text:
Talk:simulation

simulation
Sense: (soccer) [sic] The act of falling over in order to be awarded a foul, when a foul hasn't been committed.

This would seem to be the sense of  deceit, misrepresentation Assuming an appearance which is feigned, or not true. For example, aren't there other ways in which one could attempt to deceitfully cause a football referee to award a foul? DCDuring TALK 11:44, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * The act described here is a dive:. SemperBlotto 11:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * @DCDuring, yes but they wouldn't be called 'simulation'. I suspect that very few people watching a game and seeing a player booked for 'simulation' would understand what it means from "assuming an appearance which is feigned, or not true". Keep. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:45, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Keep. According to WP, simulation is the term used by FIFA, and this (page 117) confirms it. Not any simulation (sense: assuming an appearance which is feigned) in a football game is a simulation (sense: feigning a foul). Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 13:46, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Keep IF the definition is accurate, i.e. it doesn't cover any kind of faking in a football match. Equinox ◑ 13:56, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I will happily concede the RfD if someone would just define this properly and cite it, which should be easy enough in Google News and its archive. I suppose there may be a problem if this has not been in use in English for very long. I wonder if this sense's etymology is a calque of a Romance language football term. You wouldn't trust an American to do this, would you. DCDuring TALK 14:24, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:56, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:simulation


text:
Talk:prison guard

prison guard
Is a guard in a prison and probably not interpretable in any other way. The "usually a man" is either sexist bias or purely encyclopaedic information. Compare jail guard, jail inmate (both well attested on Google Books). Equinox ◑ 01:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * SOP--Brett 01:26, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 01:36, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Obvious SoP. SemperBlotto 08:03, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:19, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Off with his head! -- A LGRIF  talk 14:51, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete DCDuring TALK 15:41, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per COALMINE this is clearly the most common word for this occupation and is useful for translations, this is shown by the massive availibility on google books for prisonguardsee here.#* 2005, Ernie López, Rafael Pérez-Torres, To Alcatraz, death row, and back: memories of an East LA outlaw, page 81

 * As we disembarked, I saw a prisonguard wrap the anchor rope around a post and then place a chain around the looped rope and secure it with a padlock.
 * 1) * 2006, Stephanie Hepburn, Rita James Simon, Women's roles and statuses the world over, link
 * Men are required to serve either in the police force, the prisonguard service, or in one of the military economic service units.
 * 1) * 2007, Robert Baer, Blow the House Down: A Novel, page 148
 * Instead, a striking, petite woman in a sky-blue prisonguard uniform met me on the other side.
 * 1) * 2008, Fodor's Peru, page 294
 * The 35-meter (115-foot) Obeliseo, a strangely designed building that's shaped like a prisonguard post
 * 1) * 2010, Richard Ford, Independence Day, link
 * “I liked it so much at first,” she says, turning to gaze out the front, where sexy Marilyn-the-prisonguard ' s garbage can waits at the curb.Lucifer 02:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The first quotation is a scanno. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 03:15, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * And your other quotations all use hyphenated prison-guard as an adjective, except the last hyphenated Marilyn-the-prison-guard. When hyphenated words wrap at the end of the line, Google Books interprets them as unhyphenated. ~ Robin 06:25, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. To me this feels very much a set term. It is more than 10 times commoner than ‘jail guard’ (180,000 v. 14,000 on b.google); and it's also in the OED (in the ‘compounds’ section of prison:). < class="latinx" >Ƿidsiþ 07:45, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Fine, well here are three that are indisputably oneword not one-word/one- word/one word situationals.one, two, three.Lucifer 09:30, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Number three seems to be a misspelling of Telfair (State) Prison guard tower; it is capitalised and makes more sense in the context. It probably can be verified with usenet quotations though, so for the sake of fairness I'm changing my vote to abstain. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 15:51, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This bloody COALMINE is more trouble than it's worth. Hint: if you can dig up three probable scannos for something like happyperson, which represent practically none of the actual usage, then you are probably abusing it. Equinox ◑ 22:40, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I found three obvious non scannons, they are literal scans of the original work that can be seen as clearly one word. This clearly shows that this term is widely used as a set term. Also even coal mine is just a mine dedicated to coal. But so what? Someone that doesn't know that would not know how to break apart the terms. Also prison guard/prisonguard isn't just guarding a prison, its more of a job of guarding the prisoners and preventing their escape and disciplining them. Prison guards are present even when jails are not, such as chain gangs, and for transport. That is a richer meaning than the sum of parts. I call bs. Happyperson is just an adjective+noun, prisonguard is a set term and a common occupation.Lucifer 00:49, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Lucifer; a prison guard is still a prison guard even if they never set foot in a prison, or never guard a prisoner. As for WT:COALMINE, it requires that the term be "significantly more common than a single word spelling that already meets CFI". Correct me if I'm wrong, but scannos do not count towards meeting the CFI, do they? Otherwise, we should amend the CFI to be clear that a scanning error by itself is not a countable use of a word. bd2412 T 16:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Scannos certainly don't count. The citations that aren't scannos seem more plausibly interpreted as typos or typesetting errors than a alternative forms. "Prisonguard" is very rare compared to "prison guard", which suggests error.
 * As for Luciferwildcat's argument, a rental truck maintains its identity even when it is not under rental or even available for rental and an ice cube tray maintains its identity even when empty or when it only has water or wax or orange juice in it. It is hardly unusual that an NP is SoP under these circumstances. DCDuring TALK 17:51, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * First, rental is an adjective indicating availability for rent. Although abbreviation has led to noun usage ("it's a rental"), a truck is not a rental truck unless it is or has been available for rent. On the other hand, we absolutely should have an entry for ice cube tray. If I get a cafeteria tray and pile ice on it, does that make it an ice tray? If I take a tea tray, fill it with water, and put it in the freezer, is that an ice tray? bd2412 T 17:59, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not agree that "rental" is an adjective. It does not meet the usual criteria: is not comparable etc. Equinox ◑ 20:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * When I came up with WT:COALMINE, the idea is to avoid the situation where the commonest form doesn't mean CFI but a much less common form does. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Every example cannot be scanno or error simply because you wish them to be.Lucifer 19:58, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. But there is a reason why we have and have a well-populated Category:English misspellings. DCDuring TALK  20:34, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * This clearly isn't a misspelling it doesn't say prizungaard!Lucifer 03:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Keep but ditch the "usually a man" --Jtle515 (talk) 08:51, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept as no consensus. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:04, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:prison guard


text:
Talk:ass with two panniers

ass with two panniers
I don't think this has ever been correct --Cova 21:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Only web usage is in lists and dictionaries. GBC has it literally, but not the idiomatic sense we have.--Dmol 22:48, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * RFV, bloody Wonderfool can never tell the difference between RFD and RFV. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:55, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Deleted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:ass with two panniers


text: appertisant

title: appertisant


text: appertisé

title: appertisé


text:
appertiser

Etymology
From (Nicolas) Appert +.

Verb

 * 1)  to can

title: appertiser


text: appertisée

title: appertisée


text: appertisés

title: appertisés


text: appertisées

title: appertisées


text:
appertise

Noun

 * 1) demonstration; showing

title: appertise


text: appertises

title: appertises


text: appertisons

title: appertisons


text: appertisez

title: appertisez


text: appertisent

title: appertisent


text: appertisais

title: appertisais


text:
Talk:enjoy your meal

enjoy your meal
This was on speedy but I think it needs a discussion. To me this seems like an ideal entry for the Phrasebook. -- Liliana • 14:15, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Particularly as other languages often have very specific translations, such as French bon appétit and Spanish que aproveche -- A LGRIF  talk 16:46, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

See recent discussion at [[WT:TR]]. —msh210℠ (talk) 19:27, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

 * English (also) uses "bon appetit", so we can host the translations there, if we delete this. - -sche (discuss) 09:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If I were looking for translations, bon appetit would certainly not be the place I'd look, this would. —CodeCat 16:57, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * As long as we're providing translation targets for French phrases, how about "óu est l'hôtel?","comment vous appelez-vous?", "quelle heure est-il?" or "la plume de ma tante est sur la table" ... Chuck Entz (talk) 15:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * WT:CFI says "Phrasebook entries are very common expressions that are considered useful to non-native speakers." Probably keep, seems very common and sufficiently useful to merit inclusion. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:32, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Keep for phrasebook. 06:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep as phrasebook entry (even though I disagree with the inclusion of phrasebook entries in mainspace). Equinox ◑ 09:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Kept. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

The statement that "enjoy your meal" cannot be said by a cook or server is blatantly untrue (and pretty silly). Danhicks (talk) 12:32, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Usage note is insufficient
Nobody actually says this in English.

It is however very common indeed in things such as phrasebooks and teaching materials. I assume because people feel "bon apetit" is too French so they overtranslate it into English.

It is also used by foreigners and with foreigners, also I assume for the reason of overthinking it and avoiding French, or because they've heard other foreigners use it, or because they got it from a phrasebook or language teaching material.

It's much more common to not say anything, to say a colloquial phrase like "dig in" or "let's eat" or just "enjoy", or to say the French phrase, but not with any approximation of the French pronunciation.

It may be possible that it's used by food servers in restaurants in USA. I'm not sure. It's definitely not used in Australia. Especially not between native speakers.

This is discussed by native English speakers in some forums: ,

— hippietrail (talk) 05:23, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Interesting notes, perhaps this should get added to the entry. – Jberkel 13:12, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I felt it would be too bold a unilateral move to just slam it into the entry, so I brought it up here in the talk page instead, after discussing it in a couple of forums over the years. Please feel free to add a version of it yourself though, or bring it up as a discussion topic in the appropriate place in Wiktionary. I'll keep an eye out for it. — hippietrail (talk) 17:06, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:enjoy your meal


text: appertisait

title: appertisait


text: appertisions

title: appertisions


text: appertisiez

title: appertisiez


text: appertisaient

title: appertisaient


text: appertisai

title: appertisai


text: appertisas

title: appertisas


text: appertisa

title: appertisa


text: appertisâmes

title: appertisâmes


text: appertisâtes

title: appertisâtes


text: appertisèrent

title: appertisèrent


text: appertiserai

title: appertiserai


text: appertiseras

title: appertiseras


text: appertisera

title: appertisera


text: appertiserons

title: appertiserons


text: appertiserez

title: appertiserez


text:
Talk:sylfaen

sylfaen
English: a certain typeface. Since when do we do typefaces? -- Liliana • 16:26, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * We do have Arial. I think this is a WT:BRAND issue. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 16:40, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

 * . Looks like a word with possible pronunciation, etymology and occurrences in sentences. "Since when do we do typefaces" is not a CFI consideration. If this rhetorical question is asked to mean that "we don't do typefaces", I point out that CFI does not say anything of the sort. --Dan Polansky 20:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * But the English proper name referring to a specific typeface should probably be capitalized as "Sylfaen", and thus moved to Sylfaen. For attestation, see . --Dan Polansky 20:37, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I really can't think of a reason to exclude this. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:09, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Bad caps if nothing else! Equinox ◑ 20:47, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Move to RFV for WT:BRAND. Sylfaen is a trademark of Microsoft Corporation. Equinox ◑ 14:35, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, it is not a brand of physical product. Keep in RFD and keep. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Nobody except for you supports that interpretation of the BRAND policy. -- Liliana • 16:39, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * If that is true, nothing should be easier than removing the "physical product" language from WT:BRAND via a vote. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:49, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * @Liliana-60, I support it only in the sense it's written there, and it seems wrong to ignore it totally, which is what other editors do. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept as no consensus. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:sylfaen


text: appertiseront

title: appertiseront


text: appertiserais

title: appertiserais


text: appertiserait

title: appertiserait


text: appertiserions

title: appertiserions


text: appertiseriez

title: appertiseriez


text: appertiseraient

title: appertiseraient


text: appertisasse

title: appertisasse


text: appertisasses

title: appertisasses


text: appertisât

title: appertisât


text:
Talk:intermediate filament

intermediate filament
SoP: A filament that is intermediate in size. DCDuring TALK 17:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

 * It doesn't really seem to be SoP; even in context, intermediate could be anything.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Definitely not SOP; it signifies a unique class of proteins (usually keratins) in microbiology. Maybe the entry needs to be clarified. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem may be with the definition which seems to focus solely on one attribute. Citations that illustrated use would, as always, enable a better definition. DCDuring TALK 06:34, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:37, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:intermediate filament


text: appertisassions

title: appertisassions


text: appertisassiez

title: appertisassiez


text: appertisassent

title: appertisassent


text:
Talk:Caracalla

Caracalla
Tagged RFV, but never listed. From the RFV comment, it appears this page was intended, and this page is more appropriate. Feel free to speedy-close if we have a policy on this one way or the other, I'm just cleaning out the "oldest tagged (but not listed)" entries. - -sche (discuss) 04:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept. No votes, comments or nomination. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:38, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Caracalla


text:
Talk:Arcang.

Arcang.
Tagged RFV, but not listed, and RFD seems like the more appropriate venue, per the comment the tag-adder left. - -sche (discuss) 08:16, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think the very obvious solution to all binomial author abbreviations is to have an appendix of them; however, I also note that Wikipedia already has List of botanists by author abbreviation and List of authors of names published under the ICZN. bd2412 T 23:41, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Arcang.


text:
Talk:Andr.

Andr.
Tagged RFV, but not listed, and RFD seems like the more appropriate venue, per the comment the tag-adder left. - -sche (discuss) 08:17, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm actually not so sure. How are such abbreviations used? My initial reaction was that since they refer to individuals they should be deleted, in the same way that Smith shouldn't list all of the people to whom 'Smith' might refer. But I'm now not as sure. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:56, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * See Binomial nomenclature. Cheers! bd2412 T 23:55, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see also Requests_for_deletion/Others -- Liliana • 12:59, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Keep. These abbreviations refer to individuals (or groups of individuals, e.g. Cuv. & Val.), but these entries are not about individuals, they are about abbreviations used according to international conventions. The sense of a word is not a good deletion reason. Lmaltier (talk) 08:21, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Andr.


text:
barattage

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) churning

title: barattage


text:
Talk:Sacramento River

Sacramento River
Tagged but not listed -- Liliana • 03:49, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. We have Nile, Amazon. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 15:35, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, but we don't have Nile River or Amazon River. -- Liliana • 17:19, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This river is sometimes referred to without the word "River" ("divert the surplus waters of the Sacramento"), but not usually. Equinox ◑ 17:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Delete all place names as SOP-like as this one. —msh210℠ (talk) 01:10, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I added the sense to SacramentoLucifer (talk)
 * Keep provided Equinox is right in that this is more often called "Sacramento River" than "Sacramento". I figure we want to keep "Niagara Falls" and "Sacramento Mountains, even though they may be not perfectly analogous to "Sacramento River". --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept as no consensus. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sacramento River


text:
Talk:London Bridge

London Bridge
Wiktionary is no encyclopedia of bridges -- Liliana • 15:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * An argument might be made for this bridge being an exception due to its iconic nature, but not with that definition. Besides, there's one bridge by this name that got shipped off to the US,so the definition isn't completely true. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:02, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There's no consensus on this entry, but I say delete it per Chuck Entz. Why include famous landmarks merely because they are famous? Mglovesfun (talk) 14:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Despite being Wonderfoolery, I think it conforms to WT:CFI. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 15:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The relevant passage is "Among those that do meet that requirement, many should be excluded while some should be included, but there is no agreement on precise, all-encompassing rules for deciding which are which." It seems wrong to say it 'conforms to' the criteria set out by this passage, as their are none. It's perfectly true to say that nothing in WT:CFI excludes this entry, but there's nothing in this passage that endorses this type of entry. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:50, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * What meant is that I think London Bridge belongs to the included side of "many should be excluded while some should be included". Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 19:51, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * IMO delete. Landmarks like this should be outside our scope. Equinox ◑ 19:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A further thought: in this particular case (unlike some geographic names), it would be a reasonable guess that this was a bridge located in London (just like Sydney + opera house). That doesn't automatically mean that any bridge in London is the London Bridge, but really any further details are encyclopaedic. This makes it even more obvious and unnecessary here than actual place names like, say, Toowoomba, which means nothing to most people. Equinox ◑ 21:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Encyclopedic. Maro 20:33, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
 * London Bridge is falling down. My fair lady. (Ignore me. Just thinking out loud.) -- A LGRIF  talk 18:03, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Deleted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:58, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:London Bridge


text:
Talk:sobriety

sobriety
Rfd-redundant: not intoxicated is the same as sober, right? If it isn't, the first sense needs to be clarified as meaning something other than not intoxicated. It should probably say "sober (all senses)". —Internoob 03:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, delete. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 04:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This is an example of a generic problem for terms related to a morphologically simpler term. Our entry for sober has four senses. A single-sense definition for sobreity implies that all four senses of sober might be applicable, which may or may not be true, and in the same order (whether of frequency of current use or historical order of occurrence). Also that the same translation would apply for each sense in every language. Keep, add senses that correspond to each sense of sober and reword challenged sense in line with corresponding sense of sober. DCDuring TALK 12:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Essentially, I agree with DCDuring, but use glosses like '# Quality of being sober not drunk'. I say the same for adverbs where the corresponding adjective has at least two definitions. -Mglovesfun (talk) 12:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * In principle, this notion could even apply to alternative forms and - dare I say it - inflected forms. "-Ly" adverbs, though perhaps not the highest priority, could use this treatment. As for "cleanup"-type listing, I would start with morphologically derived nouns, verbs, and adjectives, especially those that already have translation tables. DCDuring TALK 12:47, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Translation tables is a good point, as the translation of "quality of being sober" may depend on which to which sense of sober one is referring. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:37, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Keep. "Not intoxicated" refers principally to no alcohol content in the blood; "sober" refers to a condition resulting from abstinence from any of several drugs, inclluding marijuana. These definitions aren't the same thing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:00, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 00:04, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:sobriety


text:
beurrerie

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) butter factory; dairy (place where butter is made)

title: beurrerie


text:
Talk:língua sueca

língua sueca
SOP of língua (language) + sueca (Swedish). Could redirect to sueco maybe, by analogy with Swedish language which passed an RFD. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 14:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete; in Spanish and Portuguese, these are just the full phrasings of a linguistics structure left over from Latin, but where the adjective can now be used to denote the language itself. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:56, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Deleted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 00:56, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:língua sueca


text:
Talk:start button

start button
start + button. The rest is completely encyclopedic and not part of the actual definition. -- Liliana • 15:40, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Compare Start and (capitalised) Start button, the thing in Windows. Equinox ◑ 15:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Any button/key/arrow can be known this way, like up button, down button, etc. 'Button' is just a qualifier to make clear what the context is, delete. --Mglovesfun (talk) 18:20, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. The function of the Start button depends on the game and the context in the game, just like all the other buttons on a controller (left/right trigger, left/right bumper, select button, dpad, etc.....) and should thus not be included in a dictionary. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 03:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete if it doesn’t have another meaning like reset button does. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't delete. It can additionally refer to the button in Windows. Foreigners find the definition handy.
 * Keep, I think "start" means to begin and that "start [button]" means to open up the main directory of a computer's various software programs, I also know this is a hard to translate term and would be useful for that too.Lucifer 11:41, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The button in Windows is capitalized though, as in Start button. That might merit inclusion. (We have taskbar too, for example, as well as Start Menu.) -- Liliana • 13:02, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think its used in the singular too, I'll look for sources and create the capitalized version too.Lucifer 23:02, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I think the term is misleading because it's not generic. The menus in other graphical interfaces like KDE or Gnome are not called start menus despite matching the definition. The start menu is specifically the one in Windows. —CodeCat 23:13, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I wrote a new, more generic definition, but to be honest, it still looks very much like start + button. --Hekaheka 23:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Any on button is sop but start button is the graphic user interface "button" used in operating systems and is both idiomatic and a set term. start means to begin and button is something on your shirt or or something you literally press.Lucifer 00:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Your argument is better used to support the computer (and other technology) meaning of button. You could similarly argue for stop button, pause button, fast forward button ... where do we stop?    D b f  i  r  s   19:09, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete "start button" doesn't carry more meaning than "green button", "square button"... The (computer science) definition is not correct since it is specific to Windows operating systems (actually only some versions, introduced with W95 and I think now dropped in W8) and even if capitalized I'm not sure it should be included either since button is just a context for "Start", it could be simply added to Start. Fedso (talk) 10:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Deleted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:start button


text:
Talk:Hanging Gardens of Babylon

RFD discussion
For a RFD discussion that took place in 2008–2009, see Talk:Angkor Wat. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 11:22, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hanging Gardens of Babylon
Do we need this? Apart from Great Pyramid of Giza, this is the only of the wonders of the world we have. -- Liliana • 00:44, 22 December 2011 (UTC) (addendum: note also that Statue of Zeus at Olympia failed not too long ago!)
 * Delete, not a word or an idiom. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:26, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Great Pyramid of Giza passed for no consensus in 2008. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's delete that too. There's no logic in keeping a pyramid and letting a hanging garden fall. --Hekaheka 15:19, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's nominate it separately though, right? Or just add it into the bottom of this debate? Mglovesfun (talk) 17:30, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. This entry is governed by WT:CFI, which accurately states that there is no consesus on complete criteria for inclusion and exclusion of names of specific entitites. What I am looking at is whether the entry can carry useful lexicographical information. And it can: it states that "Hanging Gardens of Babylon" is capitalized as a proper name, whereas the same object is often referred to in Czech by "visuté zahrady Semiramidiny", capitalized as a phrase that is not a proper name. The entry contains Russian translation "висячие сады Семирамиды", capizalized just like the Czech translation. The Russian translation refers to the object by reference to Semiramis rather than Babylon, an interesting lexicographical fact.
 * As an aside, Statue of Zeus at Olympia mentioned by the nominator Liliana was deleted two years ago on 5 December 2009, with a RFD discussion that had 4 votes for deletion (Equinox, Visviva, Ruakh, DCDuring) and 3 votes for keeping (Bogorm, Stephen, DAVilla ), so it should not have been deleted, as there was no consensus for deletion. Admittedly, the text of CFI contained the unvoted-on attributive-use rule back then, so the entry probably failed to meet CFI at the time. --Dan Polansky 13:53, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is also a place name, for which we have no consensus. The main objection that we have for place names is that there are so many of them, including streets, buildings, and parks. The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World hardly causes a prioritization issue for us, because as the name implies, there are only seven of them. We have entries for every major geological feature, country, city, and astronomical object. We even have the names of some important streets, parks, and buildings. The threshold for us is the small places.

 * The other problem with place names is the lack of any lexical information. As Dan pointed out, some entries should be kept when they provide lexical, and not just encyclopedic information. ~ heyzeuss 16:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. —msh210℠ (talk) 17:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Kept as no consensus. —msh210℠ (talk) 17:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Why so quick? We are not in a hurry. Let this sit here for a few more weeks (maybe until spring?). -- Liliana • 16:23, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. They are/were gardens, in Babylon, that hang. Anything further is for Wikipedia. Equinox ◑ 23:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Deleted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 00:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hanging Gardens of Babylon


text:
beurrine

Noun

 * 1)  margarine

title: beurrine


text:
Talk:lampoonry

lampoonry
Mis-spelling, but it seems it comes from Webster. lampoonery exists also. -- A LGRIF  talk 12:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Though we really have no criteria to differentiate between misspellings, nonstandard forms and obsolete forms. Is it attestable? If so, keep with some sort of content. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Certainly appears to be attestable, there's hundreds of good results in Google Books. -- Cirt (talk) 01:31, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept as no consensus. — Ungoliant (Falai) 00:38, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:lampoonry


text:
vișină

Etymology
, from.

Noun

 * 1) sour cherry

title: vișină


text:
Talk:life support system

life support system
We seem to already cover both senses at life support. ---> Tooironic 09:04, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hold on, does life support ever occur outside of this collocation? I'd like to see cites for it. -- Liliana • 13:53, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * From Google Books: "His mother turned off his life support after a week", "The gas supply and life support facilities necessary to maintain habitable atmospheres", "the harm resulting from inappropriate use of life-support technology". Equinox ◑ 14:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Harumph. Might still deserve a redirect, just because it's one of the more common collocations. -- Liliana • 15:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete this is already covered under life support.Lucifer 13:46, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see the harm in redirecting. Otherwise, delete. —msh210℠ (talk) 17:19, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd agree that it's probably better to redirect this entry at this point in time. :) -- Cirt (talk) 01:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirected, since a majority of votes/comments asked for that. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:life support system


text:
Talk:get the axe

get the axe
we have axe sense 3, which occurs in more instances than just this one -- Liliana • 17:57, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Right. Hard-redirect or delete. —msh210℠ (talk) 18:46, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree; redirect or delete. --EncycloPetey 03:51, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Do not agree. To "Get the ax[e]" and variants means, primarily, to get fired. Any other use (e.g. "my girlfriend gave me the axe" is secondary and possibly derived. Note that the example given for axe sense 3 is the phrase "gave him the axe" (not just the word "axe") and the example from literature ("[O]ne day the axe just fell" from Tangled Up In Blue) describes the person getting fired from his job. It's true that the word "axe" is, by itself, used as a shorted version ("The company axed me"), sometimes, I suppose. But "The company gave me the axe" is probably more common.

 * At the very least, axe sense 3 should be rewritten to indicate that it means getting fired, and "A dismissal or rejection" either eliminated, or given as a secondary meaning, or added as separate sense (and a non-firing literary example would need to be found). Herostratus 04:13, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Deleted, but I left a note about the hard-redirect-supporting votes, in case someone in the future insists that it should be one. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:get the axe


text:
Talk:hormone replacement therapy

hormone replacement therapy
to me this seems entirely guessable from its components -- Liliana • 23:20, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep as a set phrase. Isn't it specific to particular hormones and a particular set of patients also.--Dmol 23:39, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I thought the same, but surprisingly, no, it is not specific at all. It can refer to all hormones and all sorts of patients! -- Liliana • 23:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If there is sufficient usage to indicate this specific meaning, I think it should be kept and the definition changed to match, even if this is not the "official" sense of the term.--Dmol 17:44, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete if this is correct. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 14:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep medical term for a disease reeks of a proper nounLucifer 10:37, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not a disease, it's a cure. Of what does it reek now? --Hekaheka 19:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Unsure. My relative gets insulin multiple times a day because she doesn't produce it herself. I've never heard anyone say she's on (or getting) hormone replacement therapy. —msh210℠ (talk) 17:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Well the current definition says "A therapy that replaces hormones". Maybe we need to roll some dice at Google Books and get a few quotations to clear up the meaning? -- Liliana • 15:21, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

 * , agree with analysis by, above. -- Cirt (talk) 01:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:hormone replacement therapy


text:
Talk:sexual appetite

sexual appetite
One's appetite... for sex? ---> Tooironic 12:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's that obvious. -- Liliana • 14:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Seems to be a technical term that contains more than "sexual" and "appetite." Haplology 14:11, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Definition seems wrong though: "the sex drive as a measure of a persons mental health". In general usage it is not a measure of mental health, to a psychiatrist it may be, but that's not part of the definition, more of an "this is also true "statement. But in essence, keep. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've redefined it a bit, could still do with work IMO. Also I think sex drive is a synonym but we lack the sense at sex drive. I still say keep as not easily derived from the sum of its parts. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:20, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

C'mon, what else could it be than what it says? And what does "technical term" mean in this context? If it really is one, there should be some explanation. I don't have strong opinion in either direction, but it just looks rather useless. If kept, shouldn't we add sexual desire by the same token? --Hekaheka 02:33, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. —msh210℠ (talk) 18:12, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per sex driveLucifer 20:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Would you mind to explain? --Hekaheka 23:09, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Another entry with principally hormonal justification. Delete DCDuring TALK 14:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * , this is also used in clinical settings. -- Cirt (talk) 01:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:14, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:sexual appetite


text:
Talk:-istically

-istically
No such suffix, all the 'derived terms' end in -ic and are then suffixed with -ally, see -ally which covers this. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * To quote DCDuring from a similar discussion, "By what criteria does one evaluate the "existence" or, more importantly, includability in Wiktionary of a suffix?" As for the derived terms, this may not be the case for all. I would contend, at least, that realistically could as easily derive from realist + -ical + -ly as from real + -istic + -ally. This also raises a question as to whether -istical exists. Finally, there are numerous examples in the wild (in blog posts and forums and the like) of "-istically" being appended to words that do not usually combine with suffixes, for example "funistically", "foodistically", "beeristically", "stupidistically". More conventionally, see 2003, Don Michael Randel, The Harvard Dictionary of Music, p. 598:
 * Horns, trumpets, and trombones, both soloistically and sectionally, became central to the orchestral concept... His highly subtle orchestration elevates woodwinds, more often scored soloistically than sectionally...

bd2412 T 15:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * At the very least I think this is -istical + -ly... —CodeCat 23:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That doesn't seem realistical to me... Chuck Entz 00:34, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept as no consensus. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Looks like junk to me. Look at the derived term monotheistically! Did someone nail this big plank on the end of *monothe? Equinox ◑ 18:46, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

 * See also Talk:Americanistically. Equinox ◑ 22:47, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. PUC – 22:51, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I would think you would first need to demonstrate the specific alternative origins of words ending this way. If it's impossible to tell, then this is all we have left. bd2412 T 23:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Looking at the list in the entry, I don't see a single term that cannot be explained as coming from an adjective ending in -ic to which -ally was appended. There may well be counterexamples (such as the ones you've mentioned above), but those and those alone should be mentioned in the entry. PUC – 23:57, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't particularly have a problem with that. bd2412 T 03:56, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:-istically


text:
Talk:FD&C Yellow No. 5

FD&
Is this kind of thing appropriate as an entry? Should we add the Pantone colors while we're at it? -- Liliana • 14:35, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) I don't see why not. 2) Pantone asserts that their lists of color numbers and pigment values are the intellectual property of Pantone and free use of the list is not allowed. (but we should have an entry for Pantone: and possibly for Pantone Matching System:. SemperBlotto 15:13, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

 * I ran across these things frequently in my long translating career. American foods, drugs and cosmetics are full of them. They’re important. If a company is going to export its products to Europe or Asia, these terms have to be translated to "E" numbers. —Stephen (Talk) 15:36, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

 * What's the name of the color? Is it "FD&C Yellow No. 5" (with some capitalization and some spelling of number), or is it "Yellow No. 5" (with some capitalization and some spelling of number) with the "FD&C" part just a reference to which definition of "Yellow No. 5" is being used? Compare "[chemical name] USP": the chemical name is just "[chemical name]"; the "USP" is added just to show whose definition of "[chemical name]" is being used. —msh210℠ (talk) 17:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Keep it would be useful to know exactly what yellow #5 is without reading a dissertation on it at wikipedia.Lucifer 13:48, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

RFD discussion: July 2019–August 2020
Previously survived an unsatisfactory RFD after one person (Luciferwildcat) voted to keep. --Gibraltar Rocks (talk) 08:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

 * Mmmmmphhh there was a time I voted to keep all the "E numbers". Now I wouldn't. Still, what is this? Not a trademark, I suppose? Is it the normal name for the thing? Are there other names for it? I would prefer us to make the decision based on policy. Equinox ◑ 06:42, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

 * The term is in use:, , . Although our definition calls it a “color additive composed principally of tartrazine”, all sources that I saw suggest it is just tartrazine. --Lambiam 12:56, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually if you read the FD&C Act, you will find that it is defined as a mixture containing certain limited amounts of impurities. My understanding is that tartrazine is just the name of the trisodium salt which is the primary constituent of Yellow 5. But I am no expert on this. -Mike (talk) 22:03, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

 * What is the reason for deleting? I see it is in use, we may need to change the definition slightly but that isn't grounds for removal. Stephen G. Brown said in the original discussion: "I ran across these things frequently in my long translating career. American foods, drugs and cosmetics are full of them. They’re important. If a company is going to export its products to Europe or Asia, these terms have to be translated to "E" numbers." There were two explicit keep votes and no explicit delete votes in that discussion. --Habst (talk) 16:25, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

 * Keep. Add the missing reds, blues. Dream up a category for them. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:11, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

 * FD&C Blue No. 1; FD&C Blue No. 2; FD&C Green No. 3; FD&C Red No. 3; FD&C Red No. 40 (sic); FD&C Yellow No. 5; FD&C Yellow No. 6. Category:FD&C certified color additives? --Lambiam 07:47, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

 * Delete the forms with FD&C at the start, I can imagine terms such as or  surviving, but the full term is purely encyclopedic. This is no more lexical than, say, 21 USC § 841. -  TheDaveRoss  12:09, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Move to yellow no. 5 and leave a redirect behind. Also, if kept, can the header be fixed so that it doesn't uselessly read FD&C? bd2412 T 04:55, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep FD&C Yellow No. 5. Consulting, it seems "FD&C Yellow No. 5" would be more common than "yellow no. 5", which is not found at all in this capitalization; "FD&C Yellow No. 5" is probably not found since it has too many items, more than 5. Stephen G. Brown reasoning above seems persuasive, and I failed to come up with a rationale for deletion to override CFI. (The nominator is Wonderfool. Even Wonderfool can make good nominations, but I would not like to count his vote, and he did not provide any CFI-relevant deletion rationale.) --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Example quotation: "For these reasons, the Commissioner concludes that the use of FD&C Yellow No. 5 in drugs should be declared in the form of a precautionary statement, [...]"; more are at . --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that this revolves around the distinction between "47 N Main Street" and "10 Downing Street". Is this a legally defined, but meaningless label for a known specific thing, or does it have meaning in a linguistic sense? I'm sure there are plenty of durably-archived uses in court records of lawyers and police officers referring to crimes by their numbers in the criminal code- and the people they're talking to know exactly what they talking about- but do those numbers mean anything as English? Another example is the number worn by a famous sports figure. Any fan of their team will immediately know who you mean when you say the number, and it may be used as shorthand for the the player's name in durably archived sports writing- but does it belong in a dictionary? If you want to anchor this in CFI, the relevant part is conveying meaning. The problem is, of course, that semantics is a tricky field, there's no doubt disagreement among lexicographers and semanticists about what "meaning" means. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:44, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no question in my mind that "FD&C Yellow No. 5" conveys meaning; and there is no question that this is an English term, just like "the chemical element with atomic number 90", which I would argue is a sum of parts. We may need to update CFI, or come up with a rationale for interim CFI override. To do so, we need to provide a least a tentative exclusion criterion, and examine that criterion on a larger set of items. And maybe we should do that on an occasion different from Wonderfool being bored. We may start by looking at E102: it is a term that refers to something, but it may be annoing that it does so via a counting number attached to something, and that may be the same annoyance with FD&C Yellow No. 5, except that some people above seem to be rather annoyed at the "FD&C" part and are happy with yellow no. 5, which is damned by GNV as per my link above. Then what is the annoyance? I don't know. Let us note the customary capitalization; it seems the users of the term treat it as a proper noun rather than a substance common noun; then, the policy would be WT:NSE, and it would be up to editor discretion to keep or delete. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

 * No consensus to delete: Discussion has been open for over a year and there does appear to be any consensus for deletion emerging. Purplebackpack89 13:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:FD&C Yellow No. 5


text:
Talk:unit

unit
Rfd-redundant: 5. (military) A self-contained military organization; usually a battalion, regiment, or naval ship.

Seems redundant to either:

4. An organized group comprising people and/or equipment.
 * He was a member of a special police unit.

or:

6. (military, informal) A member of a military organization.
 * The fifth tank brigade moved in with 20 units. (i.e., 20 tanks)

or:

7. (US, military) Any military element whose structure is prescribed by competent authority, such as a table of organization and equipment; specifically, part of an organization.

But I'm not sure. There may also be other redundancies in that Noun section. —msh210℠ (talk) 19:36, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

 * delete #5 and #6 ... I agree that #5 covered by #7 and others. A regiment is unit but so is squad (that would fall under the TO&E of #7). A square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not necessarily a square. A regiment is a unit but a unit is not necessarily a "self-contained" organization. Anent #6, I held three MOSs in the Army ... one of them being Armor. I can't imagine someone saying that the 5th Armor (not tank, at least not in the US) Brigade moved in with 20 units with the "units" referring to the number of tanks. Military communications demand clarity ... and that isn't clear at all. I'v been out of the Army for several years now but I don't recall that even as slang but things change fast in the military. I'd be willing to listen to someone who is on Active Duty or in the Reserves chip in and defend it.

 * Sense 5 deleted. Sense 6 wasn’t nominated. — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:30, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

unit square
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_square --Backinstadiums (talk) 16:48, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:unit


text: bufflonne

title: bufflonne


text:
Talk:table scrap

table scrap
¶ I had a soupçon someone would attempt to get this deleted, so here I am. Could this be interpreted as sum‐of‐parts? --Pilcrow 22:56, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I suppose that scrap: could be interpreted as a fight. Anyway, I have never heard of this term. RfV? SemperBlotto 08:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It's the small pieces of food left over on your plate that you would throw away, shove down the disposal, or sneak to your doggy.Lucifer 08:46, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Widespread use. Not a set phrase or idiom. A mere collocation. Picnic scraps would be attestable, for example. But many seem to believe that all attestable collocations should be, some (eg, SB) restricting inclusion to collocations involving polysemic components. No OneLook reference has this.
 * Scrap in this sense can be found in many phrases of the form "NP scrap(s)". The NP can be a food that constitutes the scrap(s) or a place or event that may be the source of the scrap(s). A near synonym is scraping(s). DCDuring TALK 16:47, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * In this situation, I'd favor keeping it, since table scrap refers to leftover food, and not to junked bits of a table. The combination "table scrap" could have more than one possible meaning, but only one is usually intended.  Additionally, table scrap is an exact synonym of one sence of scrap, just as ice hockey is a synonym of one sense of hockey.  The additional word does not add any meaning to the definition that was not there before, so it isn't really an extra word (since it lacks independent meaning in the collocation), but the additional word does clarify which sense is intended.   --EncycloPetey 17:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The principle on which your argument relies are a poor basis for making replicable decisions about inclusion. The first argument applies to all phrases including at least one polysemic terms. Thus it puts us on the wrong side of a combinatorial explosion of potential entries, given the poor quality of our entries for single words, despite having the benefit of copyright-free dictionaries for all basic words and many others, including some not yet included. In addition polysemy is an artifact of the care with which we (or anyone) subdivide meaning in words. Does head have 10 or 100 senses? Does barometer have one, two, three, or ten senses?
 * The second argument (if it is not an observation) just seems wrong. The sense of scrap that appears in table scrap is the same sense that appears in picnic scrap or kitchen scrap. A picnic scrap, for example, could be from a blanket as well as a table and a kitchen scrap' from a counter. Butcher scraps would be from a chopping block. The same sense also appears with NPs referring to the type of food in which "table" is potentially completely irrelevant.
 * This kind of discussion also illustrates the somewhat arbitrary nature of what one calls a "sense". DCDuring TALK 18:15, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The second point was indeed observation more than argument, but your reply is not error-free. In fact kitchen scrap does not always refer to food in the quotations I'm finding:
 * Boys' Life - Oct 1976
 * Kitchen Scrap. Here's a way to recycle kitchen throwaways such as popsicle sticks, disposable ice-cream spoons, and soda straws.
 * The combination "kitchen scrap" (as food bits) seems to be more British, whereas "table scrap" is more used in the US.

 * In any case, "table scrap" does appear in crossword dictionaries, FWIW, even if not in the OneLook sources. --EncycloPetey 19:40, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I never said that kitchen scrap meant only food. Another use of scrap is to refer to materials of any kind by their source. "Foundry scrap", "picnic scraps", "household scraps", "factory scrap". DCDuring TALK 20:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

This is an interesting variation: This seems to suggest a meaning that is, at least, exclusive of meat scraps. bd2412 T 18:26, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * 1911, C.A. Rogers, "Raising Chickens-The Principles Involved", Agriculture of Vermont, p. 97:
 * The domestic chick must be given the animal food in some concentrated form also, such as meat scrap, meat meal, milk or buttermilk; the latter alone, however, will not provide enough protein to properly balance the ration. It can be supplemented with table scrap or meat scraps. DCDuring TALK 20:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. Maybe meat scraps are only scraps of meat, while table scraps are scraps of anything (possibly including meat) from a table. Equinox ◑ 18:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Exactly. DCDuring TALK 20:29, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The second sense should be verified, it seems to be the sense justifying inclusion. Lmaltier 18:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * How about this: 2008, Kim Powers, Capote in Kansas: A Ghost Story, p. 3:
 * She was not a retiring woman, about to roll over and accept table scraps.
 * Cheers! bd2412 T 03:43, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Doesn't look very SoP to me, for example it's not a scrap of a table (a bit of wood or metal or plastic). But having never heard of the term, I will decline to make further comment. --Mglovesfun (talk) 18:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Taking an example from close at hand (BD2412's cite), "retiring woman" could have any of a few meanings (referring to personality, relationship to employment, specific activity with respect to a vehicle or other machine, an occupation} depending on context, though the personality one tends to be the most common sense and probably the default. If I build an entry around one of them, wouldn't it be necessarily included by your logic? DCDuring TALK 20:15, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that it's fair to draw a comparison between those, since retiring is a participle instead of an attributive noun. I wouldn't apply Mglovesfun's rationale except in a [N + N] combination.  I'm not arguing for full and unmitigated validity of the reasoning in all such cases, but I agree with the principle of his reasoning. --EncycloPetey 17:11, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I would suggest that the context of the phrase as used in the sentence I cited can be gleaned by reading the surrounding text more broadly. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:27, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:table scrap


text:
Talk:strength training

strength training
SoP -- Liliana • 22:48, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

It's a sport, and is the set term for this sport, it's a two word not sop compound.Lucifer 22:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Set phrase, keep. —  [Ric Laurent] — 00:06, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

 * For once, I agree with GT/Lucifer. It's borderline, but possibly distinct from the expected sum of parts.    D b f  i  r  s   11:00, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

It's not a sport, it's a form of exercise used in training for many a sport. --Hekaheka 12:34, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

 * I would disagree for now, but I'm not sure if or how strength training differs from body building, except that body building gets to the point of being gross, whereas strength training actually makes you kinda hot. I think of strength training as body building for people who don't care to do steroids and look like aliens. —  [Ric Laurent] — 14:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I can think of at least two differences: 1) there are competitions in body building but not in strength training 2) in body building one tries to get good-looking and voluminous (in somebody's eyes, at least) muscles but in strength training the focus is in adding the performance (and as by-product often also the volume) of the muscles. --Hekaheka 22:03, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of competitions for people who use strength training, but they're not called "strength training competitions". They're called sports. --EncycloPetey 18:58, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see that it matters whether strength training is different from body building or not. A dictionary can and does contain words that mean the same thing. Leonxlin 18:22, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * As I read the definition it would be SoP were it not for the prepositional phrase "through anaerobic exercise." As no citations support this (or any other aspect of the definition) the entry is not really defensible as it stands. Move to RfV. DCDuring TALK 18:07, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Citations added; definition amended. --EncycloPetey 17:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. --Mglovesfun (talk) 13:27, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Strength training is a specific form of resistance training that utilizes low numbers of repetitions with higher resistance.  As Harvey Newton put it in 2006 (see another quote in the entry): "Strength training, a relatively new term, is applied to athletes who use resistance training to increase strength with the express purpose of improving performance in their chosen sport.  Strength training implies that the athlete is actually using a high enough resistance, applied with a relatively low number of repetitions, to actually gain stength.  Not everyone engaged in resistance training actually trains for increased strength."  Strength training is a very specific form of resistance training, such that many major athletic teams now have strength coaches. --EncycloPetey 18:58, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Definitely a lexical item whose precise meaning cannot be deduced from the constituent words themselves. Leonxlin 18:22, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

 * , essentially agree with, above. -- Cirt (talk) 01:42, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Kept. Tag had already been removed by . — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:strength training


text:
bâtisseur

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) (male) builder

title: bâtisseur


text:
caillage

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) curdling

title: caillage


text:
înfărma

Etymology
. Possibly from +, variant of , or from a , present active infinitive of  or , present active infinitive of. Another hypothesis is + Latin.

Verb

 * 1)  to dress, clothe
 * 2)  to grab (something)

title: înfărma


text:
Talk:MSL Entry, Descent, and Landing Instrumentation

MSL Entry, Descent, and Landing Instrumentation
This just can't be happening. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:41, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. - -sche (discuss) 04:53, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sum of, sum of, sum of parts. Delete.--Dmol (talk) 06:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedily deleted. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:06, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


text:
carraghénane

Noun

 * 1) carrageenan

title: carraghénane


text:
baltais

Adjective

 * 1) the white;

title: baltais


text:
cistercien

Etymology
, from (whence 🇨🇬).

Adjective

 * 1) Cistercian

Noun

 * 1) Cistercian

title: cistercien


text:
coercitif

Etymology
From +.

Adjective

 * 1) coercive

title: coercitif


text: baltās

title: baltās


text: baltai

title: baltai


text: colorectale

title: colorectale


text: colorectaux

title: colorectaux


text: colorectales

title: colorectales


text: baltām

title: baltām


text: contrebalancée

title: contrebalancée


text: contrebalancés

title: contrebalancés


text: contrebalancées

title: contrebalancées


text: baltajām

title: baltajām


text:
b'fhéidir

Adverb

 * 1) maybe, perhaps

title: b'fhéidir


text:
crémage

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) to cream

title: crémage


text:
Talk:nineteen sixty-eight

nineteen sixty-eight
Was suggested above that "I think nineteen sixty-eight needs to go". It seems to me that, excluding the question of attestation, any year can be known by a number. Also, just because it is written out in words, is this more dictionary-worthy than 1968? Note that nineteen does not have an entry for the year 19 AD even though in my opinion, it's more justifiable as it's a single word not two consecutive words (which debatably, do function as a single unit anyway). Mglovesfun (talk) 21:06, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * And, just so you know, we cover this very topic at Appendix:Year pronunciation. delete -- Liliana • 21:13, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we can set up a larger appendix to redirect all year names to, where we can also provide a table of translations. bd2412 T 23:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Are we nominating the 80+ other entries that were created at the same time (nineteen eighteen through nineteen ninety-nine)? Chuck Entz (talk) 05:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes. I've now tagged with rfd (linking to this section) all the years listed at [[special:prefixindex/nineteen]] except nineteen hundred (worth discussing separately IMO, because the year is but one sense in a larger entry) and nineteen hundreds (worth discussing separately IMO also). —msh210℠ (talk) 15:52, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that this should be a blanket proposition, and I suggest that my above proposal for an appendix would apply to all these. I would make an exception for nineteen eighty-four, which I believe has an idiomatic meaning deriving from the book of the same name. bd2412 T 18:39, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * My aim was to use this as a 'test case' and nominate more year names if this succeeds. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Year names and numbers are systematically produced by a simple system. No point cataloguing them independently, any collection will always be infinitely incomplete. Smurrayinchester (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete SOP, this is how year names are formed in English, nothing lexical here. —msh210℠ (talk) 16:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, including the relevant senses at nineteen hundred and nineteen eighty-four (but not the other senses). --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:54, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted, will delete the rest at some point, unless someone else does it before me. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:19, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:nineteen sixty-eight


text:
Talk:performance management system

performance management system
Aargh! --Hekaheka (talk) 02:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Looks like someone is suffering from PMS. Or is that PMS?  Or PMS?  I'm so confused.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 06:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I was going to say weak keep - it does look like it has specific meaning in the business world - but then I saw that we have performance management. performance management system is just a system for performance management. The definition given doesn't match any of the citations - you can't set up a technique - and from the sounds of it, it's actually describing what performance management is. Delete. (The other two PMS entries look appalling too. "performance monitoring system: A system to monitor performance...") Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:28, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete all --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

performance monitoring system
Delete, it literally says "A system to monitor performance". Mglovesfun (talk) 10:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

performance measurement system
Nominating the other PMSes that Eiríkr identified. performance monitoring system is defined as "A system to monitor performance [...]", performance measurement system as "A set of measurable criteria and methodology [i.e a system] to enable performance to be measured objectively [...]". Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:performance management system


text:
Talk:performance monitoring system

performance management system
Aargh! --Hekaheka (talk) 02:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Looks like someone is suffering from PMS. Or is that PMS?  Or PMS?  I'm so confused.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 06:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I was going to say weak keep - it does look like it has specific meaning in the business world - but then I saw that we have performance management. performance management system is just a system for performance management. The definition given doesn't match any of the citations - you can't set up a technique - and from the sounds of it, it's actually describing what performance management is. Delete. (The other two PMS entries look appalling too. "performance monitoring system: A system to monitor performance...") Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:28, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete all --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

performance monitoring system
Delete, it literally says "A system to monitor performance". Mglovesfun (talk) 10:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

performance measurement system
Nominating the other PMSes that Eiríkr identified. performance monitoring system is defined as "A system to monitor performance [...]", performance measurement system as "A set of measurable criteria and methodology [i.e a system] to enable performance to be measured objectively [...]". Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:performance monitoring system


text:
Talk:performance measurement system

performance management system
Aargh! --Hekaheka (talk) 02:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Looks like someone is suffering from PMS. Or is that PMS?  Or PMS?  I'm so confused.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 06:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I was going to say weak keep - it does look like it has specific meaning in the business world - but then I saw that we have performance management. performance management system is just a system for performance management. The definition given doesn't match any of the citations - you can't set up a technique - and from the sounds of it, it's actually describing what performance management is. Delete. (The other two PMS entries look appalling too. "performance monitoring system: A system to monitor performance...") Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:28, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete all --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:43, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

performance monitoring system
Delete, it literally says "A system to monitor performance". Mglovesfun (talk) 10:02, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

performance measurement system
Nominating the other PMSes that Eiríkr identified. performance monitoring system is defined as "A system to monitor performance [...]", performance measurement system as "A set of measurable criteria and methodology [i.e a system] to enable performance to be measured objectively [...]". Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:performance measurement system


text:
Talk:metaphysician

metaphysician
Rfd-redundant. Sense 1: “A philosopher who has developed a metaphysical system or theory”.

Subset of sense 2: “A philosopher who specializes in the scholarly study of metaphysics.” Unless metaphysics is somehow special. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 01:03, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Quite redundant. bd2412 T 01:37, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thirded; I agree. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:44, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:metaphysician


text:
Talk:Java Modeling Language

Java Modeling Language
We've deleted similar terms before (Windows Forms etc.) and this isn't any different. -- Liliana • 09:08, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 04:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Something for Wikipedia. Equinox ◑ 09:26, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:26, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Java Modeling Language


text:
câpre

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) caper (bud)

title: câpre


text:
Talk:Euro overnight index average

Euro overnight index average
Google Books suggests that the definition is wrong, and this is sum of parts, as it's just the average overnight index of the Euro. -- Liliana • 13:52, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, Sae1962's known for poor edit, this is likely another one. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:45, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 23:45, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Euro overnight index average


text:
Talk:zaljubuvati

zaljubuvati
Macedonian has only Cyrillic script so this cannot be a valid term for fall in love in Macedonian language. --BiblbroX дискашн 17:04, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes shot on sight; if anyone knows the Cyrillic script, feel free to create it. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I was moving it around a bit, but my Cyrillic spelling is pretty bad outside of Russian, and I couldn't seem to verify anything. So it remains deleted. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:39, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:zaljubuvati


text:
Talk:música para acompanhar

música para acompanhar
(Moved from WT:RFV). SOP of música + para + acompanhar (“music to accompany”). When looking for citations, this phrase was usually followed by an object (i.e. “music to accompany something”). In two cases it was by itself, but in those cases it could be rewritten with a comma (“... music, to accompany”). Furthermore, it’s not even a set term. The term used by musicians is acompanhamento. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 23:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, simple. FWIW (not a lot I'd imagine) but fr:música para acompanhar failed on the French Wiktionary ages ago. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:34, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Deleted, I've added acompanhar in order to cover it completely. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:música para acompanhar


text:
somniculosus

Etymology
From. Vowel length altered after.

Adjective

 * 1) sleepy, drowsy
 * 2) sluggish, slothful
 * 3)  making sleepy, drowsy or sluggish
 * 4) deadly
 * 1) deadly

title: somniculosus


text:
Talk:hardly the crime of the century

hardly the crime of the century
Hardly the idiom of the century. Ƿidsiþ 07:42, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of deleting it on sight. Maybe crime of the century: would be worth an entry? SemperBlotto (talk) 08:03, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Or simply of the century, for uses like "trial of the century", "crime of the century" and "game of the century" which aren't SOP at least to the extent that phrases are used for events that happen far, far more often than once a century (unlike, say, "storm of the century", which does seem to refer to a once-in-a-hundred-years storm). Smurrayinchester (talk) 11:45, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree, delete, but create . I don't think it literally means 'once a century' but more like 'the most memorable of the century'. 11:49, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * But isn't it just like of the week:, of the day:, of the hour:, of all time:? Ƿidsiþ 11:55, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I suppose so, but I don't see how this is a sense of ? 12:00, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't think of that. The OED actually has, under sense 30 ("preceded by [...] a word equivalent to a superlative"), subsense f: "A person or thing considered the leading example of his, her, or its kind in a specified period of time". Which, despite having spent hours expanding of:, I apparently haven't yet included -- but maybe we should have it. Ƿidsiþ 12:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * See Crime of the century (idiom). "Of the century" seems to have crossed over into idiomaticity. The list of "Xs" used in "Xs of the century" consistent with this construction by order of frequency at COCA is trial, crime, storm, person, deals, wedding, man, sale, game, event, fight, find, elections, understatement, etc. It would seem to require an non-gloss definition like used to indicate the most remarkable example of its kind, but with something better than "indicate".
 * Substituting other time periods (day, month, year) seems to give us a construction rather than an idiom. We don't have a good way of presenting constructions that would be useful to a user and does not mislead, IMO. DCDuring TALK 14:32, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm not opposed to having it, I was just pointing out that several similar constructions are possible. Ƿidsiþ 14:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Cf. "not the happiest person in the world". Equinox ◑ 14:52, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete the nominated entry, SoP, should be covered elsewhere. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:57, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Metaknowledge. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:hardly the crime of the century


text:
Talk:picadura de garrapata

picadura de garrapata
nothing but a picadura de garrapata. We have no mina de carbón criteria in Spanish.--Maria.Sion (talk) 23:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

 * dog bite=mordida de perro, tick bite=picadura de mosquito, cat bite=rajuñaso de gato; all different, translation is useful and coal mine covers english wiktionary for all languages.Lucifer (talk) 00:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Spanish seems to be quite different about how it combines most words, creating discrete phrases with prepositions rather than just tacking them together without spaces. In that sense, WT:COALMINE doesn't usually apply to Spanish. Tickbite may save tick bite from deletion as SOP, but it doesn't save every translation into every language.
 * As for the different words used to translate bite, that's something that could be covered in translation tables or usage notes, but people aren't going to get the information about which word is used to translate which kind of bite from entries like this, but from the entries that link to them- which could just as easily link to picadura and to garrapata (or is that mosquito? ;p ), and give the same information. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * @Lucifer, in which case, all you have to do is cite picaduradegarrapata. Have fun with that, delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 02:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't tempt me papasitoLucifer (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete SOP. The difference between picadura and mordida should be explained in picadura and mordida. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 04:52, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:picadura de garrapata


text:
décaillage

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) decurdling (in cheesemaking)

title: décaillage


text:
Talk:ungeeignete Person

ungeeignete Person
SOP of ungeeignete "unsuitable" + Person "person". —Angr 10:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Wow, that's terrible. I'm tempted to speedy it. - -sche (discuss) 10:26, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Beer parlour. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:00, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Msh210. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. bd2412 T 03:12, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:ungeeignete Person


text:
Talk:women's suffrage

women&
women's suffrage. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, anyone who ever speaks a little English knows what women means, so all that anyone who doesn't know what women's suffrage needs to do it look up suffrage, and we have an entry for that. I wonder if this was intended as a translation target; if so, in the foreign language entries just put women's suffrage, which is standard and has been standard for ages (since befoire I started editing in 2009). Mglovesfun (talk) 13:58, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per Monsieur Gardner. --Æ&Œ (talk) 17:30, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Delete. - -sche (discuss) 10:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Looking up suffrage won't tell you which of the possible definitions applies. Siuenti (talk) 14:02, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That would be a problem in any NP with at least one polysemous component. And yet people figure out meaning almost effortlessly. DCDuring TALK 16:06, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Is a green car/plane/boat/vehicle, etc. one that's painted green, or one that has a low impact on the environment? Is a green plant an organism with chlorophyll in its leaves, or an environmentally-friendly manufacturing facility? We can't include every phrase where one of the words has more than one meaning- we have to trust that people can figure it out from the context. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:46, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You seem to be making my case for me. Is a green car one that painted green, or that has a low impact on the environment? It depends. Is "women's suffrage" their right to vote, or their right to express an opinion? Siuenti (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * @Siuenti, do you not trust our readers to literally string two words together? Mglovesfun (talk) 20:40, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Answer my question and I'll answer yours. Siuenti (talk) 20:57, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * What is your question? Mglovesfun (talk) 20:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

So can "women's suffrage" mean "a kind of women's prayer"? I don't know that meaning of "suffrage" at all. AFAIK, "women's suffrage" refers only to the right to vote, but perhaps not. --BB12 (talk) 19:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't either; there's a more thorough definition here. In theory, given the right context, "women's suffrage" could mean "an intercessory petition on behalf of women", just as "red dog" could mean "an ugly woman who's a Communist", even though in both cases those aren't the meanings that immediately spring to mind. That doesn't make "women's suffrage" any less SOP than "red dog", though. —Angr 20:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Most, but not all, uses of red dog are SoP ;-}. DCDuring TALK 20:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Fine; "brown dog" for "ugly Nazi woman", then, although we don't seem to have that meaning of [[brown]] yet. —Angr 21:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

 * I agree that this should be deleted, but nevertheless, if the grounds for doing so are theoretical, then I think it has to stay because Wiktionary is descriptive not prescriptive. (Unfortunately, the CFI is not clear. It says that "bank parking lot" is sum of parts because "parking lot" can go with any definition of "bank." But, in fact, the "(sperm) bank" meaning doesn't work, as I've argued here, section titled "Fifth paragraph - other issues.") --BB12 (talk) 21:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * @BenjaminBarrett12 the problem with that argument, is if we accepted it, we'd have to acceot every word with more than one meaning combined with every other word where that phrase meets WT:CFI. Possibly not just every two word term, but multi-word term. We'd end up with blue car because blue car doesn't mean a pornographic car, or even worse, the car is blue because it doesn't mean the car is pornographic. Your argument is a common one in deletion debates, but has been rejected for years because of the reason I've just given. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It seems fairly improbably that the phrase "blue car" would refer to a pornographic car. But I don't see the concept of "women's right to express an opinion" as inherently improbable. Siuenti (talk) 21:47, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair point, another point I usually make at this point (ugh the word 'point' three times in succession) is that we're saying it's hypothetically possible to know the words women's and suffrage but not understand what women's suffrage means. Is there any evidence of anyone actually making this mistake? I don't like the idea of keeping an entry purely based on a though experiment. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:13, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

 * @User:Mglovesfun: I agree that my argument is not felicitous. That's why I think the CFI needs to be rewritten. Currently, there doesn't seem to be a coherent policy. --BB12 (talk) 23:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Delete. Either that, or create entries for black suffrage, African-American suffrage, negro suffrage, colored suffrage, latino suffrage, Mexican suffrage, Asian suffrage, Native American suffrage, indian suffrage, Jewish suffrage, racial suffrage, female suffrage, sex suffrage, feminine suffrage, women suffrage, woman's suffrage, womanhood suffrage, household suffrage, universal suffrage, free suffrage, equal suffrage, impartial suffrage, manhood suffrage, direct suffrage, municipal suffrage, alien suffrage, soldier's suffrage, youth suffrage, child suffrage, and adult suffrage (to name a few). All of these can be found in Google books, though some may not have the necessary 3 cites. Since the argument for women's suffrage is that one can't tell which definition of suffrage is meant, the same argument will apply for all of these. I think a good case can be made for a manhood suffrage entry, and perhaps one or two others- but the aforementioned argument applies equally to every one of the above.  Chuck Entz (talk) 05:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Yes. That's exactly the problem. --BB12 (talk) 07:55, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

 * To me the actual issue is an inverse one: whether, because women's/woman's/female suffrage are combined so very commonly in the US in reference to the Suffragist movement, suffrage has as its most common, person-in-the-street meaning "women's right to vote". DCDuring TALK 15:11, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Landau discusses the issue of SOP in his book "Dictionaries" (add "amazon dot com" to the following URL: Dictionaries-The-Art-Craft-Lexicography/dp/052178512X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1341985826&sr=8-1&keywords=landau+lexicography&tag=780065172-20) (I have a different edition, but I think it's the same), but I don't think he really comes to a conclusion. AFAIK and IMHO there probably is no real conclusion; ultimately, prescriptivism must step in to prevent the lexicographic gates of hell from breaking loose with alien suffrage, goldfish suffrage and the like. --BB12 (talk) 05:56, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 15:45, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:women's suffrage


text:
decurdling

Noun

 * 1)  The cutting of curds into blocks as part of cheesemaking.

Translations

 * French:

title: decurdling


text:
Talk:seminal work

seminal work
The wordiness of the definition does not make this any the less SoP. A seminal work is a work (noun) that is seminal:. DCDuring TALK 04:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Indeed, delete. Seminal includes "seminal work" in an example sentence. --BB12 (talk) 06:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Delete. seminal artwork (for example) can be quite widely found too: the phrase does not have extra meaning. Brown leaf! Equinox ◑ 10:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Delete per nom. - -sche (discuss) 10:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Of the more than 1100(!) uses of seminal followed immediately by a noun in COCA, more than 1050(!!!) are in not in the biological sense. About 250 different nouns follow. Among my favorites is "seminal bike zines". Work is the most common with 142 uses. DCDuring TALK 12:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom as SOP. bd2412 T 22:49, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete further evidence that it's SOP is that one can refer to someone's "early, seminal work" in a field without mentioning a specific work. If it were a set phrase, you wouldn't have both countable and uncountable constructions. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:08, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and other commenters. Astral (talk) 01:33, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Jamesjiao. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:seminal work


text:
Talk:age group

age group
Sole sense: "A demographic grouping based on age."

What makes most of these groupings specifically "demographic"? In "Johnny plays well with those in his age group.", is that age group "demographic"? Does anyone few this usage as different in 'feel' than the usex? Ie, is it any more or less idiomatic? The meanings of the component words in this pairing select and combine fairly predictably it seems to me. In academic and policy writings the "demographic" sense prevails. In other settings other meanings prevail. DCDuring TALK 12:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

If we were or had a dictionary of common phrases, aka a phrasebook, this would be a good candidate. Oh, would that we were! DCDuring TALK 12:46, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is not a group of ages but a group of people of a certain age. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:48, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Keep per Takasugi-san --Anatoli (обсудить) 01:32, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Takasugi Shinji as well. Astral (talk) 18:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Kept. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:age group


text:
Talk:flood alert

flood alert
"An official warning broadcast when a specific area is likely to experience flooding, normally due to excessive rain." Does it have to be official? Does "normally due to excessive rain" tell us anything? Isn't it any alert that warns of a flood? Compare earthquake alert, tsunami alert. Equinox ◑ 02:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * SOP alert! This is really just an alert having to do with (the danger of) a flood If this isn't covered at alert, we should change that entry so it is. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, clear SoP. — Ungoliant (Falai) 02:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Deletion alert. bd2412 T 02:51, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Delete per Equinox and Chuck. - -sche (discuss) 10:52, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, since I trust our readers literally to be able to string two words together. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:57, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and other commenters. Astral (talk) 18:00, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Gone. —msh210℠ (talk) 21:51, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:flood alert


text:
Talk:a square peg in a round hole

a square peg in a round hole
Did you mean: square peg into a round hole -- Liliana • 16:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We were missing square peg in a round hole. This could be a redirect. DCDuring TALK 17:24, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, utter tosh, just read the definitions. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Deleted as "not written in comprehensible English". Mglovesfun (talk) 12:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:a square peg in a round hole


text:
Talk:heavy drinking

heavy drinking
Is this really specifically "Excessive drinking to the point of drunkenness", or is it just "drinking" + "heavily" (eg. heavy eating, heavy coughing, heavy reading)? Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:27, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

 * I think they're pretty much the same thing, aren't they? Theoretically, you could have someone who drinks a lot of alcohol but spreads it out all day long so as to not get drunk, but I think that's pushing it. Delete --BB12 (talk) 08:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Move to rfd. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Citations could help, but not for attestation. If there is "a lot of" usage along the line of "heavy drinking" leading to "drunkenness" (under any of its many Wikisaurus synonyms}, that would provide support for our intuitions/experience of the use of this expression. But, it seems to me extremely unreasonable that including "Y", the frequent or even inevitable result of "X", in the definition of "X" should, by itself, make "X" a keeper when it would not otherwise be one. DCDuring TALK 14:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Kill. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:00, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. --Hekaheka (talk) 10:45, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

RFV discussion: July 2012
Is this really specifically "Excessive drinking to the point of drunkenness", or is it just "drinking" + "heavily" (eg. heavy eating, heavy coughing, heavy reading)? Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:27, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

 * I think they're pretty much the same thing, aren't they? Theoretically, you could have someone who drinks a lot of alcohol but spreads it out all day long so as to not get drunk, but I think that's pushing it. Delete --BB12 (talk) 08:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Move to rfd. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Citations could help, but not for attestation. If there is "a lot of" usage along the line of "heavy drinking" leading to "drunkenness" (under any of its many Wikisaurus synonyms}, that would provide support for our intuitions/experience of the use of this expression. But, it seems to me extremely unreasonable that including "Y", the frequent or even inevitable result of "X", in the definition of "X" should, by itself, make "X" a keeper when it would not otherwise be one. DCDuring TALK 14:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, sorry, I meant to take this to RFD, not RFV. Should I just close this now? Smurrayinchester (talk) 15:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, use and . I will let you do it as the original nominator. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Struck. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:heavy drinking


text:
шапсыгъэбзэ

Proper noun

 * 1) the Shapsug language (One of the Adyghe dialects)

title: шапсыгъэбзэ


text:
Talk:Portable Management Interface

Portable Management Interface
Definition seems to say it's a product by Sun Microsystems. Since it's not a single word, why would we keep names of individual commercial products? Mglovesfun (talk) 14:06, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not even WP has an article for this. Definitely not dictionary material. — Ungoliant (Falai) 18:41, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not dictionary material (I would have thought). SemperBlotto (talk) 18:53, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete (or speedy) --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:45, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * A little bit late for a speedy! Mglovesfun (talk) 16:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Portable Management Interface


text:
Talk:wheelchair sport

wheelchair sport
Any sport distinguished from other sports by its use of wheelchairs. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:10, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I just added a new definition at wheelchair which helps to show how this is a SOP. — Ungoliant (Falai) 20:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, thanks to the new sense of wheelchair. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:27, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think this is SOP noun+noun with the usual sense of wheelchair; I'm not sure the new sense of wheelchair is distinct from the other. In any event, delete this. —msh210℠ (talk) 15:48, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 07:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:wheelchair sport


text:
Talk:run for office

run for office
This is run: + for: + any of many terms, one class of which has office as a hyponym. See also: and run for:. DCDuring TALK 12:04, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Also consider: "He ran on the Socialist line for governor." DCDuring TALK 12:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, of course. Or redirect to run, I suppose. —msh210℠ (talk) 15:58, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:06, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. bd2412 T 19:00, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:run for office


text:
Talk:halterophilia

halterophilia
Correct spelling is halterofilia
 * Shot on sight. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:51, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:halterophilia


text:
Talk:Belvoir Hunt

Belvoir Hunt
"A fox hunt based at Belvoir, Leicestershire." Name of a specific event where the meaning is easily derived from the sum of its parts. I think there's a suggestion that it's rhyming slang for 'cunt' too. Anyone know about that? In any event, I'm nominating this definition, not a definition we don't have. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:57, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * FWIW I see no bgc/ggc results for " ". —msh210℠ (talk) 15:29, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If it was rhyming slang, it would be more likely to just be "her belvoir" (rhyming slang almost always deletes the actual rhyming part - it wouldn't be much use otherwise); and the similar berk (from Berkley hunt) is only used as an insult - you'd never actually say "her berk". That said, the only evidence I could find for use as slang were a couple of not-very-reliable web forums claiming beaver comes from Belvoir hunt. Delete Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not dictionary material. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:24, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per msh210. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:38, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Belvoir Hunt


text:
Talk:gay apparel

gay apparel
"Festive attire, party clothes." Apparel that is gay. Equinox ◑ 13:08, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow that's bad, here since 2005 as well. Delete. Total misunderstanding. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. — Ungoliant (Falai) 15:07, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, though some interpretations of our stated principles would have it kept. ("All words in all languages" and "A term should be included if it's likely that someone would run across it and want to know what it means.") DCDuring TALK 15:21, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * (a little off topic) I think the main reason that "A term should be included if it's likely that someone would run across it and want to know what it means." hasn't been kicked out of WT:CFI is because nobody applies it anyway. Nevertheless I think we should remove it from WT:CFI. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:47, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Not everyone would know that this means garments associated with flashy dressing homosexuals in Western culture.Lucifer (talk) 23:36, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It doesn't. A quick check will reveal that it was used in Shakespeare well before gay developed its modern meaning.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:12, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It was? I've never heard it outside "Deck the Halls". —Angr 22:18, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * "My gay apparel for an almsman's gown" in Richard II. Equinox ◑ 22:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Metaknowledge. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:gay apparel


text:
Talk:whatever is necessary

whatever is necessary
This seems absolutely transparent. That it might sometimes be used with a wink and a nod is immaterial and does not differentiate it from any number of expressions. DCDuring TALK 00:56, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

 * I would contrast it with what it takes, which at least some dictionaries find idiomatic. I am skeptical about whatever it takes as well. DCDuring TALK 01:00, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete (and nominate whatever it takes). Mglovesfun (talk) 09:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete (and keep whatever it takes). --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 16:15, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Matthias Buchmeier (talk) 11:49, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Mglovesfun. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 07:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:whatever is necessary


text:
Talk:Mars Science Laboratory

Mars Science Laboratory
Encyclopedic. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Killed in cold blood. Another ridiculous and badly written entry by . --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 15:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow, is it really a 'mission' rather than a 'laboratory' as the title suggests? Presumably it's only a mission as it hasn't happened yet. That's a bit like saying if I plan to make a cup of tea, the cup of tea is a 'plan' rather than a 'drink'. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Metaknowledge. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 06:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

"A robotic space probe mission to Mars launched by NASA on November 26, 2011...etc." This seems to be an encyclopaedic topic, not a dictionary term. Same goes for a few of the contributor's other entries. Equinox ◑ 12:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * A previous incarnation failed RFD. Is there any reason this is different? Chuck Entz (talk) 13:48, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Deleted as previously deleted/failed RFD or RFV since it’s pretty much the same definition as the previous. There must be a discussion for undeletion. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mars Science Laboratory


text:
Talk:no sois nada especial

no sois nada especial
Tagged but not listed. Apparently a proverb, looks like a total error to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:56, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. It’s nothing special, it’s just SOP. — Ungoliant (Falai) 00:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It seems to be originally created as translation to "proverb" you ain't all that and a bag of chips which is now redirected to all that and a bag of chips. Delete --Hekaheka (talk) 09:25, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Clearly there is such heated debate with a variety of opinions here that we need to the postpone the delete as long as possible. But seriously, it seems like for every entry on this page, when the discussion ends with a consensus to delete, no one bothers actually deleting anything. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 10:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * If you want to tag anything that seems appropriate with go ahead. Non-admins have done that before, in fact I'd be grateful. FWIW user:TAKASUGI Shinji just archived more than 20 kb of past discussions. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:28, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Not a set phrase nor a proverb to me. Delete. Actarus (Prince d'Euphor) 10:32, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Of course it's a bunch of c..p. Even if you don't know much about Spanish, then just look who created it and the definition (s)he wrote. Please Delete this quickly, porque no es nada especial. -- A LGRIF  talk 13:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by Metaknowledge. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:no sois nada especial


text:
Talk:Dutch alphabet

Dutch alphabet
and most of the other contents of Category:en:Alphabets, to wit: Esperanto alphabet, Greek alphabet, Hawaiian alphabet, Hungarian alphabet, Latin alphabet, Lojban alphabet, Macedonian alphabet, Pashto alphabet, Phoenician alphabet, Proto-Canaanite alphabet, Roman alphabet, Romanian alphabet, Russian alphabet, Slovene alphabet, Sorani alphabet, Turkish alphabet, Zhuyin alphabet, Arabic script, Glagolitic alphabet and Khmer script. They all seem SOPpy to me; the lists of precisely which letters constitute the Macedonian alphabet seems encyclopedic. (It's not that we can't make the information short enough to "fit" in a dictionary-definition, it's just...do we want to?) I checked for previous discussion and only found Talk:Phoenician alphabet. (Addendum: also most of the contents of Category:Alphabets.) - -sche (discuss) 17:30, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree, delete, especially as there already is Appendix:Latin script alphabets. —CodeCat 17:48, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect, perhaps? --Yair rand (talk) 18:05, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * How about each gets an entry like: "The alphabet used by the Dutch language, consisting of the basic Latin alphabet + [insert letters]"? Delete. But when there is a specific alphabet for a language (Khmer, Canaanite, Glagolitic) that sense should be added to the entry.Korn (talk) 20:35, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yup, delete -- Liliana • 21:42, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete all. SOP of Dutch (pertaining ... to the Dutch language) + alphabet. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 20:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleted by -sche. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 08:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dutch alphabet


text:
лъапцӏэ

Adjective

 * 1) barefoot

Synonyms

 * (Shapsug)

Adjective

 * 1) barefoot

Synonyms

 * лъапсӏэ (Shapsug)

title: лъапцӏэ