text:
corneule

Etymology
From, from , diminutive of. .

Noun

 * 1)  One of the corneas of a compound eye in the invertebrates.

title: corneule


text: corneules

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

title: corneules


text:
Talk:building model

building model
A model of a building, no? -- Liliana • 23:16, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Delete. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 23:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, doesn't get much simpler than this. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:41, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 21:24, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nice pic and all, but encyclopaedic info. Equinox ◑ 21:41, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:45, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:building model


text:
crowstone

Etymology
?

Noun

 * 1)  Ganister, a kind of sandstone.

title: crowstone


text: crowstones

title: crowstones


text:
Talk:fuddleduddle

fuddleduddle
I don't think this is either relatively or absolutely common as a misspelling of fuddle-duddle. It may not be common enough to be attestable. If it is I am not sure why we would call it a misspelling rather than an alternative spelling. DCDuring TALK 15:08, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * After looking on Books and Groups, I'd say it does not seem citeable, unless uses on Usenet as in e-mail addresses like fuddleduddle@website.com count. - -sche (discuss) 07:33, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * They don't. —msh210℠ (talk) 20:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, not attestable anyway. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:38, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 02:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:fuddleduddle


text:
Talk:solontu

solontu
Any person who read Manchu or Chinese character can go and check page 521 in Manchu-Chinese Dictionary by An Shuangcheng(《满汉大词典》，安双成). The word "solontu" is right there--Šolon (talk) 16:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Whatever may be the case, I moved the page to ᠰᠣᠯᠣᠨᡨᡠ. -- Liliana • 17:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Which is marked for deletion with no explanation, so the same comment could be applied to that. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Can this be detagged? Or does someone here still want it deleted? -- Liliana • 13:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I tagged it for speedy deletion; since it's been wikified and moved to Manchu script, there's no need for that. So detagged. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:42, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:solontu


text:
Talk:biographical film

biographical sketch
NISoPs. Compare comedy film, comedy sketch, tragic film, biographical play, etc. Equinox ◑ 15:31, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't see any idiomaticity. DCDuring TALK 20:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, ditto. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:15, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Same here. —msh210℠ (talk) 16:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

deleted -- Liliana • 03:34, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:biographical film


text: cimentant

title: cimentant


text: cimente

title: cimente


text: cimentes

title: cimentes


text: cimentons

title: cimentons


text:
cimenter

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1)  to cement
 * 2)  to confirm

title: cimenter


text: cimentez

title: cimentez


text: cimentent

title: cimentent


text: cimentais

title: cimentais


text: cimentait

title: cimentait


text: cimentions

title: cimentions


text: cimentiez

title: cimentiez


text: cimentaient

title: cimentaient


text: cimentas

title: cimentas


text: cimentâmes

title: cimentâmes


text: cimentâtes

title: cimentâtes


text: cimentèrent

title: cimentèrent


text: cimenteras

title: cimenteras


text: cimentera

title: cimentera


text: cimenterons

title: cimenterons


text: cimenterez

title: cimenterez


text: cimenteront

title: cimenteront


text: cimenterais

title: cimenterais


text: cimenterait

title: cimenterait


text: cimenterions

title: cimenterions


text: cimenteriez

title: cimenteriez


text: cimenteraient

title: cimenteraient


text: cimentasses

title: cimentasses


text: cimentât

title: cimentât


text: cimentassions

title: cimentassions


text: cimentassiez

title: cimentassiez


text: cimentassent

title: cimentassent


text:
hagdon

Etymology
. Compare later. Attested (as hagden) from the 17th century.

Noun

 * 1)  One of several species of sea birds of the genus, especially,  (syn. Puffinus gravis, ), the , and , the  or.

title: hagdon


text: hagdons

title: hagdons


text:
cimenterie

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) cement works

title: cimenterie


text: User talk:Tomtomn00

title: User talk:Tomtomn00


text:
alhenna

Etymology
Borrowed from, preserving the Arabic article.

Noun

 * 1)  henna

Etymology
Borrowed from, from.

Noun

 * 1) henna shrub

title: alhenna


text:
cintré

Adjective

 * 1) curved
 * 2) fitted (clothes)
 * 3)  crazy, nuts

title: cintré


text: empawn

title: empawn


text: empawned

title: empawned


text: empawning

title: empawning


text: empawns

title: empawns


text:
trawlnet

Noun

 * 1) A kind of fishing net; a trawl.

title: trawlnet


text: trawlnets

title: trawlnets


text:
cinémathèque

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) film archive

title: cinémathèque


text:
ecphractic

Etymology
From, from. Compare 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1)  Serving to dissolve or attenuate viscid matter, and so remove obstructions; deobstruent.

Noun

 * 1)  Any medicine of this kind.

title: ecphractic


text:
disenclose

Verb

 * 1)  To free from being enclosed.

title: disenclose


text: disenclosed

title: disenclosed


text:
circonlocution

Etymology
..

Noun

 * 1) circumlocution

title: circonlocution


text: disencloses

title: disencloses


text: disenclosing

title: disenclosing


text:
entomolite

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)  A fossil insect.

title: entomolite


text: entomolites

title: entomolites


text:
circonspect

Etymology
, from and.

Adjective

 * 1) circumspect, cautious, prudent

title: circonspect


text:
circonstanciel

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1)  adverbial

Usage notes

 * Not to be confused with.

title: circonstanciel


text:
Wiktionary:Votes/2012-03/CFI for Endangered Languages

CFI for Endangered Languages

 * Voting on: Two changes on the the criteria for inclusion page to address the difficulties in finding adequate source material to attest endangered languages:

 * At CFI, replace

 * "For terms in extinct languages: usage in at least one contemporaneous source."

 * with

 * "For terms in languages with sparse documentation, usage in at least one source."

 * Under "Languages to include," add the following section:

 * Languages with sparse documentation

 * The criterion for inclusion for languages that are extinct, endangered or without a strong written tradition is generally a contextually appropriate citation in at least one source. An endangered language is one listed by an institution such as UNESCO Interactive Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger or the Living Tongues Institute for Endangered Languages, or a dialect of those languages.

 * Vote starts: 00:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Vote ends: 23.59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

 * Vote created: BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 17:47, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Discussion:
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] WT:BP
 * [[Image:Wikt rei-artur3.svg|20px]] Wiktionary talk:Votes/2012-03/CFI for Endangered Languages

Support

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 02:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support. This will be helpful for languages without a written tradition. This is the case of Hunsrik, which I created some entries for last year. Last time I checked, the only published material in Hunsrik were two short tales, two chapters of the Bible and a comic book (despite having, literally, millions of speakers). Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 04:49, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 4) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 11:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)  This hasn't really come up yet, as we're really only working on "big" languages, but it will definitely come in handy further down the road.  Some of the problems which Dan Polansky notes are real problems, and will have to be addressed at some point, but I still think this a change for the better.
 * 5) [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|20px]] Support, although it will be hard to monitor what goes in. Who will check and how? I'd like to request similar treatment for languages seldom appearing on the web with scarce resources, even if they are not considered "endangered". --Anatoli (обсудить) 03:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose  EncycloPetey (talk) 02:41, 30 March 2012 (UTC) This willbe problematic if we remove the criterion for extinct languages like Bactrian, Avestan, and other extinct languages where scholarship has changed significantly over time. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:41, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know if this will change your mind, but this has only a small impact on extinct languages. The current criterion for extinct languages is "usage in at least one contemporaneous source" and the new language would be "usage in at least one source" and "generally a contextually appropriate citation in at least one source." BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 03:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it won't. Ancient Greek is an extinct language, so the criterion currently applies to it.  However, it does not have "sparse documentation", so the effect of this proposal is to eliminate an important criterion for Ancient Greek; the new version would not be applicable. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:06, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. I was wondering if Ancient Greek/Latin or something else would be adversely affected by the "sparse documentation" criterion. Is there a reason to keep the "contemporaneous" and the "usage" criteria as opposed to non-contemporaneous usage and/or mention (such as in a scholar's dissertation on some word)? BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 01:11, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I suppose that depends on how you define 'sparse'. The corpus size of Ancient Greek, while enormous compared to most extinct languages, is miniscule compared to any major living language.  -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 01:23, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose  Dan Polansky (talk) 07:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC) Absolutely. This does not even require a durably archived source or the like; a single post anywhere on the web is going to suffice. No problem has been demonstrated that this proposal solves. No list of examples of terms of "poorly documented" languages that are excluded by current CFI while they should not has been provided. Furthermore, it is unclear that citing in use as opposed to mention is really going to help these "poorly documented" languages. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:10, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the vote and the feedback. I agree the durable requirement needs to go in. If this vote passes, I will immediately draft a new vote adding that in. If not, I will re-draft with that included. For endangered languages, I often forget that most people don't see them because I see them everywhere: in the paper, on the Internet, in my community. Depending on who you ask, there are about 3000 of them in the world. Off the top of my head: Ainu (northern Japan), Jeju dialect (South Korea), Ditidaht (mentioned in the Beer Parlour), Makah (mentioned on the discussion page), Salish and Lushootseed (Washington State), Crow (US), Cornish (England), Irish, Quechuan (South America), dozens of languages in Australia, Maori (New Zealand) and Hawaiian. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 01:43, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There is no list of terms currently excluded because editors simply add terms from endangered languages and languages without strong written traditions without citations. If they were all sent to RFV, few would survive, but as a community we choose to ignore them instead of removing legitimate words, which would run counter to "all words in all languages". That is the problem that this vote can solve. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 02:54, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * My complaint is that I have not a single term that would newly be included, and not a single quotation that would make the term includable. Examples of languages do not cut it for me; I need examples of terms and their prospective attestations according to the new rule. Discussing a rule in the abstract without dealing with specific examples is less than advisable. If a real problem with endangered languages is demonstrated, the likely solution for it would be a restoration of something like "Appearance in a refereed academic journal, or" in WT:ATTEST, a bullet point that was removed in . But again, in order to restore the bullet point, we need a list of example terms with their academic references to see what we are talking about. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:20, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Here are two examples; would these work?
 * 1996 — ed. by Crisca Bierwert, Lushootseed Texts, pp. 124-125: ʔux̌áx̌ƛʼil - "they screeched" - I do not find this word on Google at all or in my Lushootseed Dictionary by Dawn Bates, Thom Hess and Vi Hilbert
 * 1987 — Allis Pakki Chipps-Sawyer, Standing on the Edge of Yesterday: A Dilemma of Oral Knowledge Survival in a West Coast Family [], p. 106: "t’abuuk’ʷ" - I do not find this word on Google at all even though it's on the Internet. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 08:04, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You have not provided any sentences in which these terms are used. Are these citations of the terms in use to convey meaning? As the would-be quotations that you have provided are from works with English titles, they could be mere mentions. Maybe you should check WT:QUOTE and Citations:szökőár, a page that shows Hungarian sentences that use the cited term. After you provide complete sentences from your sources, we may quickly see whether these are uses or mentions. --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:24, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The first citation is from a sentence; however, the second is not. As noted in the Beer Parlour, the revised proposal will allow usage or mention, so sentences will not be required. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 03:35, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Citations should always have sentences, whether the sentences use the term or mention it. The citations that you have provided are therefore inadequate. Later: Maybe not; use-attestation should feature sentences, sure, but I am not so sure about each mention-attestation, such as from dictionaries. --Dan Polansky (talk) 06:42, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * This proposal is because it is difficult in many cases to come up with any citation, and sentences are no different. My thought to address this is to say something like "sentences should be provided whenever possible" or something like that. I don't think the language could be made stronger than that. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 06:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It was always possible to enter a whole sentence or sentence-like thing such as a bullet point from the source that you are citing, unless you cannot actually see the page of the source, in which case you should not be entering the source anyway. --Dan Polansky (talk) 06:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I see what you're saying. Give whatever context there is if it's only "cat - gato" in a Spanish-English dictionary, for example. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 07:02, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I've seen some modern Burmese words in an English-Burmese phrasebook, which I hard hard time to find on the web. Also some simple web pages where words were written graphically. Later I was able to confirm the correctness from native speakers and also saw some video on Youtube - the words appeared written by a marker on a whiteboard. I trust native speakers' judgement. I think the proposal is good. You can always rvf any terms that don't appear right. --Anatoli (обсудить) 03:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose, for drafting reasons. It removes the clause for extinct languages which I like. If there were a vote to add an exception for poorly attested languages without removing the exception for extinct languages, I'd support it, if the wording were unambiguous enough. This wording isn't unambiguous enough for me, and it fails my first criterion anyway. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:43, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the vote and the feedback. The issue of extinct languages is complex. As mentioned on the discussion page, Makah recently became extinct according to the definition of having no native speakers. There are many other such languages, such as Manx, for example. Such languages fall somewhere between endangered and extinct, so I was trying to make sure they did not fall through the cracks. Also, the contemporaneous requirement for extinct language attestation puzzled me because it seems to rule out citing scholars for attestation. Nobody on the discussion page could say why it was there, so I tried to incorporate extinct and endangered languages together. I would welcome a reason to try to separate out long-extinct languages and keep the contemporaneous requirement if a way could be done that doesn't exclude languages that have recently gone dormant. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 01:43, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Re: "Also, the contemporaneous requirement for extinct language attestation puzzled me because it seems to rule out citing scholars for attestation": Funnily enough, one thing that I dislike about this proposal is that it seems to rule out citing scholars for attestation, since it restricts itself to uses rather than mentions, and I was thinking that I'd rather allow scholarly mentions than non-durably-archived uses. But I now take it that you did not mean to exclude scholarly mentions? —Ruakh TALK 01:52, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That's correct. The word "usage" simply comes from the criterion as it currently stands. The aim of English Wiktionary is "to describe all words of all languages using definitions and descriptions in English" and the core of this proposal was to live within that spirit and allow languages without a lot of documentation in. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 03:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|20px]] Oppose  - -sche (discuss) 07:28, 31 March 2012 (UTC) Better wording can be ironed out and more widely agreed-upon before a new vote (which we should certainly hold). - -sche (discuss) 07:28, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to agree. The feedback here in this short time has been far more constructive than the first week was :) BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 08:08, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Basically don't give up; just modify and try again. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:26, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Abstain

 * 1) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain  I think some rules are best left unwritten. But I really don't care which way this'll go. -- Liliana • 04:28, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain per Mglovesfun and Dan Polansky. This is not drafted very well; for one thing, I don't think it makes any sense at all without the IMHO-tenuous supposition that the phrases "languages with sparse documentation" and "languages that are extinct, endangered or without a strong written tradition" are synonymous, or at least coextensive. —Ruakh TALK 23:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the feedback. This was also a difficult area. It is possible (either now or in the near future) for a language to be endangered or extinct, and yet have an abundance of written materials. In the nineteenth century, both the Hawaiian and Cherokee populations had near-universal literacy rates (with newspapers and other publications) and today are seeing a resurgence in speaking populations (however tenuous). Last year, two PhDs taken completely within the language of Hawaiian were granted, demonstrating that perhaps Hawaiian is not a good candidate for the "only one usage" criterion even though it is listed in the UNESCO Atlas. I wanted to provide a means to exclude such languages. The problem is that "sparse documentation" cannot be meaningfully defined; yet without a term like that, a conversation cannot begin. The way I read this is that if a language is not "with sparse documentation," you cannot refer to that section for that language. So mention of "languages that are extinct, endangered or without a strong written tradition" refers only to languages "with sparse documentation." My hope is that, like words, languages will be challenged to demonstrate they have only "sparse documentation" so that the "only one usage" criterion is not abused. This would apply to ancient Latin and Greek as well (if anyone cares to challenge).
 * The words "extinct" and "endangered" were included as specific sorts of examples. Perhaps the insertion of "otherwise" would be better: "languages that are extinct, endangered or otherwise without a strong written tradition..." BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 08:06, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) [[Image:Symbol abstain vote.svg|20px]] Abstain < class="latinx" >Ƿidsiþ 07:24, 31 March 2012 (UTC) per Gloves.

Decision

 * No consensus, 5-4-3. --Yair rand (talk) 10:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


text:
circonstancié

Adjective

 * 1) circumstantial
 * 2) particular
 * 3) detailed

title: circonstancié


text:
subventionize

Verb

 * 1)  To come to the aid of; to subsidize or support.

title: subventionize


text: subventionized

title: subventionized


text: subventionizes

title: subventionizes


text: subventionizing

title: subventionizing


text:
ichorhaemia

Noun

 * 1)  infection of the blood with ichorous or putrid substances

title: ichorhaemia


text: spitroasts

title: spitroasts


text: chiropraticiens

title: chiropraticiens


text: chiures

title: chiures


text: chlorures

title: chlorures


text: choristes

title: choristes


text: chronométreurs

title: chronométreurs


text: dessertes

title: dessertes


text: cibistes

title: cibistes


text: ciblages

title: ciblages


text: cimaises

title: cimaises


text: cimenteries

title: cimenteries


text: cinémathèques

title: cinémathèques


text: circonlocutions

title: circonlocutions


text: cintrée

title: cintrée


text: cintrés

title: cintrés


text: cintrées

title: cintrées


text: circonspecte

title: circonspecte


text: circonspects

title: circonspects


text: circonspectes

title: circonspectes


text:
circonstancielle

Etymology 2
.

Noun

 * 1)  adverbial clause

title: circonstancielle


text: circonstanciels

title: circonstanciels


text: circonstancielles

title: circonstancielles


text: circonstanciée

title: circonstanciée


text: circonstanciés

title: circonstanciés


text: circonstanciées

title: circonstanciées


text:
surance

Noun

 * 1)  assurance
 * "But thenne were they accorded with Merlyn that kynge Arthur shold come oute and speke with the kynges / and to come sauf and to goo sauf / suche suraunce ther was made." (Le Morte Darthur by Syr Thomas Malory, book 1 chapter 8.) (Modern spelling: "But then were they accorded with Merlin, that King Arthur should come out and speak with the kings, and to come safe and to go safe, such surance there was made." from gutenberg.)

title: surance


text:
heartswelling

Adjective

 * 1) heartwrenching

title: heartswelling


text:
phyllostomid

Noun

 * 1) Any bat of the family, having large, lance-shaped noses; a leaf-nosed bat.

title: phyllostomid


text: phyllostomids

title: phyllostomids


text:
reviction

Etymology
From, , from +.

Noun

 * 1)  return to life
 * 2) * c. 1682,, letter to a friend
 * to arise from the grave to return again into it, is but an uncomfortable reviction

title: reviction


text:
owl light

Noun

 * 1) glimmering or imperfect light

title: owl light


text:
submittable

Adjective

 * 1) Capable of being submitted, or eligible to be submitted.

title: submittable


text:
Goliath beetle

Etymology
After the Biblical giant Goliath.

Noun

 * 1) A very large cetoniid beetle of the genus Goliathus.

Translations

 * Finnish: goljatkuoriainen
 * Italian:
 * Russian:

title: Goliath beetle


text:
cetoniid

Noun

 * 1)  Any of the beetle subfamily  (family ).

title: cetoniid


text: cetoniids

title: cetoniids


text:
sponsal

Etymology
From, from , from ,. See, and compare ,.

Adjective

 * 1)  Relating to marriage, or to a spouse; spousal.
 * 2) * 1870, Lorenzo Altisonant [Samuel Klinefelter Hoshour], Letters to Squire Pedant in the East, 4th Edition, page 64,
 * The sponsal munities I claim are the postnate: To be autocratix in the culinary department, synarchist in other departments of the domicile, and adespotic alibi; and to commonstrate the bairns not to be solifidians, nor nullifidians.

title: sponsal


text:
tetrinic acid

Etymology
See. It was once supposed to contain a peculiar radical of four carbon atoms.

Noun

 * 1)  A complex ketonic acid, C5H6O3.

title: tetrinic acid


text:
Aristarchian

Adjective

 * 1) Of or relating to Aristarch.
 * 2) Severely critical.

Translations

 * Portuguese: aristárquico, aristarquiano

title: Aristarchian


text: spondylolistheses

title: spondylolistheses


text:
spondylolisthetic

Adjective

 * 1)  Relating to or affected by the spine condition spondylolisthesis.

title: spondylolisthetic


text: unobservables

title: unobservables


text:
exacerbescence

Etymology
From, , present participle of , inchoate of. See.

Noun

 * 1)  increase of irritation or violence, particularly of a fever or disease

title: exacerbescence


text:
föggur

Noun

 * 1) luggage, belongings, stuff

title: föggur


text:
Wiktionary talk:Votes/2012-03/CFI for Endangered Languages

Material uploaded to Usenet
Anyone can post on Usenet. I am not convinced this is a good idea. On the other hand, I do see a need for allowing non-print sources, but I'm not sure how it should be laid out. -- Liliana • 18:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Then again, anyone can publish a book (even though it's more work). Equinox ◑ 18:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Frankly, I envision people typing up their notes in Word or Google Docs, outputting to PDF and uploading them to Usenet. That's actually more formal than many of the notebooks of linguists and anthropologists that are studied today to recover words.
 * I agree that this loose requirement seems to open a Pandora's box to allow abuses. My hope is that the restriction to endangered languages will be adequate to avoid widespread abuse. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 19:23, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * However, we already allow Usenet. I'd rather remove that line; we already know that we can use Usenet, because CFI already says so. It prevents future questions; if we banned Usenet or permitted the Web Archive, we won't have to struggle with why this part explicitly calls out Usenet.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:00, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

 * That makes sense. It brings up the question of whether endangered and extinct languages should be conflated. I'll start a new section. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 04:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Contemporaneous sources for extinct/endangered languages
One of the criteria for attestation in the WT:CFI is: "For terms in extinct languages: usage in at least one contemporaneous source." I was hoping to leave that alone, but it is closely related to the endangered language issue, so perhaps it is best to consider expanding it to include both.

Many "endangered languages" can also be classified as extinct. Makah, a language closely related to Ditidaht, is listed on the UNESCO Interactive Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger as endangered, but a few years back, the last two truly native speakers of Makah passed away. Even though people continue to use and learn Makah, it can therefore be referred to as extinct (see: Extinct_language, though the Wikipedia article does not specifically mention "native speakers," that is used by some as a criterion).

The issue with the extinct language criterion is the word "contemporaneous." I'm not sure why that is used, but my guess is that the intention is to address languages like Latin, so that only Latin words in use at the time Latin was alive would be used (i.e., not Neo-Latin). (Some people draw a distinction between dead languages like Latin that are still in use for science, etc., and extinct languages like Yana that have completely disappeared even if some written records remain.)

If "contemporaneous" can be replaced with something like "contextually accurate," then "extinct" can be widened to include "endangered languages." I'm not sure that "contextually accurate" is the right term, though. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 05:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Non-endangered languages needing similar treatment
I fully support this proposal, and I think there are some languages that are not in danger of going extinct, but are regarded as sociolects or slangs and thus are almost exclusively spoken. For example, I don't think that citing terms in Tok Pisin would be very easy, even though a few million people speak it, because it is a pidgin. Except in dictionaries, a lot of words would present a struggle to find online. Would anyone have ideas for criteria to determine what languages would be covered by this, or be interested in supporting this? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:35, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Tok Pisin has newspapers and a (written) grammar according to the Ethnologue, but your point is still valid. (It may also be that the written records available for Tok Pisin are far too sparse to provide adequate attestation for the language.) This point also applies to sign languages, for which there appears to be a double-standard.

 * The CFI for sign languages says: '(CFI) is considered to be met by any sign that is used by multiple independent deaf communities, and the "usage in permanently recorded media" condition includes any video media that has been widely distributed, including DVDs, broadcast television, and sign language dictionaries.'

 * In the discussion in the beer parlor preceding this vote proposal, Prosfilaes said, 'I'd almost say that clearly widespread use is not for any word where we can't wave at Google Books or Usenet and go look, "a metric assload of cites", which includes all the words from most languages.' I believe I have seen comments from others to the same effect.

 * If the sign language CFI is correct, then a native speaker of an endangered language can proclaim word X to be widespread and, as long as there is no challenge, it should stand. This seems reasonable for endangered languages. If Prosfilaes is correct, however, then I think the sign language CFI needs revisiting. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 22:38, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

 * The sign-language CFI makes a specific exception to the general CFI... that's not really a double standard. Other endangered languages must meet the general CFI, unless and until we create exceptions for them. - -sche (discuss) 22:43, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

 * You're right. thank you. The word "considered" is what's critical in the sentence I quoted. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 23:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The way I see it, we have already solved the sign language problem at Wiktionary (although orthography is still a mess, in my opinion). That still leaves languages like Fiji Hindi in a strange place - if we sent all our Fiji Hindi terms to RFV, many of them would end up deleted, even though they are legitimate, because only a couple newspapers, one or two non-dictionary books, and a handful of Bible fragments exist written in that language.--Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:08, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Thank you for the concrete example. My inclination is to lump endangered and extinct languages together (defining them later on the CFI page or creating a new page), and then add a provision that says exclusions can be made for languages like Fiji Hindi by vote. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 16:35, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

wording of the clause
I'm a fan of standardisation, so I've modified the text of the vote to use "terms" rather than "a term" (etc), to match the plurality of the extinct languages clause. If we wanted to match the wording of the latter clause even more closely, we could use wording like this. - -sche (discuss) 22:14, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposal for new wording
I appreciate all the guidance and conversation so far. Taking into consideration the conversation and the goals of trying to be welcoming to all languages while maintaining a high level of quality for Wiktionary, I think a rewrite of this proposal is needed. Perhaps a complete new vote page is needed as well; I'm not sure.

The one contemporaneous usage requirement for extinct languages was discussed at Wiktionary_talk:Votes/pl-2011-05/Attestation_of_extinct_languages_2, but there was not a lot of discussion. It seems to me that there was not a lot of concern about Latin terms being contemporaneous because anything not contemporaneous would not be Latin (it would be neo-Latin, medieval Latin, etc.)

Below is the new proposal. I've included the part about sign languages from the current CFI just because it seems to fit, but perhaps keeping it separate is best.

Proposal

Replace

"For terms in extinct languages: usage in at least one contemporaneous source."

with

"For terms in languages with sparse documentation, usage in at least one source or as agreed by the community according to the language."

Under "Languages to include," add the following section:

Languages with sparse documentation

The criterion for inclusion for languages that are extinct, endangered or without a strong written tradition is generally a contextually appropriate citation in at least one source. An endangered language is one listed by an institution such as UNESCO Interactive Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger or the Living Tongues Institute for Endangered Languages, or a dialect of those languages.

In cases where the requirement of at least one source is difficult to meet for a language, a vote may be held to grant an exemption from the criteria for inclusion. For languages granted exemption, the community of that language's speakers will determine criteria for inclusion and other policies for that language. Exclusions may be rescinded as well through a vote.

Terms in signed languages are acceptable as entries, and should be entered as described in the policy document Wiktionary:About sign languages.

BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 08:58, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Much better, and maybe this should be a separate sister vote that supersedes this vote if both pass. One problem: there may be no way to get the "community of that language's speakers" to figure out how to handle a language (there may be no such community on English Wiktionary, and no Wiktionary in that language). I think we should change that line from being about giving a nebulous "exemption" to being about granting those languages the right to have a single citation and still meet CFI. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:57, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Glad it looks better. My intention is to use this, not the one on the main page. Either I can replace the wording or delete this vote page and create a new one. The community would start out on their "About" page and expand if necessary; the community would be the only people qualified to develop the guidelines necessary for that language. The exemption is intended for languages that cannot meet the one usage requirement. The idea is that the vote for the exemption would pass only if it's demonstrated that the usage requirement cannot be met. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 17:52, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

 * I don't like the part about voting to exempt languages. We can vote on anything whether or not this vote passes, but I strongly oppose anything that would turn Wiktionary into a primary source instead of a secondary source.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:17, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Wiktionary is already a primary source for sign languages, which have an extremely limited amount of documentation that can be cited, so this proposal does nothing new. It builds on the sign language precedent but only in cases where a language has a demonstrable lack of documentation in a similar manner to sign languages. The rescission (cancellation) part is to provide a mechanism in case an exempted language (including sign languages) veer from a reasonable path. I struggled a great deal to come up with a medium path that would address the concerns on both sides of this issue, and welcome any alternative ideas to address the problem of sparsely documented languages. I see this proposal not only as a way to welcome other languages but to fulfill the stated aim on the Main_Page "to describe all words of all languages using definitions and descriptions in English." BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 03:09, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Re "Wiktionary is already a primary source for sign languages": not quite. Wiktionary is still a secondary source for sign languages; the exception we make for sign languages is that we allow other secondary sources (dictionaries, instructional videos which only mention rather than using terms, etc) to count as proof of the word, rather than requiring people to cite primary documents (books, newspapers, Usenet, etc). The proposed wording above would seem to allow a community of people to claim to have knowledge of the language and verify a term by say-so. I think the proposal at the top of this page, to have speakers publish things on Usenet (durably archived), and accept 1 rather than 3 Usenet post(s) (or book(s), etc), is likely to garner more support. - -sche (discuss) 04:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * So, re changing the wording: perhaps drop the second half of the above rule, leaving "For terms in languages with sparse documentation, usage in at least one source." Keep the paragraph "The criterion or a dialect of those languages." And omit "In cases  a vote." - -sche (discuss) 05:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Maybe I'm misunderstanding something, but my reading of About_sign_languages is that Wiktionary is indeed a primary source for sign languages. It says: 'Unlike spoken languages, sign languages are rarely written outside of reference materials and academic publications. Thus, the "clearly widespread use" condition of Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion (CFI) is considered to be met by any sign that is used by multiple independent deaf communities, and the "usage in permanently recorded media" condition includes any video media that has been widely distributed, including DVDs, broadcast television, and sign language dictionaries.' BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 05:54, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Ah, I think you're interpreting the first part (the "clearly widespread use" condition is  met by any sign that is used by multiple independent deaf communities) as allowing Wiktionary's deaf community to simply assert that a sign is used, without proof. I and others in other discussion fora, however, interpret "clearly widespread use" as a way of passing something by noting the existence of proof (on Usenet, in a Google Book, etc) without having to format the proof and put it into the entry. If someone claims "this term is clearly in widespread use", "this is in use in my deaf community and in other deaf communities", but other editors can't find or cite any (proof of) such use (in primary sources, secondary sign-language dictionaries—even ones not available online—, etc), then the term isn't clearly in use — and we've RFV-failed supposedly "widespread" but unciteable entries before. (I failed UGG靴子 because I could find much non-durable but no durable proof of it.) - -sche (discuss) 19:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

 * I understand that the "clearly widespread use" clause is interpreted that way in general. It's vague wording but more specific interpretation is very confusing on Wiktionary. To try to understand it, I have referred to it many, many times over the last couple of weeks since I re-joined. I still struggle to understand its purpose.
 * But with sign languages, Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2008-08/Wiktionary:About_sign_languages says "relaxes WT:CFI for these rarely written languages." Like the general CFI, the sign language CFI is written vaguely (About_sign_languages), and it appears to allow inclusion by consensus as well as by verification in recorded media. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 20:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

 * I suspect for any sign language spoken in the western world, there is tens of thousands of hours of footage that can be used as documentation. And the issues that make recording sign language hard don't apply to spoken languages. In any case, slippery slope is not a valid argument; that we've done it once (which -sche contests) doesn't mean we have to do it again.

 * I stand firmly and implacably against any proposal that lets people add material without citations. I believe it will produce a few dissonant entries in arbitrary orthographies that no one will ever use; and at the same time, it will produce even more entries that people make up.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:00, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 * I believe whether a language is granted an exemption is something that should be determined based on the evidence at hand for that specific language. I can certainly imagine someone who speaks a sparsely documented language having a smartphone but not a scanner and wanting to preserve the language they speak in that community.
 * As I've noted in my comment above, the sign language community seems very much to have such a policy, and this merely builds on that precedent. I'm open to an alternative for people who do not have written documentation of scanners. Does anybody have one? BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 05:54, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 * I think it's a bad precedent, and will vote against anything building on it. I see absolutely no point in us admitting languages that have no permanently archived sources; the only people who would care are linguists, and they probably have their own sources and would never trust Wiktionary.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 * I'm a linguist, so I disagree about not trusting Wiktionary. My hope is, indeed, that linguists specializing in endangered languages will welcome Wiktionary with open arms once a good framework is in place.
 * Nobody has commented about changing the wording on the main page, so I'm about ready to modify the language there to reflect the discussion here. I believe that without the voting part of this proposal, any language community will be able to do the same thing the sign language community did and proclaim "clearly widespread use" as a main CFI. If nobody has a concern about that, I will go ahead. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 18:00, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Why, as a linguist, would you use an anonymously edited site on matters where you have no independent verification if you had a choice?

 * Part of this issue is perhaps I'm not sure what you mean by "linguist." To me, it primarily means a person who studies or researches linguistics. Therefore, Wiktionary is itself a topic for linguistics study. However, this is veering off-topic. If you are interested in my views as a linguist, you are welcome to post on my page.BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 20:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

 * No language has the right to override CFI by fiat. There was a vote about sign languages. I'll note that I'd be hard pressed to accept any claim of "clearly widespread use" from a language with 8 speakers. With the major sign languages, at least we could check YouTube or the Internet Archive, permanently archived or not, and look for and at usage. (Stuff like http://archive.org/details/our_solar_system_sign_language even purports to come from NASA, and could be uploaded to Commons as verification.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:49, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Thank you for finding that :) So it seems that they did what I was proposing to allow in the CFI: Hold a vote. As nobody besides Prosfilaes has commented one way or the other, I will modify the language, stripping out the voting provision :) BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 19:01, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Language changed
I've updated the language to reflect sche's suggestions and the general discussion. The voting is scheduled to start in about two hours, I think. I hope this language works for everyone, and my thanks to everyone who has provided input and feedback.

Do I need to advertise this in the beer parlour again?BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 21:24, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't you think the start of the vote should have been postponed? To me, the timing was almost too close to review everything, and obviously the proposal is still under discussion. -- Liliana • 03:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

 * That's fine. I thought the issues had been ironed out. Can you advise me how to postpone or go ahead and do it? It seems that the content of the proposal is being misunderstood, too. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 03:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Well now that the vote has started, it's a bit late to do that. I think. -- Liliana • 03:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I couldn't find instructions on how to postpone, so I went ahead and started it. Can you tell me what to do for future reference? BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 03:23, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Change the date that it is set to start (to something a few days in the future), like this. - -sche (discuss) 03:30, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you! BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 03:33, 30 March 2012 (UTC)


text:
Clumber spaniel

Etymology
Named from the estate of the Duke of Newcastle.

Noun

 * 1) A spaniel of a British breed, with short legs and stout body, which, unlike other spaniels, hunts silently.

Translations

 * Finnish:
 * Irish: spáinnéar Clumber
 * Russian: кла́мбер-спание́ль

title: Clumber spaniel


text: Clumber spaniels

title: Clumber spaniels


text:
paralactic acid

Etymology
+

Noun

 * 1)  sarcolactic acid

Related terms

 * paralactate

title: paralactic acid


text:
unbuxom

Adjective

 * 1) Having small breasts; not buxom.

Adjective

 * 1) wayward, disobedient

title: unbuxom


text:
discumbency

Etymology
From, present participle of. See.

Noun

 * 1) The act of reclining at table according to the manner of the ancients at their meals.

title: discumbency


text:
گنوک

Adjective

 * 1) mad
 * 2) insane
 * 3) crazy

title: گنوک


text:
thimblerigger

Etymology
or

Noun

 * 1) Someone who cheats by thimblerigging, or similar tricks involving sleight of hand.

Translations

 * Catalan:
 * Irish: fear méaracán, fear na méaracán
 * Spanish: trilero, trilera

title: thimblerigger


text: thimbleriggers

title: thimbleriggers


text:
hypapophysis

Noun

 * 1)  A process, or other element, of a vertebra developed from the ventral side of the centrum.
 * Haemal spines and chevron bones are examples of hypapophysis.

title: hypapophysis


text:
distream

Etymology
(with as intensifier).

Verb

 * 1)  To flow.

title: distream


text: distreamed

title: distreamed


text: distreaming

title: distreaming


text: distreams

title: distreams


text:
mestee

Etymology
See and.

Coordinate terms

 * see list in

title: mestee


text: mestees

title: mestees


text: Thibetian

title: Thibetian


text: Thibetians

title: Thibetians


text:
seirospore

Etymology
+ English.

Noun

 * 1) One of several spores arranged in a chain, as in certain algae.

title: seirospore


text: seirospores

title: seirospores


text:
plagiostomous

Adjective

 * 1)  Of or pertaining to fish of the former order Plagiostomi, generally corresponding to the sharks, rays, and skates.

title: plagiostomous


text:
larmier

Etymology
From, from. See.

Noun

 * 1)  A tearpit.
 * 2)  A horizontal stringcourse for preventing rain from trickling down a wall.

title: larmier


text: larmiers

title: larmiers


text: Category:bal:Canids

title: Category:bal:Canids


text: Category:bal:Mammals

title: Category:bal:Mammals


text: Category:bal:Vertebrates

title: Category:bal:Vertebrates


text:
tut-mouthed

Adjective

 * 1)  Having a projecting under jaw; prognathous.

title: tut-mouthed


text: ostosis

title: ostosis


text:
sprod

Etymology
Compare 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1)  A salmon in its second year.

title: sprod


text: sprods

title: sprods


text:
pelecaniform

Noun

 * 1) Any bird of the order

Translations

 * Dutch: ,
 * French:

title: pelecaniform


text: choak

title: choak


text: choaked

title: choaked


text: choaking

title: choaking


text: choaks

title: choaks


text:
pressirostral

Adjective

 * 1)  Of or pertaining to the order, a group of wading birds with flattened beaks, including bustards, plovers, and cariamas.

title: pressirostral


text:
parcity

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1)  sparingness

title: parcity


text:
Giffard injector

Etymology
Invented by (1825–1882), French engineer.

Noun

 * 1) A.

title: Giffard injector


text: Giffard injectors

title: Giffard injectors


text:
hyemal

Etymology
From, from. Compare 🇨🇬.

title: hyemal


text:
skaldic

Adjective

 * 1) Of or relating to the skalds (Norse poets).
 * skaldic poetry

title: skaldic


text:
diageotropic

Adjective

 * 1)  Relating to, or exhibiting, diageotropism.

title: diageotropic


text:
اگاں

Conjunction

 * 1) if

title: اگاں


text: Category:Baluchi conjunctions

title: Category:Baluchi conjunctions


text:
conder

Noun

 * 1) One who conns (conds) a ship; a conning officer.

title: conder


text: conders

title: conders


text:
anatomizer

Noun

 * 1) One who carries out dissection.

title: anatomizer


text: anatomizers

title: anatomizers


text:
toluric acid

Etymology
+.

Noun

 * 1)  Any of three isomeric crystalline acids, C9H10ON.CO2H, which are toluyl derivatives of glycocoll.

title: toluric acid


text: toluric acids

title: toluric acids


text:
Talk:twite

Webster 1913 says that touite is the (not the same bird as this one) yet it appears to be the same essential word (?). Equinox ◑ 19:00, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:twite


text:
carbonatation

Noun

 * 1) (physical chemistry) A chemical reaction in which calcium hydroxide reacts with carbon dioxide to form insoluble calcium carbonate.
 * Carbonatation is used in refining sugar from sugar beet.

title: carbonatation


text: carbonatations

title: carbonatations


text:
واہگ

Noun

 * 1) wish

title: واہگ


text:
User talk:Mcalevey

funt
Hi! I removed your addition to the entry [[funt]]: I couldn't find durably-archived instances of use (that means use in books, journals, magazines, even Usenet — not just use on any old webpage on the internet), so it does not seem to meet our criteria for inclusion. You could add it to the list of creative new words, though. Cheers, - -sche (discuss) 19:08, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mcalevey


text: ბინდდებოდა

title: ბინდდებოდა


text:
pearch

Noun

 * 1)  (unit of measurement)

title: pearch


text: pearches

title: pearches


text:
forepossessed

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) Holding or held formerly in possession.
 * 2) Preengaged; preoccupied; prepossessed.

title: forepossessed


text:
timaline

Adjective

 * 1)  Of or relating to the genus  or family, which formerly included some thrushes and bulbuls, but now only the babblers.

title: timaline


text:
similitudinary

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1)  Involving or expressing similitude.

title: similitudinary


text: pummace

title: pummace


text:
caffre

Noun

 * 1) * 1808–10,, Memoirs of a Georgian Rake, Folio Society 1995, p. 165:
 * A boat, with only caffres in her, having fruit to sell, came off, and we purchased pines, oranges, plantains, guavas, star apples, etc.
 * A boat, with only caffres in her, having fruit to sell, came off, and we purchased pines, oranges, plantains, guavas, star apples, etc.

title: caffre


text: caffres

title: caffres


text:
thirdings

Noun

 * 1)  One third of the corn or grain growing on the ground at the tenant's death, paid to the lord as a heriot.

title: thirdings


text:
User talk:Pennbrook~enwiktionary

Hi! Thanks for adding that well-formatted English section to [[paseo]] — now I know a new English word. Anyway, welcome to Wiktionary. - -sche (discuss) 19:18, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's our standard greeting message:

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Pennbrook. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Pennbrook~enwiktionary that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 00:04, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 07:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pennbrook~enwiktionary


text:
User talk:65.191.36.167

Hi! Thanks for adding that well-formatted Norwegian section to [[latinsk]]. Welcome to Wiktionary. :) - -sche (discuss) 19:21, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:65.191.36.167


text:
optography

Noun

 * 1) The production of an optogram on the retina by the photochemical action of light on the visual purple; the fixation of an image in the eye.

Translations

 * Dutch: optografie
 * Esperanto: optografio
 * German: Optographie
 * Italian: optografia
 * Spanish: optografía

title: optography


text: photobleaches

title: photobleaches


text:
User talk:128.114.38.1

Just FYI: we have a WT:Sandbox for silly edits. :) - -sche (discuss) 19:25, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:128.114.38.1


text:
მირეკა

Verb

 * : He grazed (the cattle) (for the directional implications see Georgian preverbs)

title: მირეკა


text:
balistoid

Noun

 * 1)  Any fish of the genus

title: balistoid


text:
epichorial

Etymology
From +  +.

Adjective

 * 1) In or of the country; rural.
 * 2)  Relating to the epichorion
 * 1)  Relating to the epichorion

title: epichorial


text:
putrefactiveness

Noun

 * 1) The quality of being putrefactive.

title: putrefactiveness


text:
probacy

Etymology
See.

Noun

 * 1)  proof; trial

title: probacy


text: manutenencies

title: manutenencies


text:
manutenency

Etymology
From +.

Noun

 * 1)  maintenance

title: manutenency


text:
ترسینگ

Etymology
Causative form of.

Verb

 * 1) to frighten
 * 2) to scare

title: ترسینگ


text:
nursehound

Noun

 * , a species of catshark.

Translations

 * Catalan:
 * Galician:
 * Italian:, cagnola
 * Norman: biche, tchian d'mé , rousse , d'mouaîselle
 * Norwegian:
 * Bokmål: storflekket rødhai
 * Russian: звёздчатая коша́чья аку́ла, крупнопятни́стая коша́чья аку́ла, звёздчатый морско́й пёс
 * Spanish:

title: nursehound


text: nursehounds

title: nursehounds