text:
Talk:George VI

RFD discussion: August–December 2018
It is a well put together entry so I am reluctant to nominate it for deletion. Overall, I feel that the intent of the current CFI is that a complete name associated with one individual only should not be included (for example, Walt Disney [the person]) is mentioned as not being allowed an entry). John Cross (talk) 05:21, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * But this is a "regnal name". His actual name was "Albert Frederick Arthur George Windsor". As its creator, I would prefer this to be kept. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * We also have and a few others. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Does this mean that the names of the last hundred-fifty-or-so popes are fair game? Andrew Sheedy (talk) 19:51, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Not to mention the names of hundreds (thousands?) of rulers of polities and religious denominations all over the planet. George VI (disambiguation) mentions kings of Georgia and Imereti, as well as a catholicos of the Armenian Armenian Apostolic Church. Then there are situations like James VI and I who was the sixth king of Scotland and the first in England by that name. As for George VI's actual name being different, that also applies to stage names and pen names. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:54, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * See John I for an idea of where this could lead. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:22, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd say keep. WT:CFI doesn't deal with this directly, only stating that "[n]o individual person should be listed as a sense in any entry whose page title includes both a given name or diminutive and a family name or patronymic. For instance, Walter Elias Disney, the film producer and voice of Mickey Mouse, is not allowed a definition line at Walt Disney." However, this is a regnal name rather than "a given name or diminutive and a family name or patronymic". I would be in favour of WT:CFI being updated to allow for regnal names. — SGconlaw (talk) 06:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I would say keep. It's worth mentioning that Britain has had only one Queen Victoria, and she is listed at 🇨🇬. DonnanZ (talk) 08:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I would like to expand it to have a French entry, if only because of the different pronunciations "George sis" instead of "George the sixth". SemperBlotto (talk) 08:39, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Go for it if it is spelt the same. DonnanZ (talk) 08:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

 * But that's true for VI in general, surely. It's just how you say six in French! Your argument would seem to support also creating any old person called George just because French people say George differently. Equinox ◑ 13:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, when a foreign term (such as ) has been borrowed into English, don't we create an English section for it? — SGconlaw (talk) 06:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * In the case of, having a French section would be wrong anyway: it's not in use in French, as it makes no sense morphologically.
 * I suppose that’s a bad example, then. I was trying to think of a term that originates from French but is now also used in English and regarded as an English word. — SGconlaw (talk) 13:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * But I've been wondering asking myself that question a lot: from what point can we say a word has been genuinely borrowed in English, and isn't simply a French word used in running text? Per utramque cavernam 12:32, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I guess there is no hard and fast rule. I’d say that a lack of quotation marks or italics may point in that direction, but is not conclusive. At the end of the day, if the term appears regularly in English texts and doesn’t seem to be specifically regarded as foreign by the speaker or writer (for example, “e.g.” and “etc.”), it can probably be regarded as having entered the English language. — SGconlaw (talk) 13:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree with that; that's what I had in mind too.
 * I think something that can help is contrasting the use in different languages: there are some italicised Latin expressions found in English running text I was tempted to label as Latin; then I realised they're not used at all in French (unfortunately I can't give any example off the top of my head). That points towards genuine incorporation in English. But it's a grey area imo. Per utramque cavernam 21:16, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

 * Replace with and . DCDuring (talk) 19:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Replace with and  or delete. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 01:49, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, or at least replace with and . --SanctMinimalicen (talk) 02:53, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * To make it explicit, Delete, or replace with and . As I pointed out above, there can be literally dozens (see John I) of senses in one entry- not just kings but bans, burgraves, caliphs, catholicoses, counts, dukes, electors, emirs, emperors, khans, maharajahs, margraves, malietoas, nawabs, nizams, pashas, popes, princes, rajas, shahs, wālis, and holders of a number of other titles. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:19, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I think we decided some years ago that the "slippery slope" argument didn't hold here. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:24, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per utramque cavernam 07:42, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Ƿidsiþ 11:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Replace with and .John Cross (talk) 18:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete or soft-redirect to WP per Chuck Entz. This is a "disambiguated" name of a specific individual, like the example of "Walt Disney" (which uses a last name rather than a regnal number); I don't buy the argument that his also going by "Albert Frederick Arthur George Windsor" makes it any more includable: I would vote to delete [[Bill Clinton]] too, if it existed and were defined as referring to, even though his legal name is "William" not "Bill". - -sche (discuss) 20:45, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * One thing I've noticed is that the "keep" votes are almost all from or living in England. I suspect that there's a tendency to see British monarchs as not just individuals, but also as a piece of their history, a national symbol and a branch of the government. Part of the reason for my long list of other titles was to try to show the forest hidden by the trees that are a major part of the English landscape. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep using WT:LEMMING or similar: "George VI" is in oxforddictionaries.com in "George", AHD, and Collins; even MW has that is their George entry: search for "biographical name" in MW. WT:NSE leaves discretion in this case, which it does not in the Walt Disney case. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:20, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * They only include it because they include names of individuals, which is in direct contradiction of our policy. We have Wikipedia to cover individual people; those dictionaries don't. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 05:01, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
 * We do include some individuals (individual people): Category:en:Individuals; Category talk:en:Individuals. WT:NSE is designed to exclude only certain kinds of names of individuals, intentionally so: "No individual person should be listed as a sense in any entry whose page title includes both [1)] a given name or diminutive and [2)] a family name or patronymic", where I injected the numbering 1) and 2) and added italics to "both". --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Those dictionaries also include entries for John Paul II. Two of them have entries for John Paul I, and many other popes. Are we going to include all those too? I think it's ridiculous. That's outside of our purview, as far as I'm concerned. Regnal names do not generally have significant enough lexical value for them to be included in a dictionary that has an encyclopedic counterpart. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 01:23, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Our purview is incredibly broad. We have rules in place to include all attested taxonomic names such as Amanita muscaria, something which general dictionaries usually do not do; and we do have a Wikispecies counterpart that could be used to argue we do not need to include these. We can include John Paul II via WT:LEMMING; that's fine. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:39, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The problem is, like I said, that many dictionaries have biographical entries, whereas we explicitly disallow multi-word names. If we decide to allow these sorts of names, how do we decide who's incusion-worthy? I strongly oppose just using the lemming test, because it's an almost meaningless criterion, and it requires us to be beholden to other dictionaries. If our criterion is "non-legal names" or "names adopted by or given to individuals, that differ from their birth names," we'll be able to include entries for who knows how many saints, members of religious orders, popes, monarchs, etc. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 16:43, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 * As for "we explicitly disallow multi-word names", it really is not accurate to say that we disallow all multi-word names of people, as per the quoted WT:NSE. Currently included multi-word names of people include Jesus Christ, Alexander the Great, Darwin's Bulldog, Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan, Mary Magdalene, Joan of Arc, Robin Hood and more, found in Category:en:Individuals. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:55, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep because the pronunciation 'George the Sixth' is not likely to be known to second language learners. A pronunciation section needs to be added. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 10:03, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

 * Would you also want entries for every calendar date, because "3rd of November" may not be obvious? Adding a missing word that isn't written is not a pronunciation issue! Equinox ◑ 10:26, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

 * Well then, whatever kind of issue it is, if it is deleted there should be clear sections somewhere explaining that for people learning English. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 11:00, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

 * I don't think so. We're not supposed to teach everything there is to know about English. Per utramque cavernam 11:04, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

 * Delete btw, strongest possible! Equinox ◑ 10:27, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

 * I see 6 keeps when I include SemperBlotto and 9 deletes; I see no 2/3-consensus for deletion. Governed by WT:NSE. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Our tradition is to treat 2/3 as consensus and the only formal statutory evidence in that direction is Votes/2019-03/Defining a supermajority for passing votes, which admittedly applies to policy votes. The above is not consensus by any detectable standard. I am not gaming the system. Those who want to delete senses for individual people need to show consensus, which according to the best evidence is 2/3. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I started Beer_parlour/2022/August. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * About "this failed RFD *years ago*, you can't come in *years later* and overturn that based on your personal ideas of what an RFD threshold should be... start a request for undeletion if you like.": What does it matter that I noticed this erroneous closure years later? It still does not track consensus as was commonly understood in Wiktionary. "Closure based on closer assessment" is by definition not a closure based on consensus; and the plain majority that one editor proposed does not match any common definition of "consensus" either. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * And the RFD nomination was never closed using closing statement; it was just archived. Therefore, the manner of closure could not have been objected to by the RFD participants. This is in violation of our RFD process which requires first closure, and then archiving no sooner than a week after that. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

RFD discussion: September–October 2022
Let us undelete the entry on process grounds. The entry had the sense "The regnal name of the person who was King of the United Kingdom from 1936 to 1952". Talk:George VI shows this was deleted out of process: the RFD had no closing statement and thus no one could have noticed the closure and objected to it. One could consider this a minor quibble if it were not for the further problem that there were 6 keeps when I include SemperBlotto and 9 deletes, and thus no 2/3-consensus for deletion. This yields exactly 60% for deletion, and I don't recall this threshold being discussed or used at the time. Even now, there is no evidence that at least a plain majority supports 60% to be used as an overridable threshold at this level of participation;Votes/pl-2022-01/RFD voting policies shows no such thing and no other place I know of does. I have undone the out of process deletion but was reverted, so a RFD to undelete seems to be the only option remaining. On substance, the entry is supported by multiple WT:LEMMINGs and is governed by WT:NSE. I have checked M-W:George and it still has this as a biographical names; other dictionaries are at. OED probably does not have it but they also do not have Germany and surnames: their coverage of proper nouns is very minimal and not matching Wiktionary at all. --Dan Polansky (talk) 06:28, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

 * Keep deleted. Purely encyclopedic. Plenty of dictionaries have entries for Walt Disney as well, yet WT:NSE forbids us from doing the same. Binarystep (talk) 00:38, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Walt Disney is not supported by WT:LEMMING since no lemming-accepted dictionary has the term: M-W, Collins, Macmillan, and AHD do not have the term. From looking at the OneLook link above, one has to click on the links to see which dictionaries actually have the term: oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com does not have it and neither does dictionary.com; it is in vocabulary.com], but that does not count as a lemming. freedictionary.org has WordNet content that does not serve as a lemming either. By contrast, is supported by M-W, oxforddictionaries.com had it (is now gone), AHD, and Collins. OED does not have the term, but they do not have Germany and Asia either, so nothing to see there.
 * I will freely admit that regnal names are not terribly useful and are not part of the core of the dictionary, but nor are Auburn Lake Trails, Salamandra salamandra, and Small Magellanic Cloud. CAT:mul:Taxonomic names (species) alone has 5,164 entries and it does nothing but duplicate Wikispecies, albeit incompletely, featuring entries inferior to Wikispecies; CAT:en:Places in the United States has 9,370 entries, many of which are multi-word or feature enumerations of specific entities found in Wikipedia.
 * So regnal names are not terribly useful, but what is very useful is WT:LEMMING, helping us pull in useful content at the cost of also pulling in some borderline useful content. And it is WT:LEMMING that drives my keep: if the professionals think this is dictionary material, I do not feel any need to contradict them: at worst, we end up having some duplication of Wikipedia, which is unavoidable anyway as per taxa, geographic names and astronomical names. And if it is dictionary material, this also being encyclopedia material does not matter. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:07, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep deleted - it is questionable how we could even define them in a way that isn't patently SOP or encyclopaedic. At least with you can put "Charles Dickens". Theknightwho (talk) 09:25, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The definition "The regnal name of the person who was King of the United Kingdom from 1936 to 1952" does not follow from the parts, that's so sure. And it is no more encyclopedic than Auburn Lake Trails, Salamandra salamandra, and Small Magellanic Cloud. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Lexically, it means the sixth monarch/ruler/whatever named George. That clearly does follow from the sum of its parts: and . Theknightwho (talk) 09:34, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That's correct, but our definition does not follow from the parts. One would not even know it was a king of the U.K.; it could have been a king of another country. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Or of however many other places, or all the other George VIs that were kings, or indeed those that aren't/weren't kings at all. Better left to an encyclopaedia or specialist reference work. Theknightwho (talk) 09:57, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't deny that Wikipedia does the job; I deny sum of parts: one cannot navigate to the referents of the term from the parts of the term without knowing the enumeration of referents of the combination. I do not care all that much about the entry per se; I care about WT:LEMMING, as explained in my posts above. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:02, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't particularly care about WT:LEMMING as a determiner for inclusion (for one, because doing so would entail that not being included in other dictionaries means we should exclude terms). It's just a sign that the term might be borderline, but even then we need to take into account the fact that other dictionaries might be more encyclopaedic in some ways (e.g. specialist dictionaries).
 * I don't normally have a problem with terms that can be generated systematically, because attestation provides a natural barrier to including terms like thirty-seven-masted or one hundred and forty-four-forked. With names, however, that's not really the case: it will no doubt be possible to cite tens-if-not-hundreds of European aristocrats for any common name. Not to mention the question of whether these should really be in Translingual, given that names are only sometimes "translated" into the equivalent form.
 * The fact that it refers to specific individuals is besides the point, too, because (a) we can determine that it refers to a person from the name, and (b) it's narrowed-down by the regnal number. It's just as specific as any first name-last name combination, but it's still systematic. Theknightwho (talk) 10:25, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Re: "doing so would entail that not being included in other dictionaries means we should exclude terms": Not really; this is not what WT:LEMMING says and no one has proposed that.
 * Re: "e.g. specialist dictionaries": WT:LEMMING explicitly talks about general monolingual  dictionaries. An earlier version of the lemming principle did consider specialist dictionaries, but the 2014 version did not, and that is what WT:LEMMING "codified".
 * A term is sum of parts if its meaning can be determined from the separate components, per WT:CFI. The meaning of a proper name is the set of its referents. The set of referents of "George VI" cannot be determined from the separate components. It follows the term is not a sum of parts.
 * As for hundreds of aristocrats, that is not supported by WT:LEMMING; that would only be supported if one wanted to devise lemming-independent criteria. And if one wanted to devise such criteria, one could specify some form of notability; as a minimum, one could use Wikipedia-notability, but one could be more stringent. lists only few people, but I am sure there are other combinations where WP has many more individuals.
 * It would be basically a duplication of Wikipedia, no doubt, but it would protect WT:LEMMING and it would be no worse than entries for biological taxa, and not all that much worse than Newtown with all its specific entities covered.
 * I don't deny that the name is systematic; I deny it is sum of parts. Terms like "X County" are also systematic, and yet are plentifully included. -Dan Polansky (talk) 10:53, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Consider "John I": supports only the king of Portugal whereas  would support many more people. Even the WP people would be manageable, but LEMMING does not require us to pattern after WP. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * this is not what WT:LEMMING says - I never said it did. It's called a . The idea that we should include terms simply because other dictionaries do inherently entails that we should exclude terms simply because other dictionaries exclude them. Indeed, that is precisely the argument that you make when you say that we shouldn't include all those hundreds of other aristocrats.
 * If there's no argument for inclusion other than pointing to some other dictionary, it raises the question of why that dictionary included it in the first place. If it's simply because the term is notable, then that also raises the question of why we should only apply a notability criterion to proper nouns. We don't draw an arbitrary line with place names, biological taxa etc. as you want to, which automatically makes them different. Theknightwho (talk) 11:33, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Re: "The idea that we should include terms simply because other dictionaries do inherently entails that we should exclude terms simply because other dictionaries exclude them": It obviously does not entail that. Faulty logic. An implication is not an equivalence AKA implication and its inverse. I don't know what else to say. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You've misunderstood the point. I never said it couldn't be overridden by another inclusion criterion, and I shouldn't need to specify that we don't include terms arbitrarily - as such, it does follow in this context. You quite literally made the argument that we shouldn't include the hundreds of other aristocrats because they don't meet LEMMING, as I've already pointed out. Theknightwho (talk) 11:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * By the way - the fact that you're making me explain incredibly basic concepts like this is frustrating, even if I do assume good faith. I don't get the impression that you care to understand my position at all. Theknightwho (talk) 11:53, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I did not say LEMMING says we should not include hundreds of aristocrats; I said that it does not make us include hundred of aristocrats, and it does not. If we want to include them beyond LEMMING, we can; LEMMING leaves that to us. LEMMING as formulated is an additional inclusion criterion, not an exclusion criterion. One only has to read the formulation to see that, WT:LEMMING, "Terms that appear to be sum of parts, yet have entries in general monolingual dictionaries such as Merriam-Webster but not WordNet", in a page of terms that survived RFD. It does not say "exclude terms that do not appear to be sum of parts yet are not present in general monolingual dictionaries". --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You quite literally just argued that we should delete on RFV because it isn't included in other dictionaries, in lieu of investigating whether it's seen genuine adjectival use. It's a perfect example of my point, and why I don't want to see LEMMING used as a benchmark.
 * I've already addressed everything else in your comment. Please respond to that, rather than repeating the same point in different words. It's fine to disagree, but you're just ignoring my rebuttal. Theknightwho (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * To quote you just now: I admit that LEMMING guides deletion in this case, but if it were approved as an automatic rule, the rule would not force the deletion here. It follows from the formulation of LEMMING. By strengthening LEMMING as you want to, you strengthen this argument too - which was my whole point. It doesn't matter that it's not automatic, because you clearly think it's persuasive (or else you wouldn't have said it). You've basically snookered yourself. Theknightwho (talk) 12:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I made a mistake by invoking WT:LEMMING in swimming: LEMMING is about sum of parts and is an inclusion criterion, per its formulation. It was a slip of a mind. There is a more generic lemming principle: in case of doubt and indecision, consider what other dictionaries are doing. And it is this principle that slipped into the mind. My mistake. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * One could similarly argue that "Albert Einstein" is a sum of parts: it is anyone whose first name is Albert and whose surname is Einstein. But the term is a proper name, not a sum of parts. We do exclude Albert Einstein, no doubt about it, but not on the SOP grounds. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I've already addressed everything else in your comment. Please respond to that, rather than repeating the same point in different words. It's fine to disagree, but you're just ignoring my rebuttal. Theknightwho (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * To quote you just now: I admit that LEMMING guides deletion in this case, but if it were approved as an automatic rule, the rule would not force the deletion here. It follows from the formulation of LEMMING. By strengthening LEMMING as you want to, you strengthen this argument too - which was my whole point. It doesn't matter that it's not automatic, because you clearly think it's persuasive (or else you wouldn't have said it). You've basically snookered yourself. Theknightwho (talk) 12:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I made a mistake by invoking WT:LEMMING in swimming: LEMMING is about sum of parts and is an inclusion criterion, per its formulation. It was a slip of a mind. There is a more generic lemming principle: in case of doubt and indecision, consider what other dictionaries are doing. And it is this principle that slipped into the mind. My mistake. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * One could similarly argue that "Albert Einstein" is a sum of parts: it is anyone whose first name is Albert and whose surname is Einstein. But the term is a proper name, not a sum of parts. We do exclude Albert Einstein, no doubt about it, but not on the SOP grounds. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

 * Keep deleted. Equinox ◑ 12:48, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * : there's no justification for calling this close out of process. It may not have been a good idea, but not following a general tendency to the letter is not in itself a violation of the rules. That's not to say there haven't been bad closes in the past few years, but this doesn't seem like one to me.

 * A general comment: my subjective impression is that you have an almost religious faith in your powers of reasoning that lends a certain circularity to your arguments. It reminds me of law enforcement personnel who see nothing wrong with doing bad things because "we're the good guys", i.e., "it must make sense because I'm the voice of reason around here." You clearly believe that you're right, you admit your mistakes when you recognize them, and you're clearly acting in good faith, but it's A LOT of work getting you to see when you're wrong. I don't have the time or the energy- hats off to for trying. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:00, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The "general tendency" you speak of was specified in Requests for deletion/Header, and was there for a reason: to allow other people review the closure. It follows the closure was out of process, but not just in some nitpicking way but in a substantial way: it did not just violate the letter of the rule but its intent. The language above to the effect that a violation of the rule is not in itself a violation of the rules is some kind of Orwellianism I don't understand, but I don't decide here, others said "keep deleted", and that's up to them. Yes, I make mistakes, and unlike many others, I sometimes admit them when I see them. In the above case, I admitted the mistake immediately, so I don't see "a lot of work". The substance of what I was saying above is correct: LEMMING as specified is an inclusion rule, not an exclusion rule. --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * A 2/3 majority is not required, and is not accepted by the community as being required. You have a habit of making arguments based on the premises you want to be true, instead of those that actually are true, which is misleading at best. Plus, do I really need to point you to the discussion on the recent derogatory terms vote where you argued that a literal approach was the only reasonable interpretation, while dismissing the idea of intention-based interpretations? I would advise you to reflect on the term, and how it applies to you. Theknightwho (talk) 15:21, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no evidence that any other threshold is better supported by consensus. The evidence that RFDs are tallies is overwhelming. And at the top of this thread, I expressly referenced what was being done at the time, when I was active editor here. And the process violation of not closing the discussion remains either way.
 * "literal approach was the only reasonable interpretation": I did not, I explicitly said that by failure of design, we are forced to interpret it non-literally and that the problem is that the non-literal interpretation is going to differ from person to person. Thus, we are forced to interpret WT:DEROGATORY in a non-literal manner, whereas we are forced to interpret WT:ATTEST in a literal manner so that it makes sense and so that we do not need to delete a large part of Wiktionary within a short time to make sure that "only attested terms are included". But I am not sure the reader of this thread wants to read my self-defense unrelated to this thread. The problem is that the rate at which you produce misrepresentations is so huge that there is always so much to disagree with and correct, and that leads to never ending exchanges, and I am sure that you feel the same about me. This RFD nomination does not look good and the Orwellian atmosphere that has developed in the English Wiktionary is depressing. There were always misrepresentations about consensus and common practices, but they did not directly attack the RFD process itself; they attacked names of specific entities, including geographic names. Some remember. We have fixed this by voting and by fair and transparent processes; I am proud to have been part of it. We allowed the meek to take part and govern rather than deferring to the Nietzschean strong-willed great leaders to tell us what is good and what is not good. --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not misrepresenting anything by pointing out your contradictory reasoning. I note that you've failed to explain why being "forced" to interpret a policy non-literally is a problem in one instance, but apparently absolutely fine when it comes to choosing a threshold for RFD. The only difference seems to be that you support this one.
 * I'm going to be frank: it is disingenuous bordering on dishonest to argue that the burden of proof is on anyone else to overturn your made-up 2/3 consensus. Theknightwho (talk) 15:49, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll try to be short since it does not pertain to this thread. The disputed closure violated the RFD header and prevented closure review, and at that time, tallying was being done and entries were not usually deleted under 2/3 threshold; see e.g. Talk:less-than-stellar, but perhaps I made it up back then. Tallying is still being done, people are still posting bold votes, and so on, and so forth. Burden of proof is on everyone who makes unsubstantiated claims and demands to be believed without evidence, and makes absurd claims trivially refuted by phenomena observable by a Martian observer. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You used this vote to justify your reasoning, when that clearly pertained to votes and not to RFD. So yes, you made it up back then.
 * Please try to keep things concise in future. It is a valuable skill in communication. Theknightwho (talk) 16:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I said "2/3 is not documented anywhere. You can look at various discussions to see what thresholds were discussed and applied; one such is at the end of Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2018-04/Image policy." So I encouraged the closer to look for themselves and mentioned the vote as one data point. In 2018, I had no reason to believe that "consensus" was defined differently between RFD and votes, and the RFD closer did not seem to think otherwise either. At worst, I made up a connection between "consensus" in votes and in RFDs, but the RFD closer was perfectly free to reject such a connection, which did not happen. For votes, the threshold of 2/3 was mentioned back in 2010: Beer parlour/2010/June, not by me. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:47, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You claimed that it was common practice, but all you've been able to point to is your own misunderstanding of precedent. It is widely understood that votes and RFD operate differently, and the recent BP thread demonstrated that. Just admit you don't like the uncertainty and move on, instead of trying to bullshit until you get your way. It's clearly not working. Theknightwho (talk) 10:14, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Re: "It is widely understood that votes and RFD operate differently": I saw representations to that effect but no supporting evidence. In 2021 and 2022 (not earlier), one said 1/2 was enough for deletion, another one said 1/3 was enough, another said 60% was enough, another said he was told 60% was enough, another said we don't do tallying (we do, obviously), another one said we use Wikipedia's consensus definition (strength of arguments). And yet, no one has posted evidence. These inconsistent pronouncements cannot replace evidence. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:31, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * All of that just supports the point that RFD works differently, due to no consensus on a threshold, and you are conflating what people want with what they think current practice is, too. The burden of proof is and always has been on you to show there is one. You failed. Theknightwho (talk) 10:41, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It does not support any claim about how RFD works, and it therefore also does not support the claim that RFD works differently. Evidence-free representations have very little force, especially given how different and inconsistent they are. No doubt, there is currently no consensus on how RFD works. I did my best to produce evidence and pointed out to features of RFD discussions that show that RFD is closed predominantly based on tallying, which is obvious to a neutral external observer. As said, the burden of proof is on all parties making claims, on you as well. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:26, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * So you simultaneously hold the beliefs that (a) there is precedent for votes having a 2/3 threshold, (b) there is no consensus for a threshold at RFD, and (c) there is no evidence RFD works differently? You are beyond reason. Theknightwho (talk) 11:33, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep deleted per the arguments put forth above. Note: I'm not going to reply to any replies to this comment... lol — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep deleted, maybe even delete harder and delete the no entry, per the arguments above and in the last RFD. - -sche (discuss) 18:03, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep deleted per the arguments put forth above. Note: I'm not going to reply to any replies to this comment... lol — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep deleted, maybe even delete harder and delete the no entry, per the arguments above and in the last RFD. - -sche (discuss) 18:03, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

 * Deleted harder. - TheDaveRoss  14:53, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:George VI


text:
ᒌᓂᐧᑳᓈᔮᔥᑎᓐ

Verb

 * 1)  to be whirled around by the wind

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

title: ᒌᓂᐧᑳᓈᔮᔥᑎᓐ


text:
ᒌᔥᑎᓂᐱᔨᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  for there to be a sudden strong gust of wind

title: ᒌᔥᑎᓂᐱᔨᐤ


text:
ᒌᐧᐋᑎᓐ

Verb

 * 1)  to be northerly, to be a north wind

title: ᒌᐧᐋᑎᓐ


text:
ᒌᐧᐋᑎᓂᐱᔨᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to be change directions to north, to change to a north wind

title: ᒌᐧᐋᑎᓂᐱᔨᐤ


text:
ᒋᒥᔥᑎᓐ

Verb

 * 1)  to die down

title: ᒋᒥᔥᑎᓐ


text:
ᒋᒥᔥᑎᓂᐱᔨᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to gradually die down

title: ᒋᒥᔥᑎᓂᐱᔨᐤ


text:
rohový kop

Noun

 * 1) corner kick

title: rohový kop


text:
ᒋᒧᑖᒫᔑᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  for one's breath to be taken away by the wind

title: ᒋᒧᑖᒫᔑᐤ


text:
ᒋᐧᔖᐧᐋᔮᔥᑯᔥᑎᓐ

Verb

 * 1)  to make sound as it passes through the trees and bushes

title: ᒋᐧᔖᐧᐋᔮᔥᑯᔥᑎᓐ


text:
ᒌᓂᐧᑳᓈᔮᔥᑎᐦᑖᑭᓐ

Noun

 * 1) windmill

title: ᒌᓂᐧᑳᓈᔮᔥᑎᐦᑖᑭᓐ


text:
Talk:oil pipeline

RFD discussion: February 2019
SOP. 68.193.47.68 19:36, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
 * It's certainly SoP, but are we keeping translation hubs these days? SemperBlotto (talk) 19:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Would those get flagged in some way? -Mike (talk) 19:51, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per WT:THUB: I don't think Czech ropovod is "a closed compound that is a word-for-word translation of the English term"; especially, "-vod" is not obvious from "pipeline". A similar argument holds for Polish ropociąg, I think. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I notice that in Bokmål that the expected compound of +  is usually contracted to . The same happens in Danish and Nynorsk. DonnanZ (talk) 12:07, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Strangely, there is no entry for oil pipe or oilpipe (for lubricating oil). They must exist, surely. DonnanZ (talk) 12:38, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:oil pipeline


text:
Talk:cananeu

Can you provide the forms please? Ultimateria (talk) 20:44, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:cananeu


text:
Talk:aesthetic emotion

RFD discussion: February 2019
SOP. Per utramque cavernam 13:52, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:aesthetic emotion


text:
Talk:I'm genderfluid

RFD discussion: January–February 2019
And I'm cisgender, I'm transgender, I'm homosexual, I'm heterosexual... Seems completely pointless. Do we want that? Per utramque cavernam 16:27, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Surely any entry of the form "I'm " is SoP and can be translated part by part. Delete all. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:37, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't go so far as to say that (for example "I'm hungry" has non-straightforward translations in French - "I have hunger" - and Russian - "I want to eat" / "To me is the want to eat"), but yes, there's a good deal of cruft in Category:English phrasebook. Per utramque cavernam 16:42, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: sum of parts and not worthwhile for the phrasebook. However, I would keep I'm hungry: 1) Czech mám hlad is not word for word; 2) lemming principle: . For English phrasebook entries, I like to use something like a lemming criterion: . --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. The definition is most unhelpful. DonnanZ (talk) 00:13, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Not much worse than other things in the phrasebook. People seem to talk about their gender identity a lot these days so these phrases might be useful in their conversation. (As I've said before, I don't like phrasebook in mainspace, but that's another issue.) Equinox ◑ 00:22, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Delete. I'm totally flabbergasted. --Lambiam 01:43, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I would understand the possible need for I'm not gay. DonnanZ (talk) 09:48, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Keep I'm gay and I'm straight if those were intended to be nominated for deletion; I'm homosexual and I'm heterosexual are red links. Those are included in Dutch phrasebooks with some frequency and do have high utility in all kinds of settings (romance, recreation, reporting crimes), especially in places with a lot of gay tourism. I don't know why so few English phrasebooks on BGC show these terms, but there are some with such phrases.   I would also support the creation of I'm lesbian or some equivalent.
 * I lean keep I'm cisgender and I'm transgender. Again very few phrasebooks have these, but similar considerations apply as above. Print phrasebooks that still exclude those will probably have another think coming soon.
 * Abstain on I'm genderfluid; I don't think genderfluidity is any good as a catch-all or substitute for non-binary gender, it is too specific for that. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  09:38, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Delete per Semper. - -sche (discuss) 20:51, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. PrussianOwl (talk) 20:48, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Keeping "I'm gay" and "I'm straight" while removing "I'm cisgender," "I'm transgender," etc. is just blatantly discriminatory. פֿינצטערניש (Fintsternish), she/her (talk) 00:33, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Especially when the proposed criteria for keeping these did not pass. פֿינצטערניש (Fintsternish), she/her (talk) 00:37, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm gay and I'm straight have never been "kept", because they've never been RFDed in the first place (only mentioned by a single commenter above in an RFD in which they were not nominated). You're welcome to RFD them. All of these seem trivially constructable from "I'm" + the translations in the entries on the words ("genderfluid", etc), all of which been kept. - -sche (discuss) 04:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:I'm genderfluid


text:
ᐧᐋᓵᓂᐦᑖᑭᓐ

Noun

 * 1) window

title: ᐧᐋᓵᓂᐦᑖᑭᓐ


text:
小斑虎貓

Noun

 * 1) oncilla

title: 小斑虎貓


text:
Talk:miniature circuit breaker

RFD discussion: January–February 2019
Does not have a real definition, just a "miniature" + "circuit breaker"? (Has a single redlink translation.) Equinox ◑ 23:13, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * My knowledge in the matter is solely based on the Wikipedia article . It gives me the impression that “miniature” in “miniature circuit breaker” does not so much refer to the device’s diminished size (although they are among the smallest circuit breakers) but identifies a specific type. Pages like this one and this one strengthen that impression. --Lambiam 00:41, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Either it needs a proper definition, or it needs to be deleted. Not in my field of knowledge. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:53, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

I extended the translations. There is a separate article about the "big-" or "normal-sized" circuit breaker in the French Wikipedia: fr:w:disjoncteur à haute tension as opposed to fr:w:disjoncteur, which is specifically described as something with low voltage (basse tension). The German Wikipedia speaks about the "miniature" version in particular in its linked article, as it specifically mentions MCB as the English term for the device. What's more, the Chinese-language online encyclopedia, Baidu, has an article specifically about MCB. On the other hand, if it were just a small-sized version of circuit breakers, then why is it consistently called MCB (rather than e.g. "small circuit breaker" or something else) in English? It does seem to be a concept on its own, doesn't it? Adam78 (talk) 17:15, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

At the very least, it could be a translation hub, due to the reasons given above. Adam78 (talk) 16:40, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:miniature circuit breaker


text:
ᐧᐋᓵᓂᐦᑖᑭᓈᐦᑎᒄ

Noun

 * 1) window frame

title: ᐧᐋᓵᓂᐦᑖᑭᓈᐦᑎᒄ


text:
Talk:so help me God

RFD discussion: January–March 2019
Isn't this simply a wish commonly used in oaths, similar to "may God help me"? Not in published general dictionaries in OneLook. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  14:43, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

 * It's very much a set phrase at this point, as indicated by its continued use despite the somewhat archaic grammar and as indicated by the derivate . Keep, imo. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:54, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

 * It may be the original form, but it's mostly been replaced in modern English by so help me. I would call it an alternative form, albeit perhaps a bit stronger. As for being SOP: it definitely was, originally, but now most speakers are unaware of the literal meaning and would have difficulty parsing the archaic wording to figure it out. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:19, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

 * The implied imprecation in the etymology provided (“The phrase implies that the speaker is willing to risk their chance of salvation upon their truthfulness”) makes this somewhat different from a simple wish. --Lambiam 20:49, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That implication about risking salvation seems rather strong, though perhaps it might occasionally be understood to mean that during oaths before testimonies. But it makes no sense to interpret it like that for swearing in for an office or when making a promise, then it is just a request for divine aid. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:16, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

 * I remember when I was a child, if I was misbehaving, my mother would walk in the room and say "So help me God!", and that meant that if I didn't start behaving right away, I'd get a whuppin'. bd2412 T 03:53, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Inclined to keep. Per utramque cavernam 19:23, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Keep like "once upon a time": the archaic grammar diminishes the ability to sum its parts, and the meaning is now usually specific, used in specific circumstances like the definition mentions, not just at any time when one would like to invoke God's help. If you are lost and say "I will find my way to the restaurant, so help me God", it comes across like a resolute oath that you will find your way, quite different to an "I think I can, I think I can"-style "I will find my way to the restaurant, if you help me out here, God" or a more resigned-to-whatever-may-happen or even disinterested-in-going "I will find my way to the restaurant, inshallah". - -sche (discuss) 21:11, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Keep; set phrase. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 20:24, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

etymology
Could somebody analyse how the sentence is sparsed? --Backinstadiums (talk) 15:14, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:so help me God


text:
ᐧᐋᓵᓂᐦᑖᑭᓈᐱᔅᒄ

Noun

 * 1) windowpane
 * 2) lamp glass

title: ᐧᐋᓵᓂᐦᑖᑭᓈᐱᔅᒄ


text:
Talk:KOS

RFD discussion: January 2019

 * 1)   Knights of Solamnia (DragonLance fictional organization)
 * 2)   Knights of Siberys (gaming, Dungeons & Dragons)
 * Delete both senses. We should not start collecting fictional acronyms, unless they are attested in advance as meeting WT:FICTION. I would suggest a shoot-on-sight rule. bd2412 T 11:41, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - TheDaveRoss  13:38, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:KOS


text:
Talk:-culture

RFD discussion: January–February 2019
"culture" in "cyberculture" etc. is absolutely not a suffix! It's just a common word that gets prefixed sometimes! Equinox ◑ 14:40, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy. Per utramque cavernam 14:46, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete only after cleaning up all the terms that point to it. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:58, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think the terms that use it can be cleaned up beforehand. DonnanZ (talk) 12:46, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Modify the French entry too, I'm not sure whether it's a legit suffix in French though. DonnanZ (talk) 12:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No it's not, no more than it is in English. I don't know why the TLFi saw fit to speak of a "suffixal element" at Per utramque cavernam 15:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Strongly Oppose removing the French entry. The point is that the TLFi did include it that way. The English is debatable; would like to see more sourced research presented pro- & con-. 172.97.145.140 11:53, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
 * An RFD for French wouldn't appear here anyway, and the French entry hasn't been sent to RFD. As the French are a law unto themselves, I won't argue about that. DonnanZ (talk) 11:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * We're not bound by what the TLFi says. Per utramque cavernam 13:11, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The whole page was created only a few days ago by Alumnum, so you can probably rfd French too. DonnanZ (talk) 19:01, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  14:03, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

RFD discussion: February 2019
Not a suffix; see 🇨🇬. Per utramque cavernam 21:27, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * What is it we should see at that tells us  is not a suffix in English?  --Lambiam 20:59, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * In French, you mean? I'm RFDing the French entry, not the English one. Per utramque cavernam 13:06, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, sorry. I suspect it may be disputed that is a suffix on the same grounds, but I am not sure what those grounds are. Is it that as a presumed suffix it is not very productive, yielding merely apiculture, aquaculture, aquiculture, arboriculture, aviculture, citriculture, floriculture, horticulture, monoculture, pisciculture, viniculture and viticulture, at least as far as existing entries are concerned?  --Lambiam 00:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  13:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:-culture


text:
ᓂᔅᐧᑳᔖᐧᐃᓂᐦᐊᓐ

Verb

 * 1)  for there to be a sudden windstorm from the south

title: ᓂᔅᐧᑳᔖᐧᐃᓂᐦᐊᓐ


text:
Talk:S1000D

RFD discussion: January 2019
Appears to be a reference number, something like " RFC 1918 ". Equinox ◑ 20:50, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I have not been able to figure out where the name comes from, but it does not appear to be a reference number; it is not the successor to S999D or S10000C. It is more like a proper noun, such as “XML” or "3GPP". --Lambiam 20:12, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * See, the "D" stands for "documentation". - TheDaveRoss  13:51, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:S1000D


text:
Talk:capital of the world

RFD discussion: January–February 2019
SoP, where capital is in the sense "the most important city in the field specified". Equinox ◑ 03:48, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per proponent. Per utramque cavernam 10:47, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, the definition is terrible as well. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:52, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Del per nom. - -sche (discuss) 22:21, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:capital of the world


text:
toimitustyö

Noun

 * 1) editorial work
 * 2) delivery work

title: toimitustyö


text:
Talk:dual screen

RFD discussion: January–February 2019
"Two adjacent screens", evidently created in reference to the Nintendo DS game console. I think it's SoP: two computer monitors would also be a dual-screen setup, for example. Equinox ◑ 19:22, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, SoP. Ultimateria (talk) 22:21, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. I always thought about it as a fixed term since it is used as such in German or elsewhere, but there is also “dual monitors”, “dual SIM” and all kinds of things dual, and if you look around in other languages the translations are also SOP and not fixed, so no WT:THUB in the foreseeable future. Better delete because people would create even more dubious entries on the model of this. Fay Freak (talk) 03:04, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:dual screen


text:
toistotyö

Noun

 * 1) repetitive work

title: toistotyö


text:
tuotekehitystyö

Noun

 * 1) product development work

title: tuotekehitystyö


text:
turvallisuustyö

Noun

 * 1) safety work, security work

title: turvallisuustyö


text:
Talk:option

RFD discussion: January 2019
"(graphical user interface) A button on a screen used to select an action (often menu option)." I think this is redundant to sense 1, "one of a set of choices that can be made". It's certainly not just menus that can offer options: they might be hyperlinks, dropdown list entries, etc. (Note this is all unrelated to the option button, which is one specific type of on-screen element.) Equinox ◑ 22:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not a separate sense. The current translations, apart from (which should move to sense #1), are all wrong. The definition is also pretty awful; in most cases the graphical element representing an option would not be called a “button”, and the options may be preferences (like the date format) rather than actions.  --Lambiam 09:35, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:option


text:
ᑭᔥᑳᐹᔮᔑᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to have windburnt eyes

title: ᑭᔥᑳᐹᔮᔑᐤ


text: ininterrupta

title: ininterrupta


text: ininterruptos

title: ininterruptos


text: ininterruptas

title: ininterruptas


text:
nanochemically

Adverb

 * 1) In a nanochemical manner

title: nanochemically


text:
ᔮᐦᔮᒋᐦᑎᓐ

Verb

 * 1)  to begin to die down

title: ᔮᐦᔮᒋᐦᑎᓐ


text: Category:Adyghe terms with rare senses

title: Category:Adyghe terms with rare senses


text:
Talk:ALP

RFD discussion: January 2019
Noun sense for "Initialism of applied learning programme". Sent here for the following reasons: All articles provided in the quotations have this: "[…] Applied Learning Programme (ALP) […]" before the initialism is used. In addition, 3 out of 4 quotations are from the same date (5 March 2018). According to CFI, quotations need to be independent and spanning at least a year. KevinUp (talk) 16:49, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. New quotation added from February 2017 also has the full term followed by abbreviated term in brackets before the initialism is used. The quotation where the initialism is found is actually extracted from a subsequent paragraph. The same trend is also found in all 5 quotations provided (refer to the source documents provided in the URL links). Note that this PDF file also has many other abbreviations listed in it, such as "21CC" for "21st Century Competencies". KevinUp (talk) 11:40, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:ALP


text:
ᔮᔨᑳᔑᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to be split by the wind (into sheets or strips)

title: ᔮᔨᑳᔑᐤ


text: Category:Adyghe terms suffixed with -жъ

title: Category:Adyghe terms suffixed with -жъ


text:
Talk:ICA

RFD discussion: December 2018
Initialism of International Contract Agency - I think it should be deleted because of WT:FICTION --Pious Eterino (talk) 16:25, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Send to RfV, where it will almost certainly fail verification. bd2412 T 23:11, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:ICA


text:
nanomeric

Adjective

 * 1)  Relating to a nanomer

title: nanomeric


text:
Talk:Captain Hook

RFD discussion: December 2018–January 2019
A fictional pirate captain. Equinox ◑ 16:48, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

 * And why? Cp. WT:CFI ("With respect to names of persons or places [...]") + Category:en:Fictional characters. Matter of WT:RFVE? ---84.161.31.128 13:14, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. If it were to go to RFV it would need a definition which wasn't encyclopedic. - TheDaveRoss  13:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Captain Hook


text:
Talk:foundation myth

RFD discussion: December 2018
Sounds somewhat SOP, and not particularly set: the literature speaks also of, ,. I'm unsure. Per utramque cavernam 15:00, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I tend to assume that it is a technical term and also a useful translation target because it is not obvious which words to choose in other languages. Fay Freak (talk) 20:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * For a translation target rationale to apply there should at least be several idiomatic translations. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  11:15, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:foundation myth


text:
ᔫᑎᓂᐱᔨᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to travel on the water in spite of strong winds

title: ᔫᑎᓂᐱᔨᐤ


text: Category:English terms derived from Coastal Min languages


text:
nanosprayer

Noun

 * 1) A device that produces a nanospray

title: nanosprayer


text: Category:English terms derived from Min languages


text: nanosprayers

title: nanosprayers


text:
ᔫᑎᓂᔅᒄ

Noun

 * 1) a wind cloud

title: ᔫᑎᓂᔅᒄ


text:
ᒋᓯᓂᔨᐧᐋᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to be cold, to be a cold wind

title: ᒋᓯᓂᔨᐧᐋᐤ


text:
connectivistic

Adjective

 * 1) Of or relating to connectivism.

title: connectivistic


text: hígida

title: hígida


text: hígidos

title: hígidos


text:
connectivist

Noun

 * 1) A proponent of connectivism.

title: connectivist


text: hígidas

title: hígidas


text: connectivists

title: connectivists


text: galharda

title: galharda


text: galhardos

title: galhardos


text: galhardas

title: galhardas


text: cíveis

title: cíveis


text:
ᐊᔥᑐᑎᓐ

Noun

 * 1) hat, cap

title: ᐊᔥᑐᑎᓐ


text: ᐊᔥᑐᑎᓐᐦ

title: ᐊᔥᑐᑎᓐᐦ


text: xintoístas

title: xintoístas


text:
Citations:anti-seize

Use as an adjective or attributive noun
/* Note the 1956, 1964, and 1985 do not seem to involve the compound referred to by the noun */

title: Citations:anti-seize


text: alviverdes

title: alviverdes


text:
ᐊᒥᔅᑯᔮᓂᔥᑐᑎᓐ

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) hat made of beaverskin

title: ᐊᒥᔅᑯᔮᓂᔥᑐᑎᓐ


text: petroleiros

title: petroleiros


text: petroleiras

title: petroleiras


text: veludínea

title: veludínea


text: veludíneos

title: veludíneos


text: veludíneas

title: veludíneas


text:
ᒋᒋᑳᐧᐃᓐ

Noun

 * 1) a hat with a brim
 * 2)  a cowboy hat

title: ᒋᒋᑳᐧᐃᓐ


text:
ᒋᑭᔥᑐᑎᓈᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to have one's hat on

title: ᒋᑭᔥᑐᑎᓈᐤ


text: veludosa

title: veludosa


text: veludosos

title: veludosos


text: veludosas

title: veludosas


text:
ᒥᔥᑯᔒᐅᔥᑐᑎᓐ

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) a straw hat

title: ᒥᔥᑯᔒᐅᔥᑐᑎᓐ


text:
triguhan

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) wheat field or plantation

title: triguhan


text:
Talk:latinx

Dating the term
I can find a non-durable use here from 14 December 2009. WP cites Arlene Gamio as saying it dates to 2004. - -sche (discuss) 21:19, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

RFV discussion: August–September 2021
The definition is called 'uncommon'-- three durably archived cites fulfilling the various Wiktionary requirements would be helpful to show usage. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

 * Cited (it had two already, I added two more). - -sche (discuss) 00:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

 * RFV-kept. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 00:27, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:latinx


text:
ᐳᔅᒋᔥᑐᑎᓂᐦᐄᓲ

Verb

 * 1)  to put on a hat

title: ᐳᔅᒋᔥᑐᑎᓂᐦᐄᓲ


text:
connectivism

Noun

 * 1)  A theory of learning that focuses on the modern digital age and emphasizes the role of social and cultural context in how and where learning occurs.

title: connectivism


text: antiseize

title: antiseize


text: antiseizes

title: antiseizes


text:
ᐅᔥᑭᔥᑐᑎᓈᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to be have a new hat

title: ᐅᔥᑭᔥᑐᑎᓈᐤ


text:
ᐹᔅᑭᐦᐋᐅᓲ

Verb

 * 1)  for one's eggs to be hatching

title: ᐹᔅᑭᐦᐋᐅᓲ


text:
ᐅᐦᑳᑖᔮᔨᐦᑎᒻ

Verb

 * 1)  to be disgusted (by something), to hate (something)

title: ᐅᐦᑳᑖᔮᔨᐦᑎᒻ


text:
ᐅᐦᑳᑎᒻ

Verb

 * 1)  to be disgusted (by something), to hate (something)

title: ᐅᐦᑳᑎᒻ


text:
ᐋᔥᑎᒫᔥᑖᔑᓐ

Verb

 * 1)  to lie or to be in sunshine

title: ᐋᔥᑎᒫᔥᑖᔑᓐ


text: avantgardene

title: avantgardene


text:
Talk:Mixter

Dating the term
The BBC used / mentioned it 10 May 2013, but that's just from skimming Wikipedia's bibliography; there are probably earlier occurrences. (It also occurs in Laura Erickson-Schroth's 2014 Trans Bodies, Trans Selves: A Resource for the Transgender Community.) - -sche (discuss) 21:33, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * This 10 December 1998 Usenet post gives it as the pronunciation of Mx, which is not quite the same as using it as its own title. - -sche (discuss) 21:33, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mixter


text: twórz

title: twórz


text:
ᐱᐦᒋᔑᒨ

Verb

 * 1)  to set

title: ᐱᐦᒋᔑᒨ


text: stwórz

title: stwórz


text:
ᓃᐦᑎᒋᐧᐋᐤ

Verb

 * 1)  to walk down, to descend
 * 2)  to go down, to set

title: ᓃᐦᑎᒋᐧᐋᐤ


text:
ᒌᔑᑳᓂᐲᓯᒻ

Noun

 * 1) the Sun

title: ᒌᔑᑳᓂᐲᓯᒻ


text: avantgardar

title: avantgardar


text: avantgardane

title: avantgardane


text:
ᐲᓯᒻ

Noun

 * 1) the Sun
 * 2) month
 * 1) month

title: ᐲᓯᒻ


text:
ᐹᐦᑭᐦᐋᐧᑳᓐ

Noun

 * 1) chicken

title: ᐹᐦᑭᐦᐋᐧᑳᓐ


text:
ᔒᐦᒋᔥᑖᓂᒻ

Verb

 * 1)  to cock

title: ᔒᐦᒋᔥᑖᓂᒻ


text:
ᔒᐦᒋᔥᑌᓇᒻ

Verb

 * 1)  to cock

title: ᔒᐦᒋᔥᑌᓇᒻ


text:
ᐋᐦᐋᔅ

Etymology
Borrowed from, with the indefinite article attached, from , from , from , from.

Noun

 * 1) a horse

title: ᐋᐦᐋᔅ


text:
wiosenka

Etymology
From.

title: wiosenka


text:
ᑰᐦᑰᔥ

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) pig
 * 2) salt pork

title: ᑰᐦᑰᔥ


text:
ᑖᐦᑖᐤ

Etymology
Perhaps from

Noun

 * 1) turtle

title: ᑖᐦᑖᐤ


text:
ᒥᓯᓂᐦᐄᑭᓈᐳᐃ

Noun

 * 1) ink

title: ᒥᓯᓂᐦᐄᑭᓈᐳᐃ


text:
махновщина

Etymology
. lit. 'the thing relating to Makhno'.

Proper noun

 * 1)  The theory and strategy of Makhno; Makhnovism, Makhnovshchina
 * 2)  The Black Army and it's allied military groups in Ukraine, Southern Russia and Kalmykia
 * 3)  The Free Territory and the associated areas
 * 4)  chaos, mayhem

Noun

 * 1)  The theory and strategy of Makhno; Makhnovism, Makhnovshchina
 * 2)  The Black Army and it's allied military groups in Ukraine, Southern Russia and Kalmykia
 * 3)  The Free Territory and the associated areas
 * 4)  chaos, mayhem

title: махновщина


text:
청첩장

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) invitation card / letter (e.g. to a wedding)

title: 청첩장


text:
ᒨᐦᑖᐤ

Noun

 * 1) caterpillar

title: ᒨᐦᑖᐤ


text:
Talk:Irish twin

2019
Should it be said in the etymology section that this is possibly due to Ireland being heavily Catholic, and the stereotype that Catholics do not typically use contraception, and thus that the Catholic families of Ireland would have had children in quick succession? I can't find any credible sources that don't seem only speculative. If anyone has anything to back this up, let me know.

 * A while ago we had someone who kept removing that text (without any discussion), which made the removal seem like vandalism. Asking for sources is certainly reasonable though. If that isn't the origin, do you have any suggestions about what the origin might be? Maybe it's something to take to the Information Desk or Tea Room discussion areas. Equinox ◑ 22:34, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Offensive
I want to say that I categorically reject the notion that 'offensive' is a legitimate categorization for words. But anyway, does "Irish twins" really fit within Wiktionary's definition for offensive? "Language that is intended or likely to cause offense" Appendix:Glossary --Geographyinitiative (talk) 20:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

 * I think this term has traditionally been used in a humorous way, but it may very well be offensive to the Irish, because it embodies an unfair stereotype. Do you think Irish people used the term "Irish twins" in this sense? Probably not! Then why not? Offensiveness is a difficult thing to pin down (and you can't just ask the target group either, because they could theoretically lie for sympathy or benefits!). A comparable example might be : people who bought these sweets were probably not being overtly racist, but you can see why the word could cause a lot of offence, and we wouldn't use it today. Equinox ◑ 05:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Irish twin


text:
ᒥᔑᐱᔑᐤ

Noun

 * 1) lion

title: ᒥᔑᐱᔑᐤ


text:
supremist

Noun

 * 1) A person who is supreme.
 * 1) A person who is supreme.

title: supremist


text: Golgos

title: Golgos


text:
Wietnamka

Etymology
From.

title: Wietnamka


text:
ᑖᐦᑳᐱᐦᒉᓂᑲᓐ

Noun

 * 1) telephone

title: ᑖᐦᑳᐱᐦᒉᓂᑲᓐ


text:
زێڕنگەر

Etymology
From by analogy with.

Noun

 * 1) goldsmith

title: زێڕنگەر


text:
semiotikk

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) semiotics

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) semiotics

title: semiotikk


text: Polessia

title: Polessia


text: Polessian

title: Polessian


text: Polessians

title: Polessians


text:
homme-mort

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) dead man's switch

title: homme-mort


text: homme-morts

title: homme-morts


title: User:Jberkel/lists/missing/20190320/all


text:
Totmannschalter

Noun

 * 1) dead man's switch

title: Totmannschalter


text: Totmannschalters

title: Totmannschalters


text:
fâldzje

Etymology
From, from.

Verb

 * 1) to fold

title: fâldzje


text:
dodemansknop

Etymology
Compound of.

Noun

 * 1) dead man's switch

title: dodemansknop


text:
befelje

Etymology
From, from.

Verb

 * 1) to order, to command

title: befelje


text:
шагыйрь

Noun

 * 1) poet

title: шагыйрь


text:
нәшрият

Noun

 * 1) publication

title: нәшрият


text: dodemansknoppen

title: dodemansknoppen


text:
шигырь

Noun

 * 1) poetry, poem

title: шигырь


text:
fjochtsje

Etymology
From, from , from.

Verb

 * 1) to fight

title: fjochtsje


text:
мәкалә

Noun

 * 1) article

title: мәкалә


text:
әтрафлы

Adjective

 * 1) comprehensive

title: әтрафлы


text:
flokke

Etymology
From, from.

Verb

 * 1) to curse

title: flokke


text:
күренекле

Adjective

 * 1) famous, well-known

title: күренекле


text:
czuwak

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) dead man's switch

title: czuwak


text:
шәхес

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) person, individual
 * 2) personality
 * 1) personality

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) individual, person

title: шәхес


text:
echelon form

Noun

 * 1)  row echelon form
 * 2)  column echelon form

title: echelon form


text:
column echelon form

Noun

 * 1)  The transpose of the row echelon form of the transpose of a given matrix.

title: column echelon form


text:
тәрҗемәче

Noun

 * 1) translator
 * 2) interpreter

title: тәрҗемәче


text:
тәрҗемә итү

Verb

 * 1) to translate
 * 2) to interpret

title: тәрҗемә итү


text:
бүген

Adverb

 * 1) today

Derived terms

 * бүгенге

title: бүген


text:
dödmansgrepp

Noun

 * 1) dead man's switch

title: dödmansgrepp


text: vaʻu

title: vaʻu


text:
мөмкинлек

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) possibility, probability
 * 2) opportunity

Noun

 * 1) possibility
 * 2) probability

title: мөмкинлек


text:
тулаем

Adverb

 * 1) completely

title: тулаем


text:
танышу

Verb

 * 1) to acquaint
 * 2) to know each other

title: танышу


text: wetterke

title: wetterke


text:
әдип

Noun

 * 1) writer

title: әдип


text:
semiotisk

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) semiotic

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) semiotic

Etymology
..

Adjective

 * 1) semiotic

title: semiotisk


text:
иҗат

Noun

 * 1) art

title: иҗат


text:
сәяси

Etymology
.

Adjective

 * 1) political

title: сәяси


text:
эшчәнлек

Noun

 * 1) activity

title: эшчәнлек


text: wetterkes

title: wetterkes


text:
каләмдәш

Noun

 * 1) colleague of writing

title: каләмдәш


text:
каләм

Noun

 * 1) pen
 * 2) pencil

title: каләм


text:
бәяләмә

Noun

 * 1) evaluation

title: бәяләмә


text:
шигъри

Adjective

 * 1) poetic

title: шигъри


text:
әсәр

Noun

 * 1) piece, work

title: әсәр


text:
何物

Pronoun

 * 1)  what

title: 何物


text:
язу

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to write

Derived terms

 * язучы

title: язу


text:
язучы

Noun

 * 1) writer

title: язучы


text:
мәгариф

Noun

 * 1) education

title: мәгариф


text:
күпсанлы

Adjective

 * 1) many

title: күпсанлы


text: semiotiske

title: semiotiske


text:
тамашачы

Noun

 * 1) watcher, audience

title: тамашачы


text:
катнашу

Verb

 * 1) to participate, to join

Derived terms

 * катнашучы

title: катнашу


text:
катнашучы

Noun

 * 1) participant

title: катнашучы


text:
-cast

Etymology
.

Suffix

 * 1) Forming words for audiovisual content distributed to an audience, usually in a manner denoted by the word stem.

title: -cast


text:
үзенчәлек

Noun

 * 1) uniqueness, originality

Derived terms

 * үзенчәлекле

title: үзенчәлек


text:
үзенчәлекле

Adjective

 * 1) unique, original

title: үзенчәлекле


text:
diar

Etymology
From, from , from , dative and instrumental form of. Cognate with 🇨🇬, archaic 🇨🇬.

Pronoun

 * : you, to you; thee, to thee

Verb

 * 1)  to find something

Determiner

 * 1) to/for our
 * "sga"
 * "sga"

- Is hed didiu for·théit in spirut, in tain guidme-ni inducbáil dïar corp dïar n-animm iar n-esséirgiu.

title: diar


text:
саклану

Verb

 * 1) to preserve

title: саклану


text:
уку

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to read
 * 2) to study

Derived terms

 * укучы
 * укыту
 * укытучы

Noun

 * 1) study, studying

Derived terms

 * уку йорты

title: уку


text:
игътибар

Noun

 * 1) attention

title: игътибар


text:
керү

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to enter

Derived terms

 * кертү

title: керү


text:
күрсәтү

Verb

 * 1) to show

title: күрсәтү


text:
әһәмиятле

Adjective

 * 1) important

Synonyms

 * мөһим

title: әһәмиятле


text:
izàndarn

Etymology
+ ; compare. is from, ; cognate to ,.

Pronoun

 * : us, to us

title: izàndarn


text:
ogàndarn

Pronoun

 * : you (plural), to you

title: ogàndarn


text:
innàndarn

Etymology
+ ; compare. is from (see ), cognate with 🇨🇬.

Pronoun

 * : them, to them

title: innàndarn


text:
shaving brush

Noun

 * 1) A small brush used to create a lather from shaving cream or shaving soap and apply it to the face or other area before shaving

Translations

 * Afrikaans: skeerkwas
 * Albanian: furçë rroje
 * Arabic: فرشاة الحلاقة
 * Armenian: սափրվելու խոզանակ
 * Azerbaijani: təraş fırçası
 * Basque: bizar-brotxa
 * Belarusian: памазок
 * Bengali: শেভিং ব্রাশ
 * Breton:
 * Bulgarian:
 * Catalan: brotxa d'afaitar
 * Czech: štětka na holení
 * Dutch:
 * Esperanto: razpeniko
 * Estonian: vahupintsel
 * Finnish:
 * French:
 * German:
 * Greek:
 * Hebrew:
 * Hungarian:
 * Ido: barbo-pinselo
 * Irish: scuab bhearrtha
 * Italian: pennello da barba
 * Latvian: skūšanās ota
 * Lithuanian: skutimosi šepetėlis
 * Norman: savonnette
 * Norwegian:
 * Bokmål: barberkost
 * Nynorsk: barberkost
 * Persian:
 * Polish:
 * Portuguese: pincel de barba
 * Romanian:, pensulă de ras
 * Russian:, кисть для бритья
 * Slovak: štetka na holenie
 * Slovene: čopič za britje
 * Spanish: brocha de afeitar
 * Swedish: rakborste
 * Turkish:
 * Ukrainian: пензлик, помазок для гоління
 * Uzbek:
 * Cyrillic:
 * Roman: pomazok

title: shaving brush


text: shaving brushes

title: shaving brushes


text:
てんりきょう

Proper noun

 * 1)  Tenrikyo, Tenriism: new religious movement founded by  in 1838

title: てんりきょう


text:
ἐρείδω

Etymology
Of uncertain relation outside of Greek. Sometimes compared to 🇨🇬, but de Vaan finds this connection shaky at best. Hypothetically from.

Verb

 * 1) to prop, support

title: ἐρείδω


text:
гъыбзэ

Etymology
From ; hence literally “language of cry”.

Noun

 * 1) lament (A song expressing grief), a poem of lament, a song of lament

title: гъыбзэ


text: něiwèi

title: něiwèi


text: nǎiwèi

title: nǎiwèi


text: Template:form of/paramdoc

title: Template:form of/paramdoc


text:
Rasierpinsel

Noun

 * 1) shaving brush

title: Rasierpinsel


text: Rasierpinsels

title: Rasierpinsels


text:
បុង

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) coupon; voucher

title: បុង


text:
令尹

Noun

 * 1)  chancellor; prime minister
 * 2)  magistrate

title: 令尹


text: lìngyǐn

title: lìngyǐn


text: តែមប្រិ៍

title: តែមប្រិ៍


text:
κυλίνδω

Etymology
Often connected with, but Beekes doesn't find this convincing. The same element -νδ- is found also in and, suggesting a  origin. Also compare and.

Verb

 * 1) to roll, turn over

title: κυλίνδω


text:
臣仕

Noun

 * 1)  to become an official

title: 臣仕


text:
陳事

Verb

 * 1)  to narrate; to recount

Noun

 * 1)  old matter; former matter; past event

title: 陳事


text: 陈事

title: 陈事


text: yángcài

title: yángcài


text: duōxiàng

title: duōxiàng


text:
太政

Etymology
Compound of.

The use of to mean "very great" is an example of.

Noun

 * 1)  the imperial government

title: 太政


text: 沆溉

title: 沆溉


text:
left nullspace

Noun

 * 1)  The vector space of all row vectors whose dot products with the columns of a given matrix are zero; the nullspace of the transpose of a given matrix.

title: left nullspace


text: hàngxiè

title: hàngxiè


text: hàngxièyīqì

title: hàngxièyīqì


text: yīqì

title: yīqì


text: jūnxiè

title: jūnxiè


text: xīngchén

title: xīngchén


text:
מברשת גילוח

Noun

 * 1) shaving brush

title: מברשת גילוח


text:
鞋腳

Noun

 * 1)  shoe

title: 鞋腳


text: 鞋脚

title: 鞋脚


text:
災變

Noun

 * 1)  natural disaster

title: 災變


text: 灾变

title: 灾变


text: zāibiàn

title: zāibiàn


text: User:Benwing2/TemplateData start

title: User:Benwing2/TemplateData start


text: User:Benwing2/TemplateData end

title: User:Benwing2/TemplateData end


text:
User:Benwing2/templatedatadoc

{	"params": { "1": {			"label": "language code", "example": "en", "type": "string", "required": true, "description": "language code for the term's language" },		"2": {			"label": "term", "description": "The term that this term is ", "example": "Judaeo-Spanish", "type": "wiki-page-name", "required": true },		"3": {			"label": "displayed text", "description": "text to display for the linked term", "type": "line" },		"4": {			"label": "gloss", "description": "a gloss of the term", "type": "string" },		"tr": { "label": "transliteration", "description": "a transliteration of the term", "type": "string" },		"sc": { "label": "script code", "description": "A script code for the term", "example": "Hant", "type": "string" },		"from": { "label": "dialect/region of origin", "description": "Names a dialect or region from which the term originates. Parameters from2, from3, etc. also available.", "example": "Southern US", "type": "string" },		"from2": { "label": "dialect/region of origin 2", "description": "Names a dialect or region from which the term originates. Parameters from3, etc. also available.", "example": "Taiwanese Hokkien", "type": "string" }	},	"description": "Indicates that a term is another term", "format": "inline" }

title: User:Benwing2/templatedatadoc


text:
災星

Noun

 * 1)  astronomical sign of impending doom
 * 2)  person or thing that brings disaster

title: 災星


text: 灾星

title: 灾星


text: zāixīng

title: zāixīng


text:
倒把

Verb

 * 1) to resell for a windfall profit; to profiteer; to speculate

title: 倒把


text: dǎobǎ

title: dǎobǎ


text:
廬舍

Noun

 * 1)  rudimentary lodgings

title: 廬舍


text: 庐舍

title: 庐舍


text: lúshè

title: lúshè


text: Xiāngshān

title: Xiāngshān


text: guǎnxiàn

title: guǎnxiàn


text: jiànrù

title: jiànrù


text: yòuqīng

title: yòuqīng


text: zuǒqīng

title: zuǒqīng


text: yìngzhēng

title: yìngzhēng


text: xīngtuán

title: xīngtuán


text: lǚchéng

title: lǚchéng


text: lìchéng

title: lìchéng


text: liùjiǎ

title: liùjiǎ


text: tiàojǐng

title: tiàojǐng


text: tóujǐng

title: tóujǐng


text: táojīnrè

title: táojīnrè


text: tóutou

title: tóutou


text: tóutóu

title: tóutóu


text:
broust-barv

Noun

 * 1) shaving brush

title: broust-barv


text:
準媽媽

Noun

 * 1) mother-to-be

title: 準媽媽


text: Kūnlún

title: Kūnlún


text: 准妈妈

title: 准妈妈


text: yāomèi

title: yāomèi


text: yánkòng

title: yánkòng


text:
scheerkwast

Etymology
Compound of.

Noun

 * 1) shaving brush

title: scheerkwast


text: qiánqù

title: qiánqù


text:
舞痴

Noun

 * 1)  fan of dance

title: 舞痴


text: wǔchī

title: wǔchī


text: scheerkwasten

title: scheerkwasten


text: shuàixiān

title: shuàixiān


text: jǔyì

title: jǔyì


text: scheerkwastje

title: scheerkwastje


text: scheerkwastjes

title: scheerkwastjes


text:
首義

Verb

 * 1)  to reveal the main idea
 * 2)  to be the first to stage an uprising

title: 首義


text: 首义

title: 首义


text: yìjǔ

title: yìjǔ


text: yìqù

title: yìqù


text:
pennello da barba

Noun

 * 1) shaving brush

title: pennello da barba


text:
興會

Noun

 * 1)  inspiration to do something; mood to enjoy; spirits

title: 興會


text: 兴会

title: 兴会


text: pennelli da barba

title: pennelli da barba


text:
守貞

Verb

 * 1)  to remain unmarried after the death of her husband or betrothed

title: 守貞


text: shǒujié

title: shǒujié


text: 守贞

title: 守贞


text: shǒuzhēn

title: shǒuzhēn


text:
守義

Verb

 * 1)  to remain unmarried after the death of her husband or betrothed
 * 2)  to uphold morality and justice

title: 守義


text: 守义

title: 守义


text: chǒujiàn

title: chǒujiàn


text: jìnmò

title: jìnmò


text: róucuō

title: róucuō


text:
Citations:godsdamn

 * 2001, China Miéville, Perdido Street Station (ISBN 0345443020), page 560:
 * “The godsdamn Weaver melted the construct . . .”

title: Citations:godsdamn


text:
虛職

Noun

 * 1) nominal post

title: 虛職


text:
實職

Noun

 * 1) active post

title: 實職


text: 虚职

title: 虚职


text: 实职

title: 实职


text: 呷呷

title: 呷呷


text:
gāgā

Etymology
, probably.

Noun

 * 1) crow

title: gāgā


text: gága

title: gága


text:
蛇哥

Noun

 * 1)  snake

title: 蛇哥


text: xīnxiàn

title: xīnxiàn


text:
tıraş fırçası

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) shaving brush

title: tıraş fırçası


text: zhēnghòu

title: zhēnghòu


text: 蛇兒

title: 蛇兒


text: tuōbì

title: tuōbì


text: 蛇儿

title: 蛇儿


text:
Reconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šabʕ-

Etymology
Ultimately from. Compare with 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬 (whence 🇨🇬). It is often theorized to be the source for.

Numeral

 * 1) seven

Usage notes
This number exhibited chiastic concord (gender polarity), in which masculine forms were used to agree with feminine nouns, and feminine forms with masculine nouns.

Descendants

 * East Semitic:
 * West Semitic:
 * Central Semitic:
 * Northwest Semitic:
 * Canaanite:
 * Ethiopian Semitic:
 * Canaanite:
 * Ethiopian Semitic:
 * Canaanite:
 * Ethiopian Semitic:
 * Ethiopian Semitic:
 * Ethiopian Semitic:
 * Ethiopian Semitic:
 * Ethiopian Semitic:
 * Ethiopian Semitic:

title: Reconstruction:Proto-Semitic/šabʕ-


text: chóngyǎn

title: chóngyǎn


text:
rakborste

Noun

 * 1) shaving brush

title: rakborste


text:
figyelemre méltó

Adjective

 * 1) remarkable

Declension

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

title: figyelemre méltó


text: Category:ar:Verbs

title: Category:ar:Verbs


text:
裁人

Verb

 * 1) to make employees redundant; to downsize; to cut staff; to lay off employees

title: 裁人


text: cáirén

title: cáirén


text:
figyelemre méltóbb

Declension

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

title: figyelemre méltóbb


text: legdicséretreméltóbb

title: legdicséretreméltóbb


text:
Argonautical

Adjective

 * 1) Of or pertaining to the Argonauts.

title: Argonautical


text: legfigyelemreméltóbb

title: legfigyelemreméltóbb


text: fángqián

title: fángqián


text: fángfèi

title: fángfèi


text: Thesaurus:房租

title: Thesaurus:房租


text: huìjù

title: huìjù


text: 敎皇

title: 敎皇


text: Thesaurus:聚集

title: Thesaurus:聚集


text:
룡

Noun

 * 1)  dragon

Etymology 2
Korean reading of various Chinese characters.

Usage notes
In South Korea, the hanja above are read as when used as a single word or as the first syllable of a Sino-Korean compound. However, the reading is retained when the hanja is not part of the first syllable of a Sino-Korean compound. This is known as.

title: 룡


text:
امية

Etymology
From.

Numeral

 * 1) a hundred, one hundred

Adjective

 * 1) hundredth

title: امية


text: 南港

title: 南港


text: 渺视

title: 渺视


text:
渺視

Verb

 * 1) to not attach importance to; to look down on; to think little of; to despise

title: 渺視


text:
睇小

Verb

 * 1)  to look down on

title: 睇小


text: zhùwū

title: zhùwū


text: gāomàn

title: gāomàn


text: jiāohèng

title: jiāohèng


text: jiāozòng

title: jiāozòng


text: Thesaurus:傲慢

title: Thesaurus:傲慢


text: zìmǎn

title: zìmǎn


text:
زودپز

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) pressure cooker
 * 2) microwave oven

title: زودپز


text:
דרום אמריקני

Adjective

 * 1) South American: of or pertaining to South America.

title: דרום אמריקני


text:
צפון אמריקני

Adjective

 * 1) North American: of or pertaining to North America.

title: צפון אמריקני


text:
Template:form of/fulldoc

BEGIN SAMPLE OUTPUT OF TEMPLATE:

END SAMPLE OUTPUT OF TEMPLATE

title: Template:form of/fulldoc


text:
hallway medicine

Noun

 * 1)  A state of affairs in which patients are assigned to and treated in beds or gurneys located in hospital hallways due to a shortage of hospital rooms.

title: hallway medicine


text: buying it

title: buying it


text: hallway health care

title: hallway health care


text: hallway hospitalization

title: hallway hospitalization


text:
Template:archaic form of/documentation

Note: if you wish to enter inflection(s) as parameter(s), please use instead.

title: Template:archaic form of/documentation


text:
upglance

Noun

 * 1) An upwards glance.

Verb

 * 1)  To glance upwards.

title: upglance


text: upglances

title: upglances


text: upglancing

title: upglancing


text: upglanced

title: upglanced


text: hallway healthcare

title: hallway healthcare


text:
大発作

Noun

 * 1) grand mal (seizure)

title: 大発作


text:
valorless

Adjective

 * 1) Without valor.

title: valorless


text: valourless

title: valourless


text:
submessage

Noun

 * 1)  A message that makes up part of another message.

title: submessage


text:
準爸爸

Noun

 * 1) father-to-be

title: 準爸爸


text: submessages

title: submessages


text: 准爸爸

title: 准爸爸


text: 沙文猪

title: 沙文猪


text:
tremer as bases

Verb

 * 1)  to act apprehensively

title: tremer as bases


text:
沙文豬

Noun

 * 1)  chauvinist pig

title: 沙文豬


text:
Rincon Hill

Proper noun

 * 1) ; where the headquarters of Google is located.

title: Rincon Hill


text:
East Cut

Etymology
Coined in 2015, by the neighborhood improvement organization of Rincon Hill, and since used by Google Maps, and local street signs.

title: East Cut


text: Russian Hill

title: Russian Hill


text:
Telegraph Hill

Etymology
. From once hosting a telegraph station upon the hill.

Proper noun

 * 1) A placename.

title: Telegraph Hill


text:
umjaho

Etymology
From. Cognate with 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) race

title: umjaho


text: 偶們

title: 偶們


text: 偶们

title: 偶们


text: מעהל

title: מעהל


text:
nechat ve štychu

Etymology
.

Verb

 * 1) to leave in the lurch to abandon and leave in a difficult situation

title: nechat ve štychu


text:
אינפֿעקציע

Noun

 * 1) infection

title: אינפֿעקציע


text:
Republic of Indian Stream

Proper noun

 * 1)  A former unrecognized country that existed from 1832 to 1835, now part of New Hampshire.

title: Republic of Indian Stream


text:
פֿילאַנטראָפּיע

Noun

 * 1) philanthropy

title: פֿילאַנטראָפּיע


text: Indian Stream Republic

title: Indian Stream Republic


text:
אָנקאָלאָגיע

Noun

 * 1)  oncology

title: אָנקאָלאָגיע


text:
Indian Stream

Proper noun

 * , some 20 miles (30km) long, located in New Hampshire
 * , some 20 miles (30km) long, located in New Hampshire

title: Indian Stream


text:
אָפֿטאַלמאָלאָגיע

Noun

 * 1)  ophthalmology

title: אָפֿטאַלמאָלאָגיע


text:
nechat na holičkách

Verb

 * 1) to leave in the lurch

title: nechat na holičkách


text:
Citations:North Macedonia

northern Macedonia

 * 1885, The Economist, page 1194:
 * Bulgaria claims at least half Macedonia, Greece maintains her right to the whole of that province, Montenegro insists on extension in Albania, and Servia claims immediately part of North Macedonia.
 * 1970, The foreign and Yugoslav historiography of Macedonia and the Macedonian people (Institut za nacionalna istorija (Skopje, Macedonia)),
 * page 39: Then in North Macedonia the Peasants' Uprising of 1689 — 1690 broke out, the Macedonian Karpos being at its head.
 * page 68: [...] speaking about the Greek schools in North Macedonia, during the last century, while Macedonia was still part of the Turkish Empire, [...]

the site of Skopje or places now in the FYROM

 * 1930, International Press Correspondence, volume 10, page 117:
 * On the 28th January there commenced the trial of 15 national revolutionary and Communist Macedonians from Kumanovo (North Macedonia).
 * 1970, Balkan Studies: Biannual Publication of the Institute for Balkan Studies, page 130:
 * After Murad's expedition to Albania Çaus Bey must have settled in Monastir (Bitola) in North Macedonia. In H. 838 (A.D. 1433-1434) he built there a great mosque which existed into our times.
 * 1975, Ivan Venedikov, Todor Dimitrov Gerasimov, Thracian art treasures, page 16:
 * The name Dardani, given to the people living along the banks of the River Vardar around Skopje in North Macedonia, is given in The Iliad to the Trojans.
 * 2009, Demetrius Kiminas, The Ecumenical Patriarchate, page 219:
 * ... Greece 1928 (New Lands) Skiathos and Skopelos, Diocese Larissa, North Aegean Sea, Greece 1833 de facto, 1850 canon
 * Skopia (Skopje), North Macedonia, Serbia 1920

FYROM

 * 2002 October 10, "tommy" (username), Macedonian S&L Proves FYROMians WRONG, in, Usenet:
 * Prove it that it wasn't a Greek club. And yes Tito was the first to say FYROmians were not Bulgarians living in North Macedonia, but a new ethnic group.

 * 2019 February 24, track...@yahoo.com.au, Re: Towards a 'Greater' Albania... in Six Parts,, Usenet:
 * A little off topic perhaps (though there is a substantial Albanian minority in "North Macedonia") likely central to the USA/NWO agitation there re the real (Greek) Macedonia....

mentions, but early attestations of the name for the FYROM

 * 1993, Alan F. Fogelquist Handbook of Facts on: The Break-up of Yugoslavia, International Policy, and the War in Bosnia-Hercegovina, Volume 1, page 25:
 * Since that time the Macedonians have offered to sign a treaty renouncing all claims to Greek territory and to rename the country New Macedonia or North Macedonia, but the Greek government continues to block Macedonian recognition by the European community.
 * 2009, Egbert Jahn, Nationalism in Late and Post-Communist Europe, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft Mbh & Company (ISBN 9783832939694):
 * ... which were regarded as being discriminatory, and which were based on terms used by the Greeks at the time, such as The Republic of Skopje, North Macedonia or the abbreviation FYROM, introduced internationally by Greece in 1993.

title: Citations:North Macedonia


text: ενότητας

title: ενότητας


text: ενοτήτων

title: ενοτήτων


text: ενότητες

title: ενότητες


text: ενοχής

title: ενοχής


text: ενοχών

title: ενοχών


text: hoyse

title: hoyse


text: ενοχές

title: ενοχές


text: ενοχλητικότητας

title: ενοχλητικότητας


text: ενοχλητικοτήτων

title: ενοχλητικοτήτων


text: ενοχλητικότητες

title: ενοχλητικότητες


text: ενόχου

title: ενόχου


text: ένοχο

title: ένοχο


text: ένοχε

title: ένοχε


text: ένοχοι

title: ένοχοι


text: ενόχους

title: ενόχους


text: ενόχων

title: ενόχων


text: ένοχου

title: ένοχου


text: ένοχη

title: ένοχη


text: ένοχης

title: ένοχης


text: ένοχους

title: ένοχους


text:
unáhlit

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1)  to rush, be hasty, be rash

title: unáhlit


text: ένοχων

title: ένοχων


text: hosun

title: hosun


text: hosone

title: hosone


text: hosyn

title: hosyn


text: ένοχες

title: ένοχες


text: ένοχα

title: ένοχα


text:
ukvapit

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1)  to rush, be hasty, be rash

title: ukvapit


text:
hosynge

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)   garments for the leg

title: hosynge


text: hoseing

title: hoseing


text: hosiinge

title: hosiinge


text: hosiynge

title: hosiynge


text: hosyng

title: hosyng


text: hosinge

title: hosinge


text:
Free State of Jones

Etymology
. From, the heart of the area in rebellion against the CSA.

Proper noun

 * 1)  An unrecognized country that existed from 1863 to 1865, when Jones County, Covington County, Bainbridge County and portions of others, of the state of Mississippi, seceded from the Confederate States of America, and attempted to ally with the Union.

title: Free State of Jones


text:
hosyer

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)  maker of hose

title: hosyer


text:
scissor bite

Etymology
. From the teeth positioning overlapping like scissors, between the outward upper teeth and the inward lower teeth.

Noun

 * 1) A slight overbite.

Related terms

 * where upper teeth and lower teeth meet on edge instead of having an overbite or underbite

title: scissor bite


text: hoseȝere

title: hoseȝere


text: hosiare

title: hosiare


text:
ανασκόπηση

Etymology
Learnedly from, a and.

Noun

 * 1) review, survey

title: ανασκόπηση


text: hoseare

title: hoseare


text: hosyrer

title: hosyrer


text: ανασκόπησης

title: ανασκόπησης


text: hosuar

title: hosuar


text: ανασκοπήσεως

title: ανασκοπήσεως


text: scissors bite

title: scissors bite


text: hosyere

title: hosyere


text: hosior

title: hosior


text: ανασκοπήσεων

title: ανασκοπήσεων


text: ανασκοπήσεις

title: ανασκοπήσεις


text: hosyers

title: hosyers


text:
ανασκοπώ

Verb

 * 1) to survey, review, go over, scrutinise, scrutinize

title: ανασκοπώ


text: ανασκοπούμαι

title: ανασκοπούμαι


text: ανασκοπήθηκα

title: ανασκοπήθηκα


text: ανασκόπησα

title: ανασκόπησα


text: necrozoospermia

title: necrozoospermia


text:
neuroconnectivity

Noun

 * 1) neural connectivity

title: neuroconnectivity


text:
neurodifferentiate

Verb

 * 1) To undergo neurodifferentiation

title: neurodifferentiate


text:
neurodifferentiated

Adjective

 * 1) Modified by neurodifferentiation

title: neurodifferentiated


text:
neuroelasticity

Noun

 * 1) reversible neuroplasticity

title: neuroelasticity


text:
neuroelectrophysiology

Noun

 * 1) The electrophysiology of neurons

Related terms

 * neuroelectrophysiological

title: neuroelectrophysiology


text: gird one's loins

title: gird one's loins


text:
neuroinduction

Noun

 * 1) neural induction - a state somewhere between suggestion and hypnosis

Related terms

 * neuroinducer
 * neuroinductive

title: neuroinduction


text: neurosome

title: neurosome


text: neurosomes

title: neurosomes


text:
neurospherical

Adjective

 * 1) Relating to a neurosphere

title: neurospherical


text:
nonautocorrelated

Adjective

 * 1) Not autocorrelated

title: nonautocorrelated


text:
nonbulky

Adjective

 * 1) Not bulky

title: nonbulky


text:
nonlepidopteran

Adjective

 * 1) Not lepidopteran

title: nonlepidopteran


text:
nonlocomotive

Adjective

 * 1) Not locomotive

title: nonlocomotive


text:
nonlysogenic

Adjective

 * 1) Not lysogenic

title: nonlysogenic


text:
囡仔人

Noun

 * 1)  child; kid

title: 囡仔人


text:
nonprotonated

Adjective

 * 1) Not protonated

title: nonprotonated


text: توکیو

title: توکیو


text:
nonsonorant

Noun

 * 1) A speech sound that is not a sonorant

title: nonsonorant


text: nonsonorants

title: nonsonorants


text:
nucleotropic

Adjective

 * 1) That migrates towards the nucleus of a cell

title: nucleotropic


text: wàngzìzūndà

title: wàngzìzūndà


text: guānhuǒ

title: guānhuǒ


text: kāihuǒ

title: kāihuǒ


text: duòjiāo

title: duòjiāo


text: yùféi

title: yùféi


text:
taphose

Etymology
From and a second element, possibly.

Noun

 * 1)  A sieve placed over a spout of a container holding mash.

title: taphose


text: féiyù

title: féiyù


text: cuīféi

title: cuīféi


text: taphosen

title: taphosen


text: tappehose

title: tappehose


text: thaphose

title: thaphose


text:
ανασπάζομαι

Verb

 * 1)  to kiss, touch with the lips

title: ανασπάζομαι


text:
記認

Verb

 * 1) to identify; to recognize

Noun

 * 1)  mark; sign; note; notation; indication

title: 記認


text: 记认

title: 记认


text:
po mém soudu

Phrase

 * 1) in my view, in my opinion, I think

title: po mém soudu


text: ανασπάστηκα

title: ανασπάστηκα


text:
半獎

Noun

 * 1) half scholarship; partial scholarship

title: 半獎


text: 半奖

title: 半奖


text: bànjiǎng

title: bànjiǎng


text:
vaḍḍhana

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) augmentation, enlargement, extension, prolongation
 * 2) growth, increase, development
 * 3) upbringing, fostering

title: vaḍḍhana


text:
วัฒนะ

Etymology
From. .

Noun

 * 1) development, progress

title: วัฒนะ


text: Category:Naro language

title: Category:Naro language


text:
វឌ្ឍន

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) progress, development, growth, prosperity

Verb

 * 1) to advance, to develop, to make progress

Adjective

 * 1) to be advanced, developed

title: វឌ្ឍន


text: haase

title: haase


text: hayse

title: hayse


text: hoorse

title: hoorse


text:
वर्धन

Etymology
.

Adjective

 * 1) strengthening
 * 2) gladdening, exhilarating
 * 3) thriving, prosperous
 * 4) causing to increase
 * 5) granting prosperity

Noun

 * 1) growth
 * 2) prosperity
 * 3) success
 * 4) promotion, act of increasing or strengthening
 * 5) surcharge, extra charge

Noun

 * 1) upgrading
 * 2) amelioration, betterment, improvement
 * 3) extension, prolonging
 * 4)  increment

title: वर्धन


text:
hosely

Etymology
From.

Adverb

 * 1) Hoarsely; in a harsh-sounding way.
 * 2) In an unclear-sounding or hard to detect way.

title: hosely


text: hosliche

title: hosliche


text: horselie

title: horselie


text:
hosnesse

Etymology
From ; equivalent to.

Noun

 * 1) The quality of being hoarse.

title: hosnesse


text: hosnes

title: hosnes


text: hosenes

title: hosenes


text: hosenez

title: hosenez


text: hosenesse

title: hosenesse


text: hoocenesse

title: hoocenesse


text: hoosness

title: hoosness


text: hoosnesse

title: hoosnesse


text: hoosenez

title: hoosenez


text: hasenes

title: hasenes


text: hasenesse

title: hasenesse


text: horsenes

title: horsenes


text: horsenesse

title: horsenesse


text: hoorsnesse

title: hoorsnesse


text:
床包

Noun

 * 1)  bottom sheet

title: 床包


text:
當槍使

Phrase

 * 1)  to use (someone); to exploit (someone)

title: 當槍使


text: 当枪使

title: 当枪使


text:
大行皇帝

Noun

 * 1)  the departed emperor; the emperor who had just died

Descendants
Others:

title: 大行皇帝


text:
天可汗

Proper noun

 * 1)  Khan of Heaven

title: 天可汗


text: housil

title: housil


text: housyl

title: housyl


text: housyll

title: housyll


text: housul

title: housul


text: husell

title: husell


text: hosil

title: hosil


text: hosill

title: hosill


text: hosol

title: hosol


text: howsel

title: howsel


text:
howsell

Etymology 1
From.

Etymology 2
From.

title: howsell


text: howsill

title: howsill


text: hoosyl

title: hoosyl


text:
posthumous name

Noun

 * 1) One of the honorary titles given to royalty, nobles, and sometimes others in East Asia China, Korea, Vietnam, and Japan after the person's death.

Translations

 * Arabic:
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: 謚號,, ,
 * Finnish: kuolemanjälkeinen nimi, postuumi nimi
 * French: nom posthume
 * Japanese: ,
 * Korean:
 * Russian: посмертный титул
 * Spanish: nombre póstumo
 * Vietnamese:, hiệu bụt, ,

title: posthumous name


text:
houselen

Etymology
From, from ; equivalent to.

Verb

 * 1) To administer or give the Eucharist to.
 * 2) To participate in the Eucharist.

title: houselen


text: huslenn

title: huslenn


text: howselen

title: howselen


text: hoselyn

title: hoselyn


text: hoslen

title: hoslen


text: hoseli

title: hoseli


text: houseli

title: houseli


text: hously

title: hously


text: hosele

title: hosele


text: howsle

title: howsle


text: howsyll

title: howsyll


text:
houselynge

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) The giving or taking of the Eucharist.
 * 2)  The Eucharist.

title: houselynge


text: howseling

title: howseling


text: howselynge

title: howselynge


text: hoselyng

title: hoselyng


text: hoselynge

title: hoselynge


text: houslyng

title: houslyng


text: howselyng

title: howselyng


text:
oceanicity

Noun

 * 1)  The condition or degree of being oceanic.

title: oceanicity


text:
oligomannosaccharide

Noun

 * 1)  An oligosaccharide based on mannose groups

title: oligomannosaccharide


text: oligomannosaccharides

title: oligomannosaccharides


text:
oligoprecursor

Noun

 * 1) An oligodendrocyte precursor or progenitor cell

title: oligoprecursor


text: oligoprecursors

title: oligoprecursors


text:
opportunitroph

Noun

 * 1)  An opportunistic feeder

title: opportunitroph


text: opportunitrophs

title: opportunitrophs


text:
orthosterism

Noun

 * 1)  The condition of being orthosteric

title: orthosterism


text:
osmomechanical

Adjective

 * 1) Describing a mechanical action or force caused by osmotic pressure

title: osmomechanical


text: tappes

title: tappes


text:
oxepinone

Noun

 * 1)  Any ketone derived from oxepine

title: oxepinone


text: oxepinones

title: oxepinones


text:
opiumschuiver

Etymology
Compound of.

Noun

 * 1)  An opium smoker.

title: opiumschuiver


text: opiumschuivers

title: opiumschuivers


text: tappyn

title: tappyn


text:
vice chairperson

Noun

 * 1) A person who takes on the responsibilities of a chairperson in their absence; vice chair

Translations

 * Esperanto: vicprezidanto
 * Portuguese:

title: vice chairperson


text: befled

title: befled


text: befleeing

title: befleeing


text: opiaten

title: opiaten


text: sāngēngbànyè

title: sāngēngbànyè


text:
erikoissiirto

Noun

 * 1) special move

title: erikoissiirto


text:
kaksoishyökkäys

Noun

 * 1) double attack, dual attack

title: kaksoishyökkäys


text:
kaksoissotilas

Noun

 * 1)  doubled pawn

title: kaksoissotilas


text:
kehitysetu

Noun

 * 1) development advantage

title: kehitysetu


text:
kuningasgambiitti

Noun

 * 1)  king's gambit

title: kuningasgambiitti


text:
kuningashyökkäys

Noun

 * 1)  king hunt

title: kuningashyökkäys


text:
laita-avaus

Noun

 * 1)  flank opening

title: laita-avaus


text:
materiaalietu

Noun

 * 1) material advantage

title: materiaalietu


text:
pakkosiirto

Noun

 * 1) forced displacement, forced immigration
 * 2) forced move

title: pakkosiirto


text:
pakoruutu

Noun

 * 1)  flight square

title: pakoruutu


text:
pussimatti

Noun

 * 1)  smothered mate

title: pussimatti


text:
shakkitermi

Noun

 * 1) chess term

title: shakkitermi


text:
sommitelma

Noun

 * 1) arrangement, composition
 * 2)  combination

title: sommitelma


text:
tilaetu

Noun

 * 1) spatial advantage

title: tilaetu


text:
vapaasotilas

Noun

 * 1)  passed pawn

title: vapaasotilas


text:
vastapeli

Noun

 * 1) counterplay

title: vastapeli


text:
viistorivi

Noun

 * 1) diagonal, diagonal line

title: viistorivi


text:
vähemmistöhyökkäys

Noun

 * 1)  minority attack

title: vähemmistöhyökkäys


text:
välisiirto

Noun

 * 1)  zwischenzug

title: välisiirto


text: šakkitermi

title: šakkitermi


text: Template:form of/introdoc

title: Template:form of/introdoc


text:
palatopharynx

Noun

 * 1)  The palate and pharynx considered as a unit

Related terms

 * palatopharyngeal

title: palatopharynx


text:
muinaisjäännös

Noun

 * 1) relic, artifact

title: muinaisjäännös


text:
jääharkko

Noun

 * 1) block of ice

title: jääharkko


text:
پسهٔ

Noun

 * 1) sheep

title: پسهٔ


text:
alihankinta

Noun

 * 1) subcontracting

title: alihankinta


text:
kokonaiskapasiteetti

Noun

 * 1) total capacity

title: kokonaiskapasiteetti


text:
tuotantokapasiteetti

Noun

 * 1) production capacity

title: tuotantokapasiteetti


text:
tuotantoketju

Noun

 * 1) production chain

title: tuotantoketju


text:
tuotantokustannus

Noun

 * 1) production cost

title: tuotantokustannus


text:
tuotantomäärä

Noun

 * 1) production quantity, production volume

title: tuotantomäärä


text:
tuotantoprosessi

Noun

 * 1) production process

title: tuotantoprosessi


text:
tuotantovolyymi

Noun

 * 1) production volume

title: tuotantovolyymi


text:
yksikkökustannus

Noun

 * 1) unit cost

title: yksikkökustannus


text:
artikulere

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to articulate

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to articulate

title: artikulere


text:
au large

Adverb

 * 1) offshore, out to sea

title: au large


text:
au large de

Preposition

 * 1) off the coast of

title: au large de


text:
oorlogsschatting

Etymology
Compound of.

Noun

 * 1) A tribute or reparations imposed on the loser of a war or battle.

title: oorlogsschatting


text: oorlogsschattingen

title: oorlogsschattingen


text: stablecoins

title: stablecoins


text: artikuleres

title: artikuleres


text: Template:table:shogi pieces

title: Template:table:shogi pieces


text:
Template:U:hu:with-without-ik

This verb is a member of one of those (few) quasi-homonymous verb pairs that exist both with and without an ending. All (intransitive) suffixed forms of these pairs are identical (sometimes they can even have derived forms that coincide), with the exception of their dictionary form (the third-person singular indicative present, with or without ). However, the meaning of these pairs is usually distinct, sometimes unrelated. Examples include –, –, –, –, –, –, –, –, –~, and – (along with their verbal prefixes), –, –, sometimes with some difference: –, –. Therefore one may well need to check the context and the arguments to ascertain which member of the verb pair is relevant.

title: Template:U:hu:with-without-ik


text:
میاشت

Noun

 * 1)  mouth

title: میاشت


text: artikulerer

title: artikulerer


text: artikulerte

title: artikulerte


text: artikulert

title: artikulert


text: artikulerende

title: artikulerende


text: artikuler

title: artikuler