title: barbicavi


text: aziendalizzerete

title: aziendalizzerete


text: barbicava

title: barbicava


text: aziendalizzeranno

title: aziendalizzeranno


text: barbicavamo

title: barbicavamo


text: aziendalizzerei

title: aziendalizzerei


text: barbicavate

title: barbicavate


text: aziendalizzeresti

title: aziendalizzeresti


text: valueratis

title: valueratis


text: barbicavano

title: barbicavano


text: aziendalizzerebbe

title: aziendalizzerebbe


text: barbicai

title: barbicai


text: aziendalizzeremmo

title: aziendalizzeremmo


text: barbicasti

title: barbicasti


text: aziendalizzereste

title: aziendalizzereste


text: Maršalovi Otoci

title: Maršalovi Otoci


text: barbicò

title: barbicò


text: aziendalizzerebbero

title: aziendalizzerebbero


text: barbicammo

title: barbicammo


text: aziendalizziate

title: aziendalizziate


text: barbicaste

title: barbicaste


text: aziendalizzino

title: aziendalizzino


text: barbicarono

title: barbicarono


text: aziendalizzassi

title: aziendalizzassi


text: barbicherò

title: barbicherò


text: valuerant

title: valuerant


text: aziendalizzasse

title: aziendalizzasse


text: barbicherai

title: barbicherai


text: aziendalizzassimo

title: aziendalizzassimo


text: barbicherà

title: barbicherà


text: aziendalizzassero

title: aziendalizzassero


text: barbicheremo

title: barbicheremo


text: barbicherete

title: barbicherete


text: barbicheranno

title: barbicheranno


text: barbicherei

title: barbicherei


text: barbicheresti

title: barbicheresti


text: barbicherebbe

title: barbicherebbe


text: barbicheremmo

title: barbicheremmo


text: barbichereste

title: barbichereste


text: barbicherebbero

title: barbicherebbero


text: barbichiate

title: barbichiate


text: barbichino

title: barbichino


text: barbicassi

title: barbicassi


text: barbicasse

title: barbicasse


text: barbicassimo

title: barbicassimo


text: barbicassero

title: barbicassero


text:
몰타

Proper noun

 * 1) Malta

title: 몰타


text: Lobbies

title: Lobbies


text: Babies

title: Babies


text:
Talk:hosed

I'm not at all familier with this site but I was looking for the slang term as in; " We got hosed on that one ! BrianAlex 16:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That doesn't help me understand what you mean. Surely that example is just the past of hose. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:hosed


text: Parties

title: Parties


text:
herankommen

Verb

 * 1) to approach, to come close

title: herankommen


text: Handies

title: Handies


text: baby buggies

title: baby buggies


text:
einfahren

Verb

 * 1) to drive in
 * 2)  to arrive, to pull in
 * 3)  to bring in
 * 4)  to go into its burrow, den, hole etc.; to go to earth
 * 5) to run in
 * 6) to bring in; to retract
 * 1) to bring in; to retract

title: einfahren


text:
Talk:earner

The second definition here is almost always "nice little earner" - does that sense of "earner" turn up anywhere else, or is this a set phrase? 109.154.78.132 16:35, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * On second thoughts, I might be talking bollocks here. 109.154.74.219 21:13, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:earner


text: Ranskan Polynesia

title: Ranskan Polynesia


text: Γαλλική Πολυνησία

title: Γαλλική Πολυνησία


text:
Francia Polinézia

Declension

 * For the noun, see.
 * The adjective remains unchanged.

title: Francia Polinézia


text:
Polinezja Francuska

Etymology
.

title: Polinezja Francuska


text: Polinésia Francesa

title: Polinésia Francesa


text:
Fransız Polinezyası

Proper noun

 * 1) French Polynesia Overseas territory of France

title: Fransız Polinezyası


text:
im Stich lassen

Etymology
Compare 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to abandon, to leave someone in the lurch

title: im Stich lassen


text: σύστασης

title: σύστασης


text: συστάσεως

title: συστάσεως


text: συστάσεων

title: συστάσεων


text: συστάσεις

title: συστάσεις


text:
Vietname

Etymology
.

title: Vietname


text: valeam

title: valeam


text: valeas

title: valeas


text:
Ζιμπάμπουε

Etymology
From, in reference to.

title: Ζιμπάμπουε


text: valeat

title: valeat


text: valeamus

title: valeamus


text: valeatis

title: valeatis


text: valeant

title: valeant


text: valerem

title: valerem


text: valeret

title: valeret


text: valeremus

title: valeremus


text: valeretis

title: valeretis


text: valerent

title: valerent


text: valuerim

title: valuerim


text: valuissem

title: valuissem


text: valuisses

title: valuisses


text: valuisset

title: valuisset


text: valuissemus

title: valuissemus


text: valuissetis

title: valuissetis


text: valuissent

title: valuissent


text: valeamini

title: valeamini


text: Coreia do Norte

title: Coreia do Norte


text: 프랑스령 기아나

title: 프랑스령 기아나


text: Francoska Gvajana

title: Francoska Gvajana


text:
être debout

Verb

 * 1) stand (be upright, support oneself on the feet in an erect position)

Conjugation

 * see

title: être debout


text:
Faerské ostrovy

Proper noun

 * 1) Faroe Islands (group of islands between Scotland and Iceland)

title: Faerské ostrovy


text:
Verwaltungsakt

Noun

 * 1) administrative act

title: Verwaltungsakt


text:
γίντις

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) Yiddish

Adjective

 * 1) Yiddish

title: γίντις


text:
イディッシュ語

Etymology
Probably from + suffix. Compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) Yiddish language

title: イディッシュ語


text:
이디시어

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) Yiddish (language)

title: 이디시어


text:
jiddisk

Etymology
From,.

Adjective

 * 1) Yiddish (relating to the Yiddish language and liturature)

Noun

 * 1) Yiddish (the language)

Etymology
From,.

Adjective

 * 1) Yiddish (relating to the Yiddish language and liturature)

Noun

 * 1) Yiddish (the language)

title: jiddisk


text:
Talk:khúc khích

Alliteration
Does the alliteration in this term have any significance? And is the term onomatopoetic? 71.66.97.228 17:51, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:khúc khích


text:
আচরণ

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) behaviour

title: আচরণ


text:
lanzallamas

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) flamethrower

title: lanzallamas


text:
recréation

Noun

 * 1) recreation (process of recreating or result of this process)

Related terms

 * see

title: recréation


text: recréations

title: recréations


text:
Japanka

Proper noun

 * 1) Japanese (female)

title: Japanka


text:
User talk:DrollOld

Request for usurpation
Hello, Droll. A request has been made at Changing username to usurp, or "take over", your username because you have not used it to edit, and another user would like to use it to edit. Changing username says that any unused username may be usurped if the user is given seven days' notice to object and does not do so.

If you have an e-mail address set in your preferences, you should be getting an e-mail from a bureaucrat or changing username clerk explaining how to consent or object to this process.

If you do not object to being renamed to a new username in order for another user to utilize the name you currently have, please log in and post a reply here saying so (you may also tell us what username you would like to be renamed to, or we will provide you with a generic one).

If you do nothing, the request will be filled after seven days, and your account will be moved to a generic username. You may request that it be moved to a new username of your choice at any time.

If you object to being renamed, please log in and make an edit to this page clearly stating that you object to usurpation.

Please note that even if your current username is usurped, you can still edit and your data will not be lost; your preferences, watchlist, and other user settings will be transferred to a new username.

Thank you for your time.

User:Droll at en.wikipedia

title: User talk:DrollOld


text: récréations

title: récréations


text:
procréer

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to procreate (produce offspring)

title: procréer


text:
чернокожий

Adjective

 * 1)  black of African descent

title: чернокожий


text:
re-creation

Etymology
From

Noun

 * 1)  (the process of creating again or the result of this process).

title: re-creation


text: re-creations

title: re-creations


text:
লাল

Etymology
. Cognate with 🇨🇬 /, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬 / , 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1) red

Noun

 * 1) red

title: লাল


text:
প্রবৃত্তি

Noun

 * 1) inclination
 * 2) propensity

title: প্রবৃত্তি


text:
Eidaleg

Etymology
From.

Proper noun

 * 1) the Italian language

title: Eidaleg


text:
prorenin

Noun

 * 1)  A precursor of renin

title: prorenin


text:
User talk:Ghost of WikiPedant

Name change
Why the name change User:WikiPedant? --Bequw → τ 18:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Hello Bequw -- WikiPedant just got old and perplexed and went away. I'm only his ghost, a mere phantasm, a hapless sometime revenant bumping about between two worlds. But which world is the real one?  I wish I knew. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 22:36, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

remonstration
This word is not a compound of two words; it is formed by the addition of a suffix. (or it may be from post-Classical Latin, but I haven't found the source word yet, if it is) --EncycloPetey 02:55, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Hello Petey -- Right, agreed. I just made the same fix to remonstrative. But it  won't work for the etymology of remonstrate + -ive + ly, so I left it as  . -- Ghost of WikiPedant 03:00, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Sure it will. The word remonstratively is remonstrative + -ly. --EncycloPetey 04:11, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Yes, I just don't think of remonstrative as a suitable etymological root. The real root here is remonstrate, and I'd like to show that.  It seems to me that the best way to break down etymology of a term like remonstratively is to show it as a root with one suffix and then another suffix. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 04:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

 * I diagree. The word arose by stages, which stages should be listed.  That doesn't mean that remonstrate can't also be given, but the immediate progenitor remonstrative shouldn't be left out.  In either case, it should not be categorized as a compound. --EncycloPetey 04:28, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Seems to me that either approach would adequately represent the stages by which remonstratively arose. I just like to give users a link in the etymology to the root term which has the most substantive definition, and in this case that's remonstrate.  Otherwise, a user who wants to look up the meaning of the root has to click his way back up the levels manually.  Anyhow, my feelings about this are not strong enough to contest the point further -- I'm changing the etymology of remonstratively to your version.  -- Ghost of WikiPedant 04:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

neither fish, flesh, nor good red herring ≟ neither fish nor fowl
Hi GoWP. Do you reckon that these two should be given as alternative forms of each other? Or do you think they have different definitions? — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 23:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Hello Raif -- Nice to hear from you. I am inclined to think that they should be separate entries, since they seem to have distinguishable meanings.  The sense you assigned to neither fish, flesh, nor good red herring strikes me as appropriate, and it is not the same as the sense in the entry for neither fish nor fowl (which strikes me as the usual and appropriate sense for that term).  So, I'd be inclined to leave them both as they are. Regards -- Ghost of WikiPedant 05:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

 * OK, I'll go with you on that one. Could you furnish with an appropriate etymology, please? BTW, I was astounded to discover that you're not an administrator (neither as WikiPedant nor as Ghost of WikiPedant). Why, may I ask, did you abandon your original account to become your ghost? Also, would you accept nomination, were I to nominate you for administratorship? If so, which account should be ensysopped? — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 13:26, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Hello Raif -- OK, when I get a chance I'll give a little attention to an etymology for neither fish nor fowl, but I really don't do many etymologies, since I honestly feel that etymologizing is a more speculative endeavor than many editors believe. For idioms, I sometimes write etymologies (often beginning with the word "probably") when the idiom is a pretty clear allusion (like, say, asleep at the switch).  As for being an admin, that's come up once or twice before, but so far it's never been a line I wanted -- I much prefer the solitary satisfactions of mainspace editing.  I bumped off User:WikiPedant in February, in a vain attempt to leave the project cold turkey (I've really put too much time into this delightful distraction).  But, by July, the old addiction had again overpowered me and I returned to these old haunts, hopefully just as a ghost of my former self.  But now I'm at it again, putting in too much time . . . (sigh, it's just too much easy fun). At least now I've diminished to a redlink. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 17:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

 * I know the wiki-addiction all too well, and understand your actions; nevertheless, it's a shame you're playing a reduced rôle — I've always valued the emphasis you place on referencing, citing, and generally backing-up assertions. I've been an administrator here for nearly six months now, and I can't really say it's added to my workload; I'd do more patrolling, but the sheer preponderance of assited-added translations (for which cases I have no idea whether they're legit or not) makes it difficult and tedious. My most oft-used tool has been undeletion. If any of that changes your mind now or in future, then you have a willing nominator in me. As for etymology, I know it's often far more difficult than many realise, as demonstrated in Talk:sinfonietta. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 21:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

poison pen/poison-pen

 * 1) I think the noun poison pen is idiomatic and attestable.
 * 2) I am not sure that poison-pen can be shown to be a true adjective. An argument favoring poison-pen as an adjective is that "poison pen letter" (not sure about hyphen) seems to predate use of "a poison pen" or "with poison pen". I don't know that attributive use of what is construable as a noun (despite lack of prior noun attestation) is sufficient evidence of "adjectivity".

Thoughts? DCDuring TALK 18:01, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Hello DC -- Yes, I wasn't entirely satisfied with what I did there either, but it was getting late. Later tonight, I'll go back and reinstate "poison pen" as a noun (although the defn that was there was not right--it's not a "piece of writing" but more like a figurative term denoting a means, manner, or tone of expression in a written work) and note that it is usually used attributively.  But I'll leave poison-pen letter out there too.  The long list of usages (from news sources) that I reviewed showed that the hyphenated form is widely used and seems to have become more common as the twentieth-century marched on. (PS -- I too suspect that "poison pen" is a back-formation from "poison pen letter", but can't prove it.)-- Ghost of WikiPedant 22:45, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You should take a look at COCA. It makes it easy to find collocations: "poison pen pal", "'pp' memorandum", "'pp' writer". And and equal number of noun uses, eg, "with a poison pen". COCA works well for very and fairly common terms, not well for uncommon ones, let alone rare ones.
 * I am torn between a diachronic and a synchronic view of attributive use of nouns. In a synchronic view, we would ignore priority as a factor. With respect to suffixes, I have taken a diachronic view and looked only at whether a suffix was ever productive in Modern English, pushing to delete it otherwise, no matter how many words end in the putative suffix, even if many have the appropriate meaning (usually based on derivation in ME, OE, OFr, MFR, MDu, Fr, De). DCDuring TALK 23:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Wonderfool
Are you Wonderfool? Now, be honest with me. --Vahag 07:57, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL. DCDuring TALK 13:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * (Me too, DC. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 20:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC) )
 * I actually really liked the way he showed off his perfect pitch and idiomatic English. It isn't easy to be really funny online, especially in a second language. Hold on. Maybe he's WF and this hy and ru stuff is just camouflage. DCDuring TALK 23:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm flattered. --Vahag 15:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, Vahagn, but you're a bit off base. What I've seen of Wonderfool's English (in any of his incarnations) is not of a kind with mine.  You may be right about User:Internoob, though.  I've watched his edits off and on since you made that comment and he does strike me as a candidate. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 20:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Still, humour me, write here something with your old account, User:WikiPedant. --Vahag 15:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Wonderfool'a edits are characterized by carelessness and rushedness. WikiPedant's aren't. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * But, as he is an international man of mystery and a master of disguise, no one -- no one -- is above suspicion. DCDuring TALK 15:34, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, slipshod typing is s dead gieaway. DCDuring TALK 15:35, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Nope, WikiPedant made a valiant effort to shake the Wiktionary monkey off his back on Feb 26, 2010, did himself in, and left his farewell message in his final 4 edits. He won't be back here.  If you're so bloody worried, ask a CheckUser to verify that my IP's (home and work) are located in Canada and are the same as WikiPedant's.  Or send WikiPedant a message over at Wikipedia, where he is still alive and has edited continuously since before he came here.  Or send WikiPedant an email and also send me an email and watch the replies both come back from the same account at the same ISP.  And then apologize. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 16:14, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Trudeau salute
Are you sure those meet the CFI? There's a reason I didn't list them to begin with … —Ruakh TALK 18:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Hello Ruakh -- Ah, I see. You always have a good reason for what you do. I tend to be a little more relaxed about alt forms (at least I don't generally go looking for 3 cites for each) since they are really there just to steer the user to the real entry.  (ASIDE-I've pretty much stopped using redirects, since it appears that Google searches don't recognize them.)  Anyhow, I'm personally satisfied that the quotations you found (along with my native Canadian sense of Canadian usage) justify the assumption that a reasonable user might well type in one of these forms and, hence, require some steering.  If the alt forms are just left on the citations page, then the user doesn't get the same kind of assistance in finding the entry.

 * On another subject, my watch list isn't as complete as it was during my previous life and I just today picked up on the gruesome fate to which you dispatched long goodbye. Seems to me that the citations that were collected point pretty clearly to the need for an entry with 2 senses: (1) a broader sense for any protracted termination of an activity or a life, and (2) the Alzheimer's sense.  I think there are already enough quotations there to justify this, but strongly suspect more can be found if someone is still not satisfied.  What do you think it would take to reinstate a modified/improved entry? -- Ghost of WikiPedant 20:09, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Re: alt forms: Understood. After further reflection, I think it's probably fine, since if we ignore the question of "Salute" vs. "salute", the with- and without-"Pierre" versions are both attested. If we weren't so persnickety about capitalization here, it would be moot.
 * Re: : the 2006 cite is mention-only; the first 2009 cite doesn't really support any version of the "Alzheimer's" sense (can you imagine someone saying, "I think of HIV as AIDS", or "I think of the U.S. as the United States of America", or "I think of school as the friendships you form at school"?); and the second 2009 cite doesn't seem to be durably archived. As far as RFV is concerned, I would be happy with three citations that support the sense. RFD is more subjective, and it's been a long time since I've spent much time there; I find it too frustrating and inconsistent. Rarely are discussions there resolved by reference to citations and real-world usage (though sometimes they're resolved by foisting them over to RFV, which does eventually bring citations and real-world usage into the picture).
 * —Ruakh TALK 21:01, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

DT list maintenance and
At a not-neglected entry, Christmas, the hard-coded Derived terms list had 24 items. I have found 16 more, which I have auto-added to the corresponding category. For nearly all such additions I also auto-added a DT item to category(ies) for one or more other entries. One can and should argue about whether they all meet CFI, but they have all survived our process so far. One can even argue about whether Christmas disease (named after a victim surnamed "Christmas") ought to show up, which can be achieved if we really mean to exclude such indirect derivations. If someone would like to supplement this essentially morphological approach with other species of derivation, they can. (eg, is Xmas: morphologically or historically "derived from" Christmas:?)

EP used to say we "should" have both morphology and etymology information in our Etymology section. BP has had discussions of "synchronic"/morphological vs. "diachronic"/historical etymology/derivation. Now we are almost in a position to make decisions about the matters. DCDuring TALK 20:28, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Hello DC -- Truth to tell, I've deliberately kept BP and most other project pages off of my watchlist since I rose from the dead, in the interest of keeping life a little simpler this time around. But, I quite agree that it is perfectly legitimate to include both what you call morphological and historical content in the etymology sections.  Now, back to mainspace, the closest thing we have to sanespace. . . . -- Ghost of WikiPedant 04:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand. I despair of our ability to keep the project going without broader participation in BP. Only BP affords a forum to prevent Votes. It would be nice if we had a functional talk page about English-specific issues, too. DCDuring TALK 11:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * {{User:Daniel.]] has made some changes to {{temp|suffixsee}}. It is used, for example, at -ity. What to you think?

 * Hello DC -- Yes, yes, I kind of like that. Satisfies both the guys like me who want a main entry section listing derived terms (or a virtual section, I guess) and those who want all this stuff in a category. I wouldn't display the list in italics, though. I can't imagine it would be too tough to expand this functionality to a template that would work with any category containing a list of derived terms. But then, the musical question -- Would that mean that the derived terms section for every entry should be moved to a category page (there'd be a whopping big load of them)? -- Ghost of WikiPedant 22:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think what you recommend is the architecture that has been implemented as a result of the efforts of a few. See {{temp|derivsee}}. I have ripped off and ginned up a simple template using it, deployed at refer. That and referee are illustrations of the appearance. Note the redlinks at refer.

 * Do you know if there's any way we can change the category-tree thing to explicitly indicate if it's incomplete? It only lists up to 200 entries, but if you hit the limit, as -ity does, I don't see anything to indicate that. —Ruakh TALK 00:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I was wondering about that. User:Daniel. may know some trick. I sure don't. It does seem that one can click on the category for the complete view. Quite a few of the affix cats, if fully populated, would have many hundreds, not just -s, -ing, -ed, and -ly, but un-, non-, -er. Not all of them can be subdivided by etymology or sense (eg, un-). DCDuring TALK  02:36, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Apparently, the value $wgCategoryTreeMaxChildren is set to 200, so the maximum quantity of derivations shown by {{temp|suffixsee}} and related templates is 200.
 * Being completeness a worthy desideratum, perhaps $wgCategoryTreeMaxChildren should be changed to a higher value, like 999. --Daniel. 04:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I would consult with Conrad, with someone from de.wikt, or anyone else who might have had some experience. There might be a reason not to or a better way of achieving our results. DCDuring TALK 12:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

ponderous
The "slow" definition is distinct. A speech can be "ponderous", but not because of physical weight. --EncycloPetey 04:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. You're grouping that under "dull, boring".  It might be worth including "slow" under that sense as well. --EncycloPetey 04:47, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Still working on it, Petey. This one may take more than 1 session.  The OED has some interesting and rather different takes in its senses (although no separate sense like the one I removed).  I'm still rummaging through quotations to see where they lead me.  -- Ghost of WikiPedant 04:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Let me know when you're done by nominating it for WOTD. I think this would make a good selection, especially with all the nice quotations we now have. --EncycloPetey 04:59, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello Petey -- I think I'm done there for the foreseeable future. Glad you think it's a good candidate. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 05:02, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Citations pages
These are supposed to contain all the citations, including any that appear in the entry. They should never be emptied or deleted except when they are created fatuously or in error. --EncycloPetey 21:55, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

 * I disagree. If the citations page contains no citations except what're already in the entry, then it should be deleted. —Ruakh TALK 22:00, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That is directly at odds with the purpose of the namespace as stated on Citations. --EncycloPetey 22:04, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * With the new system created to handle citations, often they can be harmlessly deleted as Ruakh says. Note also on Citations in big bold letters "This is a draft proposal. It is unofficial". Says it all, really. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:08, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The deletion is not "harmless". It eliminates a structured location for the accumulation of citations.  Deleting the page will require its recreation in toto every time a new citation is added, which will confuse and annoy new editors who do not have the expert skilled of more experienced editors.  The fact that citations can be displayed in an entry with minimal interference is irrelevant to the issue of the Citations pages. --EncycloPetey 22:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Whoa, Petey -- Maintaining a citations page that contains only quotations already in the main page just creates the need for dual maintenance of both pages. That violates one of the oldest rules of database design -- don't create redundant entries that must be kept in sync manually.  I have no problem with citations pages that contain stuff not in the main entry, but manually keeping the same quotations in 2 places is extremely bad practice and it is not for me.  Sorry, but I just don't buy it. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 22:25, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * So, then, the citations should be divided into two locations? I'm sorry, but I don't understand your reasoning completely here.  If it's OK for the Citations page to contain some stuff that isn't in the main namespace, then you are acceding that the Citations namespace will contain duplication, which are state you are against.  There's a logical inconsistency there that I don't quite get.  Yes, we are currently limited so that we have some duplication.  This isn't exclusively a Main namespace/Citations space problem either.  Some citations are used on multiple entries to document different words in the same citation.  So, eliminating the Citations pages will not eliminate the problem you mention.

 * As I see it, the problem is that no solution that preserves the data in both locations has been implemented. The usual objection to such a solution is that it will make editing too complicated.  We then have a tradeoff: we can stick to database design theory at the expense of our editors' sanity, or we can limit the location of data at the expense of our editors' sanity.  Because this is a tradeoff, neither option will be wholly satisfactory.  I favor duplication, so that the Citations namespace will serve its intended function. --EncycloPetey 22:33, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Petey, in my experience the noise-to-signal ratio on the citations pages is very high; they are overloaded with ill-chosen, badly formatted, inadequately cited material. I copy good, on-the-money quotations that illuminate the meaning to the main entry where they belong.  The rest I honestly have no interest in.  If you want to edit citations pages, be my guest.  I think their existence is unnecessary and their content mostly unhelpful, and would be happy to see them gone from Wiktionary (Prediction: Someday they will be gone).  -- Ghost of WikiPedant 04:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

 * I agree that certain quotations should be kept in the main namespace because they better "illuminate the meaning" of their respective definitions. However, I don't think this practice should serve as a reason to delete every other quotation. It seems reasonable to select approximately 2 or 3 quotations for each definition in entries, while also leaving these and others in the other namespace. If, hypothetically, we had 70 English citations for word, they conceivably would show multiple nuances of usage from various authors, thus improving its coverage, but they would consume too much space in the main namespace, even with the show/hide function. The "nuances" may include the use of the word as a neologism or a borrowed word, possibly within quotes, italicized or commented, or "innovative" uses that may span other definitions. For example, one early use from Citations:marketese is "marketese, as Nielsen calls it". As for your (GWP's) other objections, can you please provide examples of "ill-chosen, badly formatted, inadequately cited material"? --Daniel. 06:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

 * As a side note, there is virtually no need for "dual maintenance", because quotations are rarely changed. --Daniel. 22:45, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Not so, Daniel. Quotations can be and are added, changed, moved around, and deleted, as are the senses they accompany.  I'm only going to put them one place -- in mainspace, where they belong. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 04:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

good quotations
Hello GOWP. Thanks again for the message. I've made a red account now and am looking to add some more quotations. What do you use to find good quotations? I'd much prefer to use quotes from Shakespeare or Shaw than ones from throwaway novels from recent times. --SixTwo 16:13, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

 * I use advanced searches at Google books and Google news, often filtering for time periods. If you have access to it, I also find the academic data base JSTOR very useful for academic journal searches.

 * Here's a good Shakespeare site with its own search capability:

 * http://www.rhymezone.com/shakespeare/

 * And I'm also fond of searches at:

 * http://www.online-literature.com

 * But the latter site's own search function has gotten buggy, so I usually search it by doing an advanced google search for that site and filtering out the term "network forums". -- Ghost of WikiPedant 16:24, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

pack on
I've no problem with the changes you've made, but I am curious to hear of any instance where a subject "packed on" bone or cartilage. That isn't usually considered possible. --EncycloPetey 01:40, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * True, true, Petey, it would be an odd locution (although possible, I suppose). But I was thinking of the packing on of body mass, which inevitably includes more than just fat and muscle.  (Actually, I was trying to avoid getting into such a list with my original rework of the defn.) -- Ghost of WikiPedant 01:46, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * In the vast majority of cases, the relevant tissue is either fat or muscle, which I felt deserves mention as such. While added weight or mass can (and often does) include other tissues, they are a minority concern for most situations where this term is used. --EncycloPetey 01:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, still part of the meaning, though. But I didn't see any need to go out of the way to list them in the defn either, which is why I just stuck in an "etc".-- Ghost of WikiPedant 01:56, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

tractable
Hey; thanks for fixing up the line from Brown at tractable — and figuring out where to put it! I couldn't decide from the context whether it meant "manageable" or "touchable" — frankly, I could see the author intending both as a bit of humour. — Beobach

 * Hello Beobach -- You came up with a rather marvelous set of quotations in your quest to attest the literal sense of vaulting school. I'm not 100% sure that I was correct in assigning Thos Brown's usage of "tractable" to that obsolete sense (which originally came from the 1913 Webster's, but has quite a range of meaning that is handled differently by the OED and some other dictionaries), but I agree that Brown seems to be trading a bit on the ambiguity of the term and that broad sense struck me as the most reasonable home for the quotation.  You seem to share my fondness for the literary and expository writing of bygone centuries, and it was one of my day's delights to read through what you added; in a few cases I found myself digging up the sources so that I could read on. As for vaulting schools, I had no idea that Brits (of which I gather you are one) had such a venerable and storied tradition of institutions and programs dedicated to the august art of the vault, but you have enlightened me. I hear that the tabloids are now reporting that Kate and William first met in mid-vault. -- Ghost of WikiPedant 20:19, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Poll on formatting of etymologies
I would like to know your preference as regards the use of "<" vs "from" in the formatting of etymologies in Wiktionary, whatever that preference is. Even explicit statement of indifference would be nice. You can state your preference in the currently running poll: WT:BP. I am sending you this notification, as you took part on some of the recent votes, so chances are you could be interested in the poll. The poll benefits from having as many participants as possible, to be as representative as possible. Feel free to ignore this notification. --Dan Polansky 10:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Discussion re wikilinking in quoted text
I recently contributed to a discussion to which you were party five months ago (at Wiktionary talk:Quotations). I notify you in case you wish to respond. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 15:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ghost of WikiPedant


text:
prosegment

Noun

 * 1)  A section of amino acids at one end of a protein molecule that assists in folding

title: prosegment


text:
retinoblast

Noun

 * 1) An immature retinal cell.

title: retinoblast


text:
tubulointerstitium

Noun

 * 1)  The tubules and interstitial tissue of the kidneys

title: tubulointerstitium


text: ateisten

title: ateisten


text: ateistar

title: ateistar


text: ateistane

title: ateistane


text:
canol nos

Noun

 * 1) midnight (the middle of the night)

title: canol nos


text:
uteroplacental

Adjective

 * 1)  Of or pertaining to the uterus and the placenta.

title: uteroplacental


text:
vasculopathy

Noun

 * 1)  Any disease of blood vessels.

title: vasculopathy


text:
torsion wrench

Noun

 * 1) An L-shaped tool used in lock picking to apply torsion to the inner cylinder of a lock, in order to hold any picked pins in place, while the other pins are shifted, and then to turn the inner cylinder and open the lock.

Translations

 * Finnish: jännitekampi

title: torsion wrench


text:
torque wrench

Noun

 * 1) A workshop tool used to precisely apply a specific torque to a fastener such as a nut or bolt; basically a wrench equipped with a torque indicator.
 * 2) A torsion wrench, an L-shaped lockpicking tool.

Translations

 * Estonian: momendimõõtevõti
 * Finnish: momenttiavain
 * French: ,
 * German:
 * Hungarian: nyomatékkulcs
 * Polish:
 * Swedish: momentnyckel, vridmomentnyckel

title: torque wrench


text:
tension wrench

Noun

 * 1) A torsion wrench, an L-shaped lockpicking tool.

title: tension wrench


text: torsion wrenches

title: torsion wrenches


text: torque wrenches

title: torque wrenches


text: tension wrenches

title: tension wrenches


text:
lock picking

Noun

 * 1) The action of using tools to unlock a lock without a key to that lock.

Translations

 * Finnish:
 * Vietnamese:

title: lock picking


text:
সিগারেট

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) cigarette

title: সিগারেট


text:
bump key

Noun

 * 1) A lockpicking tool in the form of a key of the type generally used to open a lock, on which all pins have been cut down to the lowest position, so that striking this key sharply with a hammer while applying turning force at just the right instant after the impact will 'bump' open a lock.

title: bump key


text: bump keys

title: bump keys


text:
ক্ষুদ্র

Etymology
.

Adjective

 * 1) tiny

title: ক্ষুদ্র


text: refudiated

title: refudiated


text: refudiates

title: refudiates


text: refudiating

title: refudiating


text:
User talk:Andrewmoneymaker

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or make a hyperlink. The Wiktionary tutorial is a more wordy, multi-page document that helps you through those same formatting issues, and also touches on a couple of other issues relevant to editing.
 * The document What Wiktionary is not may be of interest. In particular, if you've edited Wikipedia in the past, you should note that Wiktionary is not an encyclopedia and does not have Wikipedia-style page titles.
 * There is a technical guide to how to start a new page. But you'll also want to look at our guidelines for how to format an entry (what goes where) and our criteria for inclusion (what can be included), which are our two main policy documents. (You can get a feel for how to format an entry by looking at existing entries.)
 * The sandbox is a safe place for testing markup.
 * The FAQ has, of course, some frequently (and some infrequently) asked questions, and their answers.

I hope you enjoy editing here! By the way, you can sign your comments on talk (discussion) pages using four tildes, like this:, which automatically produces your name (or IP number if you're not signed in) and the current date and time. If you have any questions, then see the help pages, add a question to one of the discussion rooms or ask me on my talk page. —msh210℠ (talk) 19:10, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Andrewmoneymaker


text:
creț

Etymology
. Possibly from a source (compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬), from a  root, from , or a root , from.

Adjective

 * 1) curly

title: creț


text:
ছোট

Etymology
.

Adjective

 * 1) small
 * 2) short
 * 3) low
 * 4)  young, immature
 * 5) trivial, trifling
 * 1)  young, immature
 * 2) trivial, trifling
 * 1) trivial, trifling
 * 1) trivial, trifling

title: ছোট


text:
притяжательное местоимение

Noun

 * 1)  possessive pronoun

title: притяжательное местоимение


text:
অনেক

Etymology
, from 🇰🇲, equivalent to 🇰🇲.

Adjective

 * 1) many

Adverb

 * 1) very

title: অনেক


text: lockpicking

title: lockpicking


text:
lock pick

Noun

 * 1) Any device used to unlock a lock without the use of a key.
 * 2) A person who picks locks.

Verb

 * 1) To use tools to unlock locks without a key; to pick locks.

title: lock pick


text: lock picks

title: lock picks


text:
perzactly

Adverb

 * 1)  precisely, exactly; used as an affirmation

title: perzactly


text: lock picked

title: lock picked


text: lockpick

title: lockpick


text: lockpicks

title: lockpicks


text: lockpicked

title: lockpicked


text: lock-pick

title: lock-pick


text: perzackly

title: perzackly


text: lock-picks

title: lock-picks


text: perxactly

title: perxactly


text: prezackly

title: prezackly


text: prezactly

title: prezactly


text: prexactly

title: prexactly


text: lock-picking

title: lock-picking


text: lock-picked

title: lock-picked


text:
fumega

Noun

 * 1)  short and unimportant individual

Etymology
, present active infinitive of.

Verb

 * 1) to smoke (give off smoke when burning)
 * 2) to fume
 * 3) to reek
 * 4) to steam

title: fumega


text:
pranie

Etymology 1
From.

Noun

 * 1)  ; washing
 * 2)  laundry

title: pranie


text:
অদৃশ্য

Etymology
, from.

Adjective

 * 1) invisible

title: অদৃশ্য


text:
свежий

Etymology
.

Adjective

 * 1) fresh new or clean

title: свежий


text:
borgarísjaki

Noun

 * 1) iceberg (huge mass of floating ice)

title: borgarísjaki


text:
Pan-Americanism

Noun

 * 1) Belief in the benefit of Pan-American organization.

Translations

 * French:
 * Greek:
 * Hungarian: pánamerikanizmus
 * Italian: panamericanismo
 * Portuguese: pan-americanismo
 * Spanish: panamericanismo

title: Pan-Americanism


text: yerma

title: yerma


text: yermos

title: yermos


text: yermas

title: yermas


text:
non-newsworthy

Adjective

 * 1) Not interesting enough to be reported as news.

title: non-newsworthy


text:
сплетник

Noun

 * 1) gossip (person)

title: сплетник


text:
sobrehumano

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) superhuman

title: sobrehumano


text: sobrehumana

title: sobrehumana


text: sobrehumanos

title: sobrehumanos


text: sobrehumanas

title: sobrehumanas


text: Category:Spanish terms prefixed with sobre-


text:
gladlynt

Etymology
From, equivalent to.

Pronunciation

 * or

Adjective

 * 1) cheerful, jolly

title: gladlynt


text:
χάλκινος

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) bronzen, made of bronze

Adjective

 * 1) coppern (made of copper)

title: χάλκινος


text:
kupfern

Etymology
From, from , from , equivalent to. Cognate with 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1)  copper; made of copper

title: kupfern


text:
templatization

Noun

 * 1) The act of templatizing.

title: templatization


text: WN

title: WN


text:
mälta

Etymology
From the noun.

Verb

 * 1) to malt

title: mälta


text: darázskürtök

title: darázskürtök


text: hadale

title: hadale


text: hadaux

title: hadaux


text: hadales

title: hadales


text: busman's holidays

title: busman's holidays


text:
divaricamento

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) opening (out)
 * 2) stretching (apart)

title: divaricamento


text:
divaricatore

Noun

 * 1)  retractor

title: divaricatore


text:
Taiwanisch

Proper noun

 * 1) Taiwanese language

title: Taiwanisch


text:
divedere

Etymology
From.

Conjugation

 * Used only in the infinitive.

title: divedere


text:
نرمال

Adjective

 * 1) normal

title: نرمال


text:
doskonały

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) perfect, excellent, flawless

title: doskonały


text:
দেওয়া

Etymology 1
.

Verb

 * 1) to give
 * আমি ওকে বইটা কালকে দিব.
 * Ami oke boiṭa kalke dibo.
 * I'll give him the book tomorrow.
 * 1)  to allow, let

Conjugation

 * Chalita

 * Sadhu

Etymology 2
.

Noun

 * 1)  sky
 * 2)  cloud
 * 1)  cloud
 * 1)  cloud

title: দেওয়া


text:
anterogradinen

Etymology
(see 🇨🇬). Adapted with the adjectival suffix.

Adjective

 * 1)  anterograde

title: anterogradinen


text:
добродетель

Etymology
, a calque from )..

Noun

 * 1) virtue (excellence in morals)

title: добродетель


text:
достоинство

Noun

 * 1) dignity
 * 2) quality

Noun

 * 1) positive quality
 * 2) dignity, self-respect
 * 3) denomination, value
 * 4)  rank, title
 * 1) denomination, value
 * 2)  rank, title

title: достоинство


text:
Makadam

Noun

 * 1) macadam (surface of a road)

title: Makadam


text:
endly

Etymology
From, , equivalent to. Compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1)  Final, terminal; of or pertaining to the end; conclusive.
 * 2) * 1898, "Ludwig in London: Walkgo towards Tscerringross", by "Ludwig", in Punch, eds. Lemon, Mayhew, Taylor, Brooks, Burnand, Seaman, Volumes 114-115, page 65:
 * I pull me up, he push, and endly am i [sic] on one Foot on the little Waggonstep.
 * 1) * 1972, Igbo market literature - Volume 2 - Page 238:
 * The stretch of wilful obtuse to go in marriage leads a guiding knowledge of man in achieving an endly reach of it
 * 1) * 1972, Igbo market literature - Volume 2 - Page 238:
 * The stretch of wilful obtuse to go in marriage leads a guiding knowledge of man in achieving an endly reach of it

Adverb

 * 1)  Finally; at last.

Synonyms

 * See also Thesaurus:lastly

title: endly


text: un-break

title: un-break


text:
User:Yair rand/wsedit.js

// Yay, I finally got around to making a tool for adding nyms to ws pages. Still some problems with green outlines, dunno what I'm going to do about that. // Still needs possibility of adding qualifiers, maybe glosses too. // Also needs cross-browser testing. // Also needs removal of ugliness. var ccc=""

function addwseditbox(q) {

var z var prevheader=q.lastChild.innerHTML var editor=new Editor new AdderWrapper( editor,   {    'createForm':function{      return z=newNode('form', newNode('span','Add ' + q.lastChild.innerHTML.toLowerCase + ': '), newNode('input',{'name':'nym'}), newNode('input',{'type':'submit','value':'Preview'}) )   },    'fields':{'nym':function(txt,error){return txt}},    'onsubmit':function(values, render){      render('',function(res){ z.nym.value="" var nodeToInsert=newNode('div') nodeToInsert.innerHTML=res editor.addEdit({         edit: function(wikitext){            qqqq=z;while(qqqq.nodeName!="H4"){qqqq=qqqq.previousSibling}            wikitext=wikitext.replace(new RegExp("([\\s\\S]*?===="+prevheader+"====[\\s\\S]*?)"),"$1\n")            ccc=wikitext            return wikitext            },          redo: function{z.previousSibling.appendChild(nodeToInsert)},          undo: function{z.previousSibling.removeChild(nodeToInsert)},          summary: prevheader.toLowerCase+"+"+values.nym+""        },nodeToInsert) })   }  },   q.parentNode,   findnextdiv(q).nextSibling )

}

function findnextdiv(qwe) { while(qwe&&qwe.nodeName!="DIV") {qwe=qwe.nextSibling} return qwe }

$(function { if(wgNamespaceNumber==110) { xx=document.getElementsByTagName('h4'); for (x=0;x<xx.length;x++) { xx[x].insertBefore(

newNode('span',{style:'position:absolute;'},	temp=newNode('span', {style:'position:relative; left:-14px; '}, newNode('img',{src:'http://bits.wikimedia.org/w/extensions/UsabilityInitiative/images/wikiEditor/toolbar/arrow-right.png'}), newNode('div',{style:'border:1px solid #C0C0C0;background-color:#FFFFFF;position:absolute;z-index:1;display:none;padding-right:20px;width:175px;margin-top:-5px;'},			xxx=newNode('ul',{style:'list-style-type:none;list-style-image:none;margin-left:15px;font-size:13px;font-weight:normal;'},newNode('li',newNode('a',{style:'cursor:pointer;'},'Edit gloss')))))) , xx[x].firstChild)

xxx.firstChild.firstChild.onclick=function{ editwsgloss(this.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode); this.parentNode.removeChild(this); }

temp.onmouseover=function{ this.lastChild.style.display=""; this.firstChild.src="http://bits.wikimedia.org/w/extensions/UsabilityInitiative/images/wikiEditor/toolbar/arrow-down.png";} temp.onmouseout=function{ this.lastChild.style.display="none"; this.firstChild.src="http://bits.wikimedia.org/w/extensions/UsabilityInitiative/images/wikiEditor/toolbar/arrow-right.png";}

xxxx={"Synonyms":1,"Antonyms":1,"Hypernyms":1,"Hyponyms":1,"Meronyms":1,"Holonyms":1,"Troponyms":1,"Coordinate terms":1} xxxxx=xx[x] while(xxxxx.nextSibling&&xxxxx.nextSibling.nodeName.toLowerCase!="h4") { if(xxxxx.nodeName.toLowerCase=="h5"&&xxxxx.lastChild.innerHTML.match(/^Synonyms$|^Antonyms$|^Hypernyms$|^Hyponyms$|^Meronyms$|^Holonyms$|^Troponyms$|^Coordinate\sterms$/)) {xxxx[xxxxx.lastChild.innerHTML]=0} xxxxx=xxxxx.nextSibling } for(i in xxxx) {if(xxxx[i]){ xxx.appendChild(	newNode('li',{'id':i}, newNode('a',{style:'cursor:pointer;'},'Add '+i.toLowerCase) )	) xxx.lastChild.onclick=function{ addwssection(this.id,this.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode); this.parentNode.removeChild(this);}

}} } xx=document.getElementsByTagName('h5') for (x=0;x<xx.length;x++) {

if(xx[x].lastChild&&xx[x].lastChild.innerHTML&&xx[x].lastChild.innerHTML.match(/^Synonyms$|^Antonyms$|^Hypernyms$|^Hyponyms$|^Meronyms$|^Holonyms$|^Troponyms$|^Coordinate\sterms$/)) { addwseditbox(xx[x])

}

}

} } )

function addwssection(typeofsection,sectionl4header) { var editor=Editor

var nodeToInsert=newNode('h5',newNode('span',{'class':"mw-headline",id:typeofsection},typeofsection)) var nodeToInsert2=newNode('div',{style:'column-count:3;-moz-column-count:3;-webkit-column-count:3'},newNode('ul')) function addnewwssectionToWikitext(wikitext) {	qqqq=sectionl4header;while(qqqq.nodeName!="H4"){qqqq=qqqq.previousSibling} wikitext=wikitext.replace(new RegExp("([\\s\\S]*?)(\n=(?!===)|$)"),"$1\n====="+typeofsection+"=====\n\n\n$2") ccc=wikitext return wikitext } qqq=sectionl4header.nextSibling; while((!qqq)||(!qqq.nodeName)||(qqq.nodeName!="H4"&&qqq.nodeName!="H3"&&qqq.className!="printfooter")){qqq=qqq.nextSibling}

editor.addEdit({

edit: addnewwssectionToWikitext, redo: function { sectionl4header.parentNode.insertBefore(nodeToInsert,qqq);sectionl4header.parentNode.insertBefore(nodeToInsert2,qqq);addwseditbox(nodeToInsert); }, undo: function { sectionl4header.parentNode.removeChild(nodeToInsert);sectionl4header.parentNode.removeChild(nodeToInsert2.nextSibling);sectionl4header.parentNode.removeChild(nodeToInsert2); }, summary: "+section: "+typeofsection

},nodeToInsert)

}

function editwsgloss(q) { qq=newNode('span',	newNode('input',{value:q.lastChild.innerHTML.replace(/^Sense:\s/,''),size:50}),	newNode('input',{type:'button',value:'Preview'})) qq.lastChild.onclick=function{ editwsgloss2(this.parentNode.parentNode,this.previousSibling.value,this.parentNode.parentNode.lastChild.innerHTML.replace('Sense: ','')); }

q.insertBefore(qq,q.childNodes[2]) q.lastChild.style.display='none'

} function editwsgloss2(q,newgloss,oldgloss) {

var editor=Editor

editor.addEdit({

edit: function(wikitext){ if(wikitext.indexOf("") > -1) {return wikitext.replace("","")} else {editor.error("ERROR: Gloss not found")} }, redo: function { q.lastChild.innerHTML="Sense: "+newgloss;q.lastChild.style.display="";q.childNodes[2].style. display='none';}, undo: function { q.lastChild.innerHTML="Sense: "+oldgloss;q.lastChild.style.display="none";q.childNodes[2].style. display=''; }, summary: "wsgloss: "+newgloss

},q.lastChild)

}

title: User:Yair rand/wsedit.js