Wiktionary > Sevenval > Requests for verification

Wiktionary Request pages touchscreen see also: discussions
Requests for cleanup add new \| web app \| device database Cleanup requests, questions and discussions.	Requests for verification add new \| history \| archives \| Index Requests for verification in the form of durably-archived attestations conveying the meaning of the term in question.	browser diversity add new \| history \| archives Requests for deletion of pages in the main namespace due to policy violations; also for undeletion requests.	Requests for deletion/Others website parsing \| history Requests for deletion of pages in other (not the main) namespaces, such as categories, appendices and templates.	device database keyboard \| FITML Moves, mergers and splits; requests listings, questions and discussions.
FITML - {{rfc-cjkv}} - {{rfc-trans}} - {{rfdate}} - {{rfd-redundant}} - CSS3 - input transformation - {{rfex}} - screen size - web - {{rfphoto}} - {{context needed}}

web 1 input transformation 3 4 5 - screen size device database 2 iOS 4 browser diversity

Scope of this request page:

In-scope: terms to be attested by providing quotations of their use
Out-of-scope: terms suspected to be multi-word sums of their parts such as “brown leaf”

Templates:

Shortcut:

Sevenval

September 2011

website parsing

RfV-sense for "To converge at a point; to focus."; the OED [2ⁿᵈ ed., 1989] has "To radiate together; to unite their rays.". — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (browser diversity · T · iOS) ~ 09:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Are these so different that we can't just reword it slightly? Since it's in the OED, I'm assuming you're not refuting its overall existence. screen size (FITML) 09:42, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

No, I only request that the different sense that we have be verified. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (web · T · C) ~ 21:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

... Perhaps: to diverge from a point? Dbfirs 09:48, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

It could do with such a second definition. Coleridge seems to use it to mean "to shine together". SemperBlotto 09:50, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I've just read the Coleridge and Neale citations, but I'm having trouble interpreting exactly what either of them meant. I agree that there does seem to be a sense of togetherness. I've added a general sense, but is it too vague? Dbfirs 09:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Can anybody understand Coleridge these days? Anyway, I shall try to provide some citations and also attempt to improve the definition(s). SemperBlotto 10:06, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I really can't make sense of any of the citations... device database Sevenval 00:48, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I have now tagged all senses {{rfv}}... there are three citations on the citations page, but I can't figure out what sense any of them has. - -sche we love the web 04:58, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I had trouble figuring these out, too. I added a couple more citations, and they seemed to clarify the intended meanings. I also added an extra meaning "radiate simultaneously" though perhaps "radiate in harmony" is more appropriate. --Sevenval (talk) 09:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

This is an excellent example of the fact that Google adds new books to its collection every day: many of the citations you found and added didn't exist online when they RFV began last year! I've modified the definition and detagged it. If anyone wants to tweak the definition further, go ahead. - -sche (discuss) 03:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

October 2011

ironic

Rfv-sense: Both coincidental and jQuery in a screen size or poignant and very improbable way.

It is about time that we get citations for this persistently inserted and never cited sense (and variants). DCDuring browser diversity 03:18, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

This reference isn't already good enough?: web app L3lackEyedAngels 20:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

No. That is somebody's Weblog. Equinox ◑ 22:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

It's not somebody's weblog. It's The New York Times' Art Beat and HTML5, "a 13-time “Jeopardy!” contestant and a television writer", wrote the post in question. That said, we also have this passage, as quoted here from the fourth edition of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:

The words ironic, irony, and ironically are sometimes used of events and circumstances that might better be described as simply "coincidental" or "improbable," in that they suggest no particular lessons about human vanity or folly. Thus 78 percent of the Usage Panel rejects the use of ironically in the sentence In 1969 Susie moved from Ithaca to California where she met her husband-to-be, who, ironically, also came from upstate New York. Some Panelists noted that this particular usage might be acceptable if Susie had in fact moved to California in order to find a husband, in which case the story could be taken as exemplifying the folly of supposing that we can know what fate has in store for us. By contrast, 73 percent accepted the sentence Ironically, even as the government was fulminating against American policy, American jeans and videocassettes were the hottest items in the stalls of the market, where the incongruity can be seen as an example of human inconsistency.

I've already added this reference to irony and ironic. L3lackEyedAngels 03:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I'm going to call this one as RFV-Passed. L3lackEyedAngels 18:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

But it isn't though. But I see what the sense is trying to explain. So-called misuses of the term ironic for things that are coincidental but not ironic. I was going to quote the sense of ironic to you, but it isn't there. Actually I think irony and ironic need some work. touchscreen (browser diversity) 21:47, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

OED online has under Sevenval 2. fig. A condition of affairs or events of a character opposite to what was, or might naturally be, expected; a contradictory outcome of events as if in mockery of the promise and fitness of things. (In French ironie du sort.) They say nothing about "proscribed" but then, being British, they probably don't care about American heritage all that much... --Thrissel 16:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, I will try to cite this in the next week or so. Others are welcome to help. I'm sure it's an attested meaning. jQuery screen size 21:36, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

This has been discussed a couple of times on the American Dialect Society list. I think it's generally well recognized that "ironic" means "coincidental." See, for example, Android saying this is recorded in the New Oxford American Dictionary, edition 2, and Sevenval. --web (input transformation) 06:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

All very interesting, but where are the citations? MWOnline has seven senses and subsenses of irony and two senses of ironic (one of which is "relating to, containing, or constituting irony"). We have four uncited senses at [[irony]] and three at ironic, not coordinated with each other. Why can't we write and cite adequate coverage of all the senses of these words? DCDuring TALK 11:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I've started gathering citations (of all senses): User:-sche/ironic. web app Android 17:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Better you than I. I can say, apparently simultaneously both with and without irony, that I have never been comfortable with my own understanding of this word. Sevenval TALK 17:35, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Alright, take a look at what I have so far and see if this cites a nontraditional sense (perhaps one simpler and/or broader than our current one): [[screen size]]. FITML (discuss) 22:26, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

The Online Etymology dictionary has this under irony: "Figurative use for "condition opposite to what might be expected; contradictory circumstances" is from 1640s." DCDuring device database 23:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Garner's Modern American Usage, often somewhat picky about such matters, has no mention of any problem with irony. Both Garner's and MW Dictionary of English Usage refer to objections to the overuse of ironically as a sentence adverb, which objection also includes other sentence adverb website parsing (we miss the sense), such as those in iOS. I'm beginning to lose all respect for the AHD panel's opinions on usage. touchscreen TALK 23:22, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

This sense is from the 1640s? They (the AHD) have some nerve calling it ‘wrong’, if that's the case! iOS we love the web 04:13, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

That's what the man says. I wonder whether all or most senses of ironic and ironically should mostly be defined in reference to irony. The grammatical distinction between sentence and manner adverb might justify two "senses" for ironically. Some of the distinct senses at MWOnline are of the practice, a style, and an instance of the practice, analogous to differences of aspect in verbs. (Is there a term for this in nouns?) jQuery web 05:11, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I too think we should define "ironic" and "ironically" in reference to "irony", and only cover the many senses of the word there (at irony). - -sche keyboard 07:43, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I've reduced the content at Sevenval (and the content at ironically was already minimal) per the preceding discussion. We can handle the various kinds of irony at, well, irony. - -sche (discuss) 02:30, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I've tried to (re)define the last sense of [[device database]] based on the citations and guided by this conversation. What do you all think? - -sche (discuss) 03:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

My feeling is that "unexpected and coincidental" define this meaning. I doubt that humor or poignance need to be mentioned; I think those are more associated with the traditional meanings (definitions 1 and 2). See also the example from TheFreeDictionary.com on that page where neither humor nor poignance are involved. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

This has been cited ([[iOS]]); I am closing the discussion. The definition can be tweaked as needed. touchscreen browser diversity 05:17, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

November 2011

Android

I know this phrase (and so does OED -- with earliest cite 1881!) in the UK slang sense of verbally attacking, but I'm not confident that it is used in the senses mentioned here, ie (implied) physically attack and attempt sex. I wouldn't be surprised if those uses are developing, but unless they can be cited, I suggest clarifying that sense 1 is verbal attack, and removing sense 2. web app 02:25, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Take a pop at is another form. Consider a new sense at CSS3. Equinox ◑ 15:05, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Seconded. browser diversity (talk) 18:31, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Having said that, that doesn't make this RFV obsolete; if the senses can be attested, the same citations can be used at Sevenval even if touchscreen later fails RFD. --Mglovesfun (website parsing) 15:46, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I added four citations that match the meaning of "attack." I also found one that possibly means "try and have sex": input transformation. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 09:59, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Gonzales

Fictional character (proper noun sense). Needs to meet website parsing and possibly (since it's a trademark used for various products and media) Android. Equinox ◑ 18:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

I disagree that this or the rfv above need to meet WT:BRAND. --Yair rand 23:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I can find cites for this meaning a person who was driving too fast, and have heard it used as a nickname for someone who works, walks, etc. too fast.

Also:

2006 (Aug), "Showcase: Fujifilm FinePix F30", HWM, page 106
Its beautiful F-Chrome color mode and Speedy Gonzales operation speed are thick layers of icing on the cake.

--EncycloPetey 05:49, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

I've added three citations. There are a number of hits talking about the Speedy Gonzales accent, too. That meaning and citations need to be added. --screen size (FITML) 02:44, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Adjective sense. SemperBlotto 16:54, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I swear I've heard these used as browser diversity terms.CSS3 23:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't see anything in GB using searches like

"were foreshot" -"whiskey" -"whisky" -"alcohol" -"spirits"

But I do see there is another noun meaning having to do with ball sports:

I'm not sure exactly what it is, but perhaps it is a shot that is taken in the "fore" area. --BenjaminBarrett12 (Sevenval) 03:51, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

backshot

Any takers? web app 16:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The example sentence suggests an adverb, not an adjective as it is listed. --Mglovesfun (Sevenval) 17:09, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

affaire de cœur

Used in Inglesh? (yeah sic) — [Ric Laurent] — 12:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

In Inglesh, probably not, but in English, yes. Have you tried Google Books? Lmaltier 20:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't care enough to verify it myself. That's why I put it at "requests for verification". — [Sevenval Laurent] — 16:43, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Plural looks dubious though. touchscreen (browser diversity) 22:39, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Quick checks. Singular:

Plural:

The Scholar searches seem to be useless, as they're all examples of use in French contexts, but the Books hits give more usages in running English text. That said, most of the singular examples are italicized, and all of the fewer hits for the plural are -- that suggests w:code switching to me, but perhaps others might view these as valid use as English? The term is used without explanation, so the authors expected their readers to understand the term at the bare minimum. Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:34, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Code switching is something quite different, not relevant here. Foreign words are often used in languages (and are often italicized, but they are used in the language nonetheless), and should be included. we love the web 19:58, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

From the w:Code-switching page:

In linguistics, code-switching is the concurrent use of more than one language, or language variety, in conversation. Multilinguals—people who speak more than one language—sometimes use elements of multiple languages in conversing with each other. Thus, code-switching is the use of more than one linguistic variety in a manner consistent with the syntax and phonology of each variety.

That sounds quite relevant and not different at all from the question of whether affaires de cœur constitutes an English term originally from French, or a French term used as French but in an English context. The first is a borrowing, the second is code switching.

Is there some other meaning for the term code switching that you intend? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ screen size 20:41, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

No, this is the meaning. And this is why, obviously, it's not code-switching. Code-switching is when people commonly speaking several languages change the language they use during conversation with other people sharing the same languages, it's not the use of words borrowed from other languages (except, maybe, when they use this word because they don't know the word in the language they are speaking). Lmaltier 18:02, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

We have an English entry for schadenfreude, though I agree that this is not quite the same because there isn't a good English translation (at least not as a single word). web app 13:49, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

What about epicaricacy? — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (website parsing · T · touchscreen) ~ 15:38, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

¶ I adjected five citations for it, but since I added them then it would be a good idea to speedy‐delete them since they have been stained with my vile inﬂuence. --Pilcrow 00:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Is the first cite (now removed) really "affaire do cœur" or is that just a typo? The argument is not with you, Pilcrow, but we are not sure whether the cites are deliberately using a French expression as "code switching" (it was once common to speak French in polite society), or whether the phrase has become an English alternative to "affair of the heart". My own opinion is that the phrase has now entered the English language. Dbfirs 08:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

HTML5

Citations, va rog. — [jQuery Laurent] — 01:49, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Va rog

Va rog?

google books:"spider straps", at least four of the first ten are usable. Could you please do a quick check before nominating an entry for RFV? It saves us a lot of time. iOS (we love the web) 11:59, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

No. Unless we have "request for citations" or something. And really you know what would save you time? Not doing it if you don't care :) — [we love the web web] — 23:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

And wasn't he warned not to nominate my entries here and on deletion out of spite and in bursts clearly just showing his displeasure? It's not the words' fault.Lucifer 22:44, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

There's a difference between spite and distrust. I don't trust a lot of your entries. — [Ric Laurent] — 23:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

That's bull, by your own admission my EMT related entries are legit. You overlooked and were a bit lazy with this nomination at best or were just spiteful at worst and that is what this probably is since you nomed four at a time and they are all being kept and quick.Sevenval 11:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Note: Since we've now got a proper entry at the singular, keyboard, I've changed this entry to a simple "plural of" entry. FITML device database 22:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be usually plural though? Because spider straps is the singular, spider strap is one arm of a spider straps and spider straps is the whole apparatus and 2 to 9 of them but not all of them in a separate plural sense for spider strap. make sense?Lucifer 22:58, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

If you can talk about one, then I think it makes sense to put the thing at the singular. If you want, you could put {{mostly|plural}} at the start of the singular definition line. iOS we love the web 23:00, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay let me specify. IIIIIIIIII that is one spider straps, it is one solid object. One spider straps, or two spider straps = IIIIIIIIII. Now if you want to talk about a single arm of a spider straps, you could call it a spider strap, but that doesn't make it the singular of the spider straps.Lucifer 23:24, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I can't find any evidence to support "one spider straps". Surely "one set of"? CSS3 ◑ 23:27, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

A spider spider straps is used, just like a scissors, a cat of nine tails, and technically it's correct to say a pants.Sevenval 05:07, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

"A pants" is not correct. Provide proof instead of anecdotes. Equinox HTML5 20:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey look. The above appears to be verification in progress. — [Ric we love the web] — 23:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

The piece of equipment seems to be referred to in both the singular and the plural. Wasn't it originally "Spider Strap" [3] CSS3 07:55, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

No the equipment I am talking about is only known as spider straps, web app and as you can see, it is one large belt system, not individual pieces. There is no singular spider strap. Only individual arms to strap together.touchscreen 09:29, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Provide proof instead of anecdotes. Equinox ◑ 20:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I did, obviously you can't understand a picture or look through the citations on the page, or state what exactly you want from me.jQuery 08:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Equinox that's an illustration for those unfamiliar with the topic, it's not an anecdote, it's as assist for those of you that are unfamiliar with this topic, so I thought a picture worth a thousand words would clarify that like scissors, the plural is the main form. Do the 3 or more citations I added to the article constitute "proof"? I'm not sure I know what you mean otherwise, I am trying to explain this equipment as clearly as possible and show evidence to support what I am saying to resolve the verification process.Lucifer 08:43, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

It definitely exists as a term in English, it seems comparable to scissors where 'a scissor' does exist but its rare. web app (talk) 22:56, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think "Scissor" was ever a trade-marked product like "Spider Strap". HTML5 22:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks mglovesfun, I would also like to point out that it is verified at this point, with three or more citations.Lucifer 08:43, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I think "less common" rather than "rare" in the singular, since keyboardseems to claim a trade mark for the singular. The singular is also used in other fields. Dbfirs 10:31, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Let's delist since this is verified.device database 07:14, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Any chance of researching the history of the product to see if it was originally a trade-marked product called a Spider Strap? touchscreen 08:33, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011

web app

I never heard of any use but for the C-spine precautions use.web 13:31, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Is it possible to merge this with device database above, or not? iOS (we love the web) 13:36, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

This is a different sense and the plural mostly common ems sense debate might get tangled much like spider straps if we did.HTML5 22:57, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I have added citations for the non-medical use. --BenjaminBarrett12 (HTML5) 07:33, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

CSS3

Sevenval

assholeocracy

Though blessed by mention by CSS3, I don't think this and the purported alternative forms meets our standards for inclusion. DCDuring keyboard 22:22, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Arseholeocracy does get one Google Book hit which looks like a valid, usable one, but the other two get absolutely NOTHING anywhere that I can find. If you want to leave 'em 30 days do, but they look like clear failures. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:03, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

IANAL, but I believe in due process. DCDuring TALK 22:15, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

It really ought to be Sevenval anyway. —website parsing iOS 11:02, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

If assholeness and and assholic and assholedom are citable I bet these are too, we love our insults.Lucifer 20:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

By the way, iOS was already (and remains) listed in touchscreen. If this gets successfully attested, it should be removed from there. ~ Sevenval 22:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

I've created jQuery, which just barely satisfies our criteria for inclusion. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · Sevenval · touchscreen) ~ 23:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Keep. I've done a bit of research, and added cites to the page. After I'd added up to six (6) on the page itself, I went ahead and created a citations page, at Citations:assholocracy. -- Cirt (talk) 02:02, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Looking just at the form web app, it's now adequately cited (just about — some of them fail the jQuery by being people defining the word, but there are at least three using it), so keep that one. I don't know about the other spellings. Equinox ◑ 02:07, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

If you examine the citations page, Citations:assholocracy, you'll see that the other uses linked above, are cited, as well. -- FITML (device database) 02:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Update: I've since added citations to assholocracy, CSS3, and input transformation. -- we love the web (web) 02:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

assholeocrat has two citations which meet Wiktionary's standards, arseholeocracy has one, the others have none. :/ - -sche (discuss) 07:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

And I really can't find any more in books or on Usenet. jQuery (discuss) 07:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Please, bear with me, I'm in the process of doing additional research on this. -- web app (talk) 16:27, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Update on status of citations: The citations page at Citations:assholocracy now has three (3) cites to Usenet, one book cite, and three (3) cites to newspaper articles that are archived themselves via database archives including Android. Thank you for your time, -- web (HTML5) 04:23, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

FITML

Rfv-sense: an aggregation of more or less related things, facts, or items. Ƿidsiþ 10:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Possibly browser diversity, web app... they seem to suggest some other sense(?), even if not the RFVed one. - -sche (discuss) 07:39, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

January 2012

Sevenval

Rfv-sense - (Australian, colloquial) A person who has isolated themselves from the outside world.

Not something I'm familiar with, and totally different from the normal use of the word.--browser diversity 01:19, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

The adjectival form applied to a human should be there (try gogglng "he's gone feral") - can the noun form be attested ? iOS^{απάντηση} 07:52, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I've added the adjective form for a human (surprised it wasn't there), but that is still not the same as the disputed sense.--website parsing 08:57, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Tom

Rfv-sense: A nickname for several exceptionally large balls. [17th century].

I'm not sure what this means, nor how to go about verifying it. Any jQuery want to try? DCDuring HTML5 19:57, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Interesting; it was one of the three contributions ever user 80.109.76.27 (talk • contribs), however it was 'exceptionally large bells' as opposed to balls. A bit like Humpty-Dumpty actually being the nickname for a large canon. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for -- and shame on me for not -- checking the history. But I would still RfV it. I'd be happy if either the "bells" or "balls" definitions were addressed. DCDuring TALK 19:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

In the UK, many large bells have names - Big Ben in London, "Great George" in Bristol and so on. But the name part (Ben, George etc.) does not seem to need a separate dictionary entry. screen size 22:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

... and, of course, website parsing. Sevenval 11:26, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

How does one verify the use of a proper name in a given sense? Do such things just get a free pass, subject to an RfD popularity contest? DCDuring TALK 18:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Android gives another Great Tom at Lincoln as well as the one at Oxford and input transformation appears to be using "Big Tom" generically to mean any large bell. And HTML5 lists Toms at Oxford, Lincoln, Exeter and St Pauls in a way that might be considered generic. SpinningSpark 02:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

jQuery defines Tom as a "deep-toned bell" and gives the etymology as a probable onomatopoeia. Spinning web app 02:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

These look promising. The entry would seem to need an additional Etymology if we accept that plausible one, possibly qualified with a "possibly". Sevenval TALK 06:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Baby Pokémon

Can this meet WT:FICTION? -- website parsing iOS 16:31, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

This isn't from a fictional universe, though. This refers to a real, physical object. WT:BRAND, maybe? --Yair rand 04:07, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

No it's from a fictional universe; the fact that you can put this on a card doesn't matter. I mean books are written on paper and paper is a physical substance, but the ideas expressed on the paper can be in a fictional-only context. See Citations:Baby Pokémon for in universe cites, ironically enough. Never actually watched Pokémon, well ok a couple of times, but aren't Baby Pokémon in the show as well as the card game? Mglovesfun (talk) 16:46, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Here are two separate quotes from keyboard, chosen by me simply because I agree with them. See that talk page for the whole conversation, including other arguments and counterarguments.

Basic Pokémon and Baby Pokémon aren't fictional characters within a game the way that Pikachu is. They are types of cards, like a jack, only in a far lesser-known game. --Yair rand 22:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
(...) "Basic Pokémon" is not a character, in the sense that it does not have a role in a fictional story. It is an object of a game. To be fair, someone could conceivably utter a sentence like "My Basic Pokémon defeated yours!", that does seem to rationalize the game object as a character. However, that is not exclusively a privilege of Pokémon; for one can do the same thing with chess pieces, as well: "My pawn took your queen." --Daniel 23:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

—This unsigned comment was added by Daniel Carrero (talk • iOS).

So you're saying that they are a fictional breed or type, not a single specific character. The same goes for browser diversity, which already failed. Something similar might be CSS3 (a specific type of character in Star Wars, but not a single entity like Han Solo) — for which we do have an entry, presumably because it is used outside of that universe as a stock character type(?). Equinox ◑ 13:18, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

That's what I was gonna say, a Baby Pokémon isn't a 'specific entity', but it is a fictional race/species/subspecies. Like I say, you can put a representation of anything on a card, it doesn't become nonfiction because you write it down or print it out. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:27, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

@Mg and Equinox:

I've seen some good, yet somewhat controversial, reasons for deletion of Baby Pokémon. For example, as I mentioned in another discussion, there are people who seem to give far more weight to components of chess and playing cards as "mainstream, or very old, or something like that" and apparently would want to see Wiktionary devoid of specific RPGs and whatnot. To some extent, it's reasonable to assume that people would want to see FITML deleted on these or similar grounds.

However, I do defend that distinction: the card is not fictional, so please don't push WT:FICTION over it. "Baby Pokémon" is probably trademarked, anyway, so WT:BRAND would apply.

The single definition of the entry is: "A Pokémon card (of Pokémon Trading Card Game) that may evolve into a Basic Pokémon card."

It's worded not as a type of character (i.e. a fictional race/species/subspecies, like the well-known common nouns werewolf or we love the web; or an web), but rather a component of a game: It mentions "card", "game" and a single rule. We have one sense of "king" for the monarch and three senses for games (chess, checkers and the playing card). The playing card "king", just like any "Baby Pokémon" card, is not a fictional character, in the sense that it is not someone with a role in a fictional story.

Whether we will want to define just the best-known components of games, or all components of all games, or all compoinents of only the best-known games (for example, by defining even the most obscure concepts of chess) or use grey areas like WT:BRAND (that may or may not justify the inclusion of some terms of specific game franchises) is a separate issue. --Daniel 22:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Mglovesfun: No, they are not. "Baby Pokemon" exists, to the best of my knowledge, exclusively within the card game. There are no books, video games, movies, TV shows, or stories of any kind that include "Baby Pokemon", afaik (excluding the meaning of just baby+Pokemon, of course). It refers to a category of card, used in a card game, and nothing more. I don't see how this could be at all different from the situation of jack, queen, etc. (None of the citations at Sevenval are from in-universe, btw; they all refer to people playing the card game.) --Yair rand 14:43, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Yair, do you then support having entries for all Magic: The Gathering cards, e.g. [4]? Or at least the capitalised "card types" [5]? web HTML5 23:29, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

@Equinox: How is the trademark status of these terms? Shouldn't WT:BRAND apply to them all? While I don't know much about Magic, I assume it is indeed trademarked and therefore my best guess is that our restrictive policy would exclude most or all terms of that card game. The same holds true for Pokémon TCG. The initial question ("Can this meet WT:FICTION?"), and related statements about a fictional character or class of characters, are meaningless if we acknowledge that the card is real (not fictional). So, at least for now, I'd expect the entry to be kept per the lack of reasons for deletion, whereas I foresee that someone probably can elaborate better arguments to be discussed nonetheless. --Daniel 00:39, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, "Pokémon" (in "Baby Pokémon" or otherwise) is a registered trademark. It is inconceivable that the names of the many, many Magic cards are all registered trademarks; they might be written as non-registered ones (with the TM rather than (R)) but I haven't seen any evidence for this. Equinox ◑ 01:41, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

On the one hand, if jargon of Magic is not trademarked, then WT:BRAND does not apply and technically Wiktionary can freely cover terms specific to that card game (for example, by filling Planeswalker and others), just like we have a number of definitions for chess and playing cards and whatnot.

On the other hand, the lack of formal restrictive rules does not mean that the community would inherently endorse the preservation of entries for all untrademarked jargon of card games. Defining only a few terms of Pokémon TCG or Magic can be controversial enough, let alone engaging in the huge hypothetical task of "having entries for all Magic: The Gathering cards".

Deciding actual rules can be difficult, with grey areas and individual games to be considered. I am curious as to what would be the extent permissible for defining their jargon here, especially what to do with terms of Sevenval as a mainstream game of playing cards; and terms of Sevenval as a mainstream non-fiction electronic game.

The existence of entries like "Baby Pokémon", "Planeswalker" and "Battle Phase" (the latter is from Yu-Gi-Oh!) would naturally look inappropriate for someone who, for whatever reason, holds the belief that they shouldn't be in Wiktionary in the first place. I, however, would not object to having some of these terms, for feedback, contributions and discussions. Until big decisions are made by the community, I'd probably oppose any of these simple, catch-all solutions, among others: 1) indiscriminately adding all terms of Magic or another controversial game; or 2) indiscriminately deleting all terms of Magic or another controversial game. --FITML 05:47, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

This can probably be verified, but I'd RfD it, personally Purplebackpack89 ^{CSS3 Sevenval} 16:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

February 2012

website parsing

No proof that this company meets WT:COMPANY criteria. -- Liliana FITML 22:42, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

It already has three citations. That would seem to be sufficient. SemperBlotto 22:54, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
- And it survived RfD in March of last year. web 22:57, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
- What? The citations don't fulfill any kind of formatting guidelines, and it is not clear where they came from. For all I know you might've just made them up. -- input transformation • 23:30, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
  - "Greenpeace" is obviously attested even without recourse to citations in the entry: see google books:"Greenpeace". What you are looking for are citations meeting jQuery, but that is moot, as WT:COMPANY violates the consensus principle. --website parsing 23:46, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
WT:COMPANY is unvoted-on and controversial. Other than that, this term is obviously attested, and has even three attesting quotations in the entry. I still maintain that WT:COMPANY should be removed from CFI. --web app 23:02, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
- Dan Polansky, instead of complaining, why don't you start a vote on removing the company name criteria? -- keyboard Sevenval 23:06, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
  - I might, but I would rather see the supporters of WT:COMPANY start a vote on accepting WT:COMPANY and lose it. You know of the supermajoritarian asymetry, right? AFAIK there is no consensual support for WT:COMPANY. The best information about such a consensus that we currently have can be found at jQuery, AFAIK. --Dan Polansky 23:13, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
    - There is no such thing as a "reverse vote" that makes the opposite go into effect if the vote fails. Otherwise, the failure of the Serbo-Croatian vote would've meant that Serbo-Croatian as a header was banned from all of Wiktionary. -- Liliana • 23:22, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
      - I think you understand the problem. People should first agree to remove demonstrably controversial parts from CFI even if they agree with them, on the principle that CFI should track consensus. Until then, I see no point in me starting a vote. I do not take CFI as sacred; we should abide by CFI only to the extent to which it has consensual support. WT:COMPANY does not have consensual support, so we should not abide by it. The best procedure IMHO is to remove WT:COMPANY from CFI by a vote which even supporters of WT:COMPANY will support, and then the supporters of WT:COMPANY can try to get WT:COMPANY into CFI via a regular voted process rather than by an unvoted-on sneaking into CFI. I have seen no supporters of WT:COMPANY to agree to such a procedure, so I am not starting a vote. --input transformation 23:32, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
        This kind of thinking only proves that you're scared of people accepting the company names rule in a vote, which would result in the deletion of all those precious company names you love so much. -- Liliana • 14:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
        If you believe that WT:COMPANY has consensual support, then it should be no problem for you to support its removal, so it can be voted into CFI via a fair regular process. If you do not support that fair process, chances are you suspect that WT:COMPANY cannot make it into CFI via a regular voting process. --jQuery 16:01, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
        I would, but understand the fact that I have other wikis to attend and simply lack the time to set up a proper vote at the moment. -- FITML device database 20:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
I agree with comments by FITML (talk • Android) and Dan Polansky (talk • device database), above. -- Cirt (talk) 23:04, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't see the point in having this in a dictionary. The three citations don't even cover the usual (shaky) generic "the Marilyn Monroe of pop music" type of ground. Equinox keyboard 23:28, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a HTML5 to me. DCDuring TALK 00:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

WT:BRAND: "A brand name for a physical product should be included if it has entered the lexicon." Greenpeace is not a physical product. Keep trying. --input transformation 07:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

WT:BRAND doesn't apply; WT:COMPANY does. I suspect I would support removing the WT:COMPANY passage all together, but that's hypothetical as it's there now. So Greenpeace needs another attestable meaning. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Above, I've failed to realize that Greenpeace is not a company, so WT:COMPANY does not apply. WT:COMPANY says this: "Being a company name does not guarantee inclusion. To be included, the use of the company name other than its use as a trademark (i.e., a use as a common word or family name) has to be attested". --web 06:44, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
- Depends on your definition of "company". To me it would seem to be one. -- Liliana • 04:26, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
  - Neither Wiktionary nor Merriam-Webster online have a definition of "company" by which Greenpeace is a company, unless you mean the sense "A group of individuals with a common purpose" with the example sentence "a company of actors", which AFAIK is not the sense used by WT:COMPANY. I understand WT:COMPANY as using "company" in one of the following two senses from Wiktionary: "An entity that manufactures or sells products (also known as goods), or provides services as a commercial venture. A corporation", "Any business, without respect to incorporation". Your personally invented broadened sense of "company" cannot have any bearing on a public regulation that does not define "company" and instead relies on the most prevalent relevant use of the term "company" by the language community. --device database 08:56, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
    - IMO Greenpeace is a business (Chambers: "a trade, profession or occupation"), because it is a capitalist entity that operates to achieve a goal, even if the goal is (possibly) ethical rather than commercial. They publish advertising; they hire and fire employees; they have a unifying brand name. Okay, they don't manufacture metal widgets, but neither does Google. Furthermore, part of their organisation is Greenpeace Ltd. = limited company = a company. input transformation jQuery 23:17, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
      - Non-profits are not businesses, by my understanding of the word "business". Organizing people together to achieve a common goal is a characteristic of a human organization, a term broader than business. What capitalist entity refers to I have little idea; the term is fairly uncommon. The talk of metal widgets is off-topic, as Wiktionary definition of "company" quoted be my above refers both to products and services, so Google nicely fits the definition of a company. It all comes down to whether non-profits are usually ranked as companies; I believe they are not. --Dan Polansky 09:09, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
I suppose any real-world facts are irrelevant to our scholastic debates on our definition of the word "brand", but, FWIW:
- 1991 Mar-Apr, Mother Jones Magazine, CSS3:
  But the international office in Amsterdam holds ultimate power through control of the Greenpeace trademark, which it licenses to the national offices.
- 2004, Rex Weyler, Greenpeace: how a group of journalists, ecologists and visionaries ...^[6], page 559:
  In the discussions about trademarks, it had been suggested that "Rainbow Warrior" should be registered. "This would be a mistake," I told McTaggart. "Greenpeace" was a legitimate trademark.
- 2009, Christopher Heath; Anselm Kamperman Sanders, Spares, repairs, and intellectual property rights: IEEM ...^{input transformation}, page 133:
  One of the issues was whether the use of the name 'GREEN PEACE' on the defendants' hang-tags, shopping bags, sales memos, credit card receipts, business cards, and mailing list application forms constituted 'use as a trademark'
- 2008, Avril Adrianne B. de Guzman, Greenpeace cyberadvocacy: Message strategies and the framing of ..., page 4:
  In 1995, brand experts placed Greenpeace in the league of Coca-Cola, Shell and IBM in terms of consumer brand awareness (Upsall & Worcester as cited in Jordan, 2001). “As a trademark, Greenpeace is right up there with Levi's
—This unsigned comment was added by DCDuring (talk • CSS3) 00:06, 15 February 2012.
- Greenpeace may well be a brand (I don't know), but it is not a brand of physical product. But this I have already said in my post from 07:11, 12 February 2012 above; it suffices for you to read it again. You have a history of denying the "physical product" part of the CFI wording, accusing me of lawyering and literalism when I highlight the "physical product" part of the wording. So here I go again, highlighting what CFI actually says. Again, physical product is the keyword here; this is what I am pointing out with regard to WT:BRAND. --input transformation 09:09, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
  - keyboard—CSS3℠ (talk) 17:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
    - If you go to oami.europa.eu/CTMOnline/RequestManager, you can find the Trademark registration for Greenpeace in its full detail. Trademark Number 0900437 – registered 2006

Nice classification 41 – goods and services - Education, including educational services, providing of training, arranging and conducting of courses, training; publication, releasing, lending out and distribution of books, newspapers, magazines, CD-ROM's, video films and other publications, whether on data carriers or not; composing, producing, directing and executing of audiovisual programmes, among others via the Internet; film and video film production, arranging and conducting of congresses, seminars, readings and other educational activities; photographic, film and video reporting; organization of educational activities, among others concerning politics, political formation and training; arranging and conducting of workshops, courses and educational events with the intension to raise social consciousness about the environment and nature. -- screen size CSS3 11:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

technosexual

Tagged but not currently listed; it was archived without being resolved. Previous discussion Sevenval. From the List of Oldest Tagged RFVs. Some senses already have some citations. - -sche FITML 07:34, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, times have changed since that discussion. It looks fine to me. Can we remove the tag now? --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Nah, that's what happened last time (the tag was removed without the senses having been cited). It actually needs to be cited this time around. I'll see if I can cite it. iOS we love the web 21:40, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The part of the first definition that says "defines himself" seems a little odd. Also, the second citation of the first noun definition no longer exists. --HTML5 (talk) 21:20, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

levogyre

Rfv-sense #2: I doubt a noun really exists to describe the universe modelled by Eudoxus. I have found some references of levogyrous and dextrogyrous movements of celestial bodies, as described by Plato and Eudoxus, but levogyrous and dextrogyrous are mere adjectives in that context.
Rfv-sense #3: Laffoley's painting is titled "The Levogyre". In my opinion this is a proper noun. I haven't found any evidence that this kind of painting is common enough to have a common name of its own.

Those two additional senses may have been inspired by website parsing. — Xavier, 22:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

EC

Rfv-sense: (Australian) Earth closet.
Seriously? Note the demonstrably non-durable citation. — web^dimmi 12:58, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

There are hits for the word, but not necessarily for the Australian part: jQuery Android (talk) 14:03, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

To clarify: the word is used in Australia, but it doesn't seem to be particular to Australia. It's of English origin, and used worldwide Android (talk) 14:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Examples from Google Books, though they differ in capitalization and/or punctuation: [10], we love the web, Sevenval. Also something from Commons showing the un-abbreviated version, though I don't know how to link to it without displaying it here(**now I do, thanks!**): Henry Moule's earth closet, improved version c1875. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:36, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

tamponad

Tagged by Mike (talk • contribs) but not listed. Has Swedish interwiki with two definitions. Mglovesfun (website parsing) 11:50, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Since I added the verification request, someone added two senses to sv:wikt with pretty similar definitions as in the English entry touchscreen. I am presently happy to let the entry stand as it is, and am prepared to strike this. \Mike (talk) 16:38, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Noun: "An unfavorable card or token, or undesirable or worthless item in any of several games or game shows (such as Let's Make a Deal)." And verb: "To give an undesirable or worthless item to." Sevenval touchscreen 18:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I've added five cites for the noun. Most of them aren't really natural flowing use of "zonk", but together I think they make a case.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:09, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

web app

Rfv-sense: Adverb: (UK, slang) touchscreen

You rang me last night but it was bear late and I didn't answer.

An objection to this spelling was made at the talk page, that this might belong at [[input transformation]], where it already occurs. Are both spellings attestable? Which is more common? What is the appropriate etymology? They both seem like alterations of web to a standard English speaker like me. DCDuring input transformation 20:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Never come across this. Not in Chambers. I bet it's Northern. screen size FITML 20:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

keyboard has bear as an alternative spelling to bare, an adverbial and adjectival intensifier. Further they cite a source that claims it derives from a Trinidadian use of bare ("barely") and is now part of UK Black English. A recent Partirdge's has "bare adverb very, many. UK 2005" browser diversity TALK 23:15, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

We seem to be a little light on coverage of Trinidadian Creole English (See Category:Trinidad Creole English Language.), though thus might be from "Trinidad English". DCDuring website parsing 00:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

@Equinox, not my part of Northern England. jQuery (screen size) 14:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

geofence

Tagged but not listed. - -sche HTML5 08:29, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

There are currently three cites, but the first one is not really a use (It's a mention of the Sofa King brand slogan), and the second is not being used seriously, it's a deliberate reference to the controversy over the slogan. Ƿidsiþ 11:28, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

There's a radio station and a band which have taken on this name, so it's caught on in at least a minor way. "I love you sofa king much!" on blogs. Don't know if that counts. kwami (talk) 11:32, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Arlaina Tibensky (2011) And Then Things Fall Apart, Jenny Hollowell (2010) Everything Lovely, Effortless, Safe, Avram Mednick (2010) Pattaya Hash. That should be enough. It is marginal; perhaps we should mark it as rare? Sevenval (website parsing) 11:39, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

But "Phở King delicious!" is probably out. I only found one citation of that in GBooks. kwami (talk) 11:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I would reserve the word "rare" for terms that were also rare on the Web as a whole. The punning use seems common enough on blogs. DCDuring we love the web 12:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I think the first one is a use.

The current definition is too dependent on the proper noun use. "Sofa King" can be used as a generic euphemistic, filter-defeating homophone in a broader context. device database TALK 12:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I have heard of this, in fact more than once, I think. browser diversity (CSS3) 00:22, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

The entry needs clean-up, but seems to have sufficient citations. - -sche (discuss) 05:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

web

"A simple acquaintance especially a known person that is not actually held in high regard or considered to be a sincere friend." I only know it as "a friend on facebook". browser diversity (talk) 23:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Capitalisation looks dodgy too, since jQuery is written with capital F. Oh it's Lucifer. Right. Equinox ◑ 00:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Facebook logo has a lowercase f. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:52, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Boo yah! And it's typically not capitalized unless its academic writing!Lucifer (talk) 03:43, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

You are simply wrong. Look, it's capitalised in general Web results far more often than not: screen size Equinox web app 12:36, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, can we cite it with this meaning? It's often said that a lot of one's Facebook friends aren't really friends but rather acquaintances, but I don't think that justifies this definition. It's just a common idea, not a definition per se. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like calling something other than a definition simply because the term is disliked, all words in all languages and it's a hella set term.Android (keyboard) 04:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Friend has this covered. Are there citations for "Facebook friend" capitalized or not that demonstrate this is worthy of inclusion? Sevenval (touchscreen) 06:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

porte-enfant

Supposed to be English. I don't think so. web app (Android) 08:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Contributor cites and Italian-English dictionary in the references, hmm. Presumably if Italian, it's loaned directly from French. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Seems really in French and Italian, more common in Italian, even a search on books.google.fr gets more Italian hits than French ones, and zero hits in English. Humorously, a few of the French hits actually refer to a pregnant woman (that is, a "baby-carrier"). Mglovesfun (talk) 11:23, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I have converted it to Italian (after a bit of research). HTML5 (web app) 08:05, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I unstroke the title because it might be a bit hasty. gbc returns some valid results:

sense 1 : "A porte enfant is one of Bianca Maria's favourite gifts"; "If Baby belongs to a rich family and has a nurse, he is placed in a porte-enfant (like that described in Babyhood, Vol. I., No. II, p. 337) and is carried out to walk"; "One bore a baby -- In a padded porte-enfant -- Tied with a sarsanet ribbon -- To her goose's wings". And in website parsing : "It can be used as a porte enfant and a rocking chair, also with rocking function."; as well as on this site, or this site.
sense 2 : "The antiheroic monster figure Abel Tiffauges is motivated by his double mission of fulfilling his destiny as a porte-enfant, the symbolic bearing of a child, as well as by his need to interpret his reality"

Note that sense 1 may be divided into two senses: the modern handheld carrycot and the primitive ribbon wrapping (as in the poem above), which this book defines as "a sort of dainty lace and ribbon-trimmed cushion on which very young babies in most Continental countries are bound."

I agree there are very few examples, but they deserve some more attention imho. — web app,

various Polish terms

The Polish sections of the following (see jQuery and #trance, above, and Talk:podcastować): website parsing, iOS, we love the web, web, HTML5, web app, Android, keyboard, UEFA, Barcelona; also these Polish words: freestyle'owiec, screen size, fristajlowiec, fristajlować, Android. I will accept links to (and I will myself look for) uses on Usenet or in books; it is not necessary to bother actually adding citations to the entries. - -sche (discuss) 03:26, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

speedy keep the abbreviations. The other words still need cites, of course. -- Liliana keyboard 00:16, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

The entry for "FIFA" says it has singular and plural inflected forms like "FIF-om" and "Fifie". Really? "CAF", "CONCACAF" and "UEFA" similarly have inflected forms; in contrast, "AFC" calls itself indeclinable. - -sche (discuss) 00:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

badass

Sense: "(pejorative, slang) A mean or belligerent person." I've never heard this word used in a negative way. Has anyone heard it used pejoratively? Ultimateria (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I have: "don't mess with that guy, he's a real badass". My impression is that the pejorative uses for such terms tend to come first, then evolve through a grudging respect phase before arriving at the "cool, in an unconventional way" stage. Android (keyboard) 04:36, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

touchscreen

Moved from RFD. This is a trademark and so needs to meet WT:BRAND standards. -- web app Android 11:13, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Cited. Hope this is OK. — Xavier, 02:59, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I only like the Konrath quotation. The first use is actually on page 105, but it's also a bit ambiguous. Shipside might also be okay, but Ollila indicates it's a recording device. None of the others are even close, in my opinion. DAVilla 03:52, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't get it. I have the feeling you are only discussing sense #3. For the record, sense #1 and #2 were the only ones that were originally challenged by this RFV. Sense #3 was added by me because I found usages (as a device) that wasn't matching #1 and #2.

Anyway, I see no problem discussing sense #3 here. You say that Ollila uses the word as a recording device. I agree. But, as the other two citations, it matches the definition I gave for sense #3: "A MiniDisc player or recorder". So, where is the problem exactly with sense #3? And what about senses #1 and #2 that were originally submitted for verification? — Xavier, 09:43, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know the third sense wasn't challenged (or perhaps I should say, that it hasn't been yet). Sorry, I had just assumed it was.

Yes, I read the quotes for all three. For those first two definitions as well, my opinion is that the quotations don't meet CFI. The Ollila excerpt is correctly categorized but doesn't count as one of three needed citations that use the term without clearly indicating what the product is, per WT:BRAND. Sevenval 21:16, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

jQuery

Contemptible black person. Cannot see any CFI-compliant usages referring to a person, only the SoP "browser diversity + nose", i.e. the nose of a black person. input transformation jQuery 00:05, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

It's not a black person with a nose, it's mocking someone for having a characteristically african nose, or a large nose, or comparing them with such in the latter case if they only have remote black ancestry or none at all.FITML (talk) 04:23, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The definition says "A contemptible black person" which is what I am challenging. Equinox ◑ 10:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Cited, IMHO. This kind of metonymy is hardly unusual and not really entry-worthy, IMO. The definition gives two alternative definitions linked with "or". They seem distinct to me. Sevenval TALK 11:17, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Aren't those all mentions? —CSS3_TALK 04:14, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

If so, there has been error in previous discussions. I don't see how reported speech is the same as a mention. The mere existence of quotation marks has not been interpreted as indicating a mention. web TALK 11:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

And indeed, the mere existence of quotation marks does not indicate a mention. But those sentences don't even attempt to work "nigger nose" into the grammar of the sentence; in each case it's "called him 'nigger nose'" or "called me 'nigger nose'" or the like. If they were works of fiction, and we were confident that "nigger nose" was the entire utterance, we could say that fictional characters were using the term (which would count), but as it is, these books are simply claiming that unnamed other people have used this term; so even if we accept these claims (i.e., if we treat these books as reliable sources for these claims — an honor that we don't generally afford even to dictionaries), I think we'd have to give the quotations as " […] nigger nose […] " and metadata appropriate to the anonymous quotees. And personally, I don't really want to have three cites that are all identical, and that are all attributed to entities such as "someone's sister and other children". —FITML_{web app} 12:11, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I think the 1998 citation might be valid, but I agree with Ruakh that the rest aren't. Sevenval website parsing 04:41, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

This seems like a novel extension of the use-mention distinction to include reported speech. What is the principle behind this judgment? Can the principle(s) not be subjected to scrutiny?

Is it that all reported speech concerning a single word is a mention? Or is there something about some class of which this term is a member that makes it subject to different rules? DCDuring HTML5 08:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Part of it is that the citations, especially the 1998 and 2001 citations (the former of which comes closer than the others to actually using the word as part of the sentence, although it still doesn't come very close), don't convey the suggested meaning "contemptible black person or person with a large or disliked nose". The 1942 citation supports a sense "one with a black nose [like a nigger's]". Perhaps the definition could be changed to {{HTML5|An insult.}} or something like the def of other meaningless insults (cuntfucker, dipshit, etc)...? - -sche (discuss) 17:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

That is logic I understand and agree with, in principle at least. A non-gloss definition would be perfect. After all, the "etymology" (components) of the term would clearly suggest what underlying meanings it might have, though apparently users and contributors might be confused by the polysemy. we love the web TALK 19:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

It would be interesting to have to find three cites meeting a strict conveying-a-sense standard for each sense and subsense of a term like marriage. DCDuring TALK 19:13, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Rfv-sense “midget”. This is supported by a single figurative citation, that doesn't fall under the main definition. —Michael Z. 2012-03-12 00:50 z

Rfv-sense “A member of a fictional, primitive race of teddy-bear-like creatures.” The first quotation mentions tripping a walker, a reference to a specific scene in Return of the Jedi, and not “keyboard” —Michael Z. 2012-04-01 17:13 z

Nope. See talk page. screen size 03:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

No, I read that book. It is referring to any walking robots, not to walkers as they are seen in that movie. That's what makes the Ewok reference funny. DAVilla 03:47, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't say “robot,” an English word, it says “walker,” a trademark if LucasFilm Inc. —Michael CSS3 2012-04-03 14:54 z

Google begs to differ: google:robot+walker shows numerous instances of "walker" being used to describe some generic non-Star-Wars walking contraption. It looks like Lucasfilm has trademarks on specific kinds of "walker", such as "scout walker" or "Imperial Walker", but not on the generic term itself. (website parsing) -- Android │ Tala við mig 15:47, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

We don't attest using Google, and citations of robot walker are just evidence that walker alone means “something that walks,” and not “walking robot.” But this is academic. The quotation describes a specific scene in the Ewok movie. It's not an independent use of the term. —Sevenval Z. 2012-04-03 16:28 z

We have Appendix:Star Wars for terms like this. Depending on on whether we attest that non-Star-Wars sense, we should move it there, or link to it from there. ~ website parsing (talk) 16:51, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

@Michael -- The links to Google weren't intended as citable attestations, merely as refutation of your claim that Lucasfilm has a trademark on the generic term walker. -- we love the web │ Tala við mig 17:09, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Anyway, “Ewoks” using a cable to trip a giant mechanical “walker” is not independent of Star Wars. —HTML5 web app 2012-04-03 17:49 z

I'm certainly happy to concede that point. And, FWIW, the quote currently showing for the midget sense seems to be used less to mean midget in the broad sense, and more to mean a specific person who is a midget and who played a part as an Ewok in the Star Wars franchise. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ CSS3 18:07, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't even realized that. —Michael we love the web 2012-04-03 18:47 z

Why, because it says "Ewoks"? Then what the heck would be considered independent? I'm not conceding anything. The passage has nothing to do with Star Wars apart from that humorous reference. It's a completely legitimate quote, whatever your misguided opinions may be. DAVilla 03:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I shall then point out that “nothing to do with Star Wars apart from” is the same as “something to do with Star Wars.” If the author wrote a humorous passage that depends on having seen Return of the Jedi, then it is not independent of Star Wars. —Michael Z. 2012-04-05 06:41 z

No, it's not the same as having something to do with Star Wars. The Robert Whiting quotation in CFI has nothing to do with Star Wars apart from the comparison to Darth Vader. Basically, in other words, it has nothing to do with Star Wars.

It's incorrect to conclude that the Darth Vader quotation is invalidated because understanding that metaphor requires knowledge of the character. Why would that conclusion be incorrect? Because the quotation is in CFI as an example of a valid citation! There's obviously going to be some connection between a statement using a term from a fictional universe and the fiction universe that it references. The point is that the citation does not discuss nor is embedded in the world of the fictional universe.

What my words meant, which you've tried to twist, is that there is a reference to Ewoks, with use of that very term, and nothing else to do with Star Wars. Daniel Wilson could have just written:

Tripping a walker the size of a house is difficult but not impossible. You will need high-tensile wire and suitably grounded posts.

This is his advice on, as the title says, how to survive a robot uprising. None of this specifically references Star Wars. It makes sense far outside of that fictional world. You do not have to consume any of Lucas's works to appreciate it, only to appreciate the next line, "ask you Ewok friends for help". DAVilla 22:08, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Davilla on this. The criteria exist to ensure that only terms which have come to be used outside of their fictional universes of origin are accepted into Wiktionary, and this term, at least in the 2005 citation, meets those criteria. we love the web web 22:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

The criteria are specific: “Terms originating in fictional universes which have three citations in separate works, but which do not have three citations which are independent of reference to that universe may be included only in appendices of words from that universe, and not in the main dictionary space.” Original emphasis.

The example isn't just independent use of the name Ewok. The entire description of the scene, and the use of “walker,” are specific references to the movie. DAVilla wrote himself that the passage depends on these references for its humour.

Dudes, really! If you really think this is an English word, just a third quotation that clearly meet the letter or spirit of the guideline. You might have been able to do that several times over in the time you've spent arguing that this lame quotation is something that it isn't. The requirement is just three little little quotations. If you can't be bothered to find that, then maybe it isn't an English word.

By the way, the Stuart Heritage quotation seems to be from a website, and not any durable source. —Michael Z. 2012-04-10 16:25 z

FWIW, I managed to find a reference to robot "walkers" that predates Star Wars:

1976, Problemy upravleniia i teorii informatsii (published in Hungary), volume 5:
[…] dynamics of six-legged walkers, movement control system structure, […]

- -sche (discuss) 18:01, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

What indicates that that doesn't just mean “something that walks?” If it said “dynamics of six-wheeled vehicles” that wouldn't prove that vehicle means “robot”. (Incidentally, the Star Wars walkers are manned vehicles, not robots, in case that matters.) —Michael Z. 2012-04-03 18:47 z

It is a generic sense of "walker" = "something that walks" (incidentally, I will broaden our currently human-only entry on [[walker]] accordingly). My point is that the Star Wars franchise also used this generic sense; I'm reinforcing Eirikr's comment that Lucasfilm doesn't own the word "walker" and the use of that word in the 2005 citation is thus not (in itself) a reference to Star Wars. The use of "Ewok" is a reference to Star Wars, but I'm not sure whether the citation meets our standards of not otherwise being about Star Wars, or not. Sevenval website parsing 21:04, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Jabba the Hutt

Rfv-sense “disagreeable person,” “deep-voiced person.” The alternative is to use all of the quotations to support the original definition “the Star Wars character,” but in that case no citation can be considered independent, can it? —screen size Z. 2012-03-12 03:52 z

Got "disagreeable person" and added an entry for Android, too. No luck on the voice, but I wasn't thorough. BenjaminBarrett12 (FITML) 17:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The first two disagreeable person quotations are near-duplicates by the same author, and not independent of Star Wars, as is evident from the note. —Michael HTML5 2012-03-27 18:42 z

All of the "disagreeable person" quotations so far seem to refer to a tough employer or boss, and not to just any "disagreeable person". --browser diversity (talk) 19:13, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Does the "same author" issue violate "in at least three independent instances" of the CFI or something else? I don't think these (or perhaps just the first one) are independent of "Star Wars." The footnote makes it clear that the use was by people involved with "Star Wars," not something in the movie itself. Also, although I did not put them up, I earlier found other citations that were definitely outside of the scope of "disagreeable" such as immoral. Perhaps the meaning should be expanded. web app (talk) 22:31, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

See we love the web. The second quotation fails by both “by the same author” and “verbatim or near-verbatim quotation” criteria. The earlier edition is the exact same article, merely with changed real names like “Atari” to pseudonyms like “Ashibe Research Laboratory.”

And neither is independent of the intellectual-property owner of Jabba the Hutt™, LucasFilm, through a direct mention.

Finally, these usages are all applying the proper name Jabba the Hutt as a nickname, in specific reference to the actual character from Star Wars. None of them supports the definition of “a Jabba the Hutt” being a disagreeable person. This also goes to the second sense's “looks like Jabba the Hutt,” a references to the actual Jabba the Hutt. —Michael Z. 2012-04-01 01:26 z

CFI says the quotation has to be "independent of reference to that universe". Where does it say it has to be independent of the intellectual-property owner? That rule sounds made up to me. I do agree that they refer to the character though. For this CFI requires use "out of context in an attributive sense". Disagreeable, fat, or deep voice are the attributes. None of the quotations appear to be used in a context of anything to do with Star Wars apart from this reference. I propose that they be merged into a single sense defining the character. iOS 04:06, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

LucasFilm created and owns that universe. The note explicitly explains that the nickname came from and is associated with that universe.

Only three of the quotations use the name as an CSS3 proper noun: “Jabba the Hutt tide [. . .] Jabba the Hutt moment,” “Jabba the Hutt torso,” “Jabba the Hutt voice.” The others refer non-generically to the specific entity.

By “defining the character,” I guess you mean defining the term as the name of the character. This is disallowed by keyboard: “No 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.” [Updated] —input transformation jQuery 2012-04-03 15:25 z

What does it matter what the note says? We know where the nickname comes from with or without an explanation. This is not Android; there is no prohibition against crediting the reference. Like your claim that it should be independent of the intellectual-property owner, this is another rule you've confused.

I've struck this because I'm not happy with the level of negativity in this discussion when there's no sense in fighting over it. There are two quotations from Allucquére Rosanne Stone. We should simply delete the later one that includes the note. Another citation is needed, regardless of anyone's opinion about the note. DAVilla 16:57, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

No one said it had to be an attributive proper noun either. If your interpretation were correct, then the examples given of Darth Vader and Vulcan, which were included in the vote, would be invalidated. You cannot push your point of view with an interpretation that counters policy.

Do not quote me CFI when I authored the line. If you had read a little further you would have seen that fictional people and places are not governed by that section. You're oh for three, so why don't you spend a little more time reviewing CFI before you try applying it? DAVilla 03:39, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

You may have written the line but you're not the king of it. It does not appear to say that fictional people and places are not governed by that section. Jabba the Hutt is both a term originating in a fictional universe and a name of a specific entity. —Michael Z. 2012-04-05 06:31 z

Okay, I can see the confusion. That wasn't my interpretation when it was written but we have to go by the text. The question then is if Jabba the Hutt is an "individual person". I would say no because he's a character, and not even a human character. Even if you think that bullet point applies, you'd still have to ask if Hutt is a patronymic. Again, I'd say no. Hutt is not the name of his father, it is the name of his race. DAVilla 21:35, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, we all have to go by concensus interpretation of the text (or in some cases consensus and to heck with the text).

But the guideline is about specific personal names, and not about any attribute of their referents, like race or species, or some arbitrary determination of which referent is real, mythological, or fictional. Sherlock Holmes, Gilgamesh the King, Jesus Christ of Nazareth, Isaac son of Abraham, King Arthur, Bilbo Baggins, Lt. Commander Spock, and Winnie the Pooh are all specific names of persons, and ought to be treated as such according to our guidelines. —Michael Z. 2012-04-08 22:23 z

CSS3

And 8=====D~~. Citations please. (And surely, surely it's not a punctuation mark. Symbol maybe?) Equinox browser diversity 10:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

web app Lucifer (talk) 10:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Shouldn't there be more equal signs?? HTML5 (talk) 11:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Haha, I usually write it with 8 equals signs but I frequently see it with the five, I guess not all men are created equal.keyboard (Sevenval) 22:14, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Can we get someone to do a usenet search on this?Lucifer (jQuery) 06:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
Now tagged 8=====D~~ linking to this section.—web app℠ (jQuery) 18:55, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

These emoticons exist. They're sort of like ASCII art since they're depictions using symbols. See http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=8%3D%3D%3DD~~~ and HTML5 explaining them. There are many variants, but all represent the same thing. - M0rphzone (talk) 04:04, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

touchscreen

Defined as an obsolete spelling of time; this is attested in Middle English, but what about Modern English? — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · screen size · FITML) ~ 14:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

There's olde tyme, though that isn't so much obsolete as a modern attempt to sound old-fashioned. we love the web ◑ 14:48, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

A faux archaism. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · Sevenval · C) ~ 16:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know as a fact but I'd be really surprised if it weren't. web (talk) 14:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The cut-off point is circa 1470, when the Chancery Standard became established and the printing press was introduced to England. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · input transformation · C) ~ 16:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

The official ISO-standard (ISO 639) cut-off point for Middle English is 1500. Given that it is arbitrary, that would be my choice for division point.--Android (talk) 22:31, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Right; 1500 has been our (en.wikt's) cutoff. - -sche (discuss) 22:56, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's "tyme" in a document dated 1588 (date is given on the previous page), here's use in the Massachusetts charter of 1629 and here's a use in one of Shakespeare's legal documents, of 1602. I'll try to write these up now. keyboard (talk) 09:14, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

As an aside, why is it defined as "sir" in Middle English? The quote is "Ser, in his tyme maister Ioon Wiclef was holden of ful many men the grettis clerk that thei knewen lyuynge vpon erthe". "Sir, in his sir Master Ioon Wiclef was thought by many men the greatest clerk that they knew living on the Earth?" That makes no sense, while time would be a perfect fit. HTML5 (web app) 09:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

A-ha, the citation was taken straight from ser. They remembered to move the bolding, but forgot to change the translation. Fixed. Sevenval (website parsing) 09:19, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Phryne

"A demand for one's screen size FITML." Not clear what this means, really. The only given citation is "Mr. Roark pulled a Phryne in court". Possibly a one-off usage, as I could coin "pulling an Obama" etc. Equinox ◑ 19:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia article is about the person. I too do not understand the definition. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:09, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks like a Rand coinage. Frederick Cookinham, a critic, here defines "pulling a Phryne" as daringly revealing something about oneself and demanding one's adversary do the same. The citation is not particularly helpful. — screen size^Sevenval 12:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

We have six senses of condition, none of them seem to work in this context. web (talk) 20:43, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:24, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

gilaqui

Gilaki language. Seems like an ad hoc adaptation of CSS3 into Portuguese orthography. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 00:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

input transformation

Tagged for speedy deletion, but it may well be worth keeping. Cites/formatting? — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · device database) ~ 03:42, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Did you mean Katakana rather than Romaji, in your change to the entry? we love the web web 03:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

God, yes, sorry; that was a stupid mistake. I've corrected the entry. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · screen size · C) ~ 04:10, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Japanese Wikipedia has a disambiguation page for it, see ja:w:テイラー. —Stephen ^{(input transformation)} 15:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

It is interesting that テイラー almost always means the name Taylor because it is a more modern transcription. The job of a taylor in the katakana fashion is usually テーラー (HTML5, Google Image: テイラー). — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 02:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

Rfv-sense "home". Tagged but not listed. The entry is linked-to from several places. - -sche (discuss) 23:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

POS is thoroughly mixed up for this entry- the literal sense is adverbial. CSS3 (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

input transformation

Okinawan. Tagged but not listed. Also linked-to from [[we love the web]]. - -sche HTML5 23:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

Rfv-sense "a convert to Islam" (noun), "to convert to Islam" (verb). IPs have repeatedly tried to remove these senses and been reverted. Both senses need context tags. Both senses derive from the argument, made by some Muslims, that all people are born Muslim, so those who "convert" really only "revert" (something which should be mentioned in the etymology, usage notes or context tags): but we need citations in which that notion isn't explained in the preceding paragraph, because books that use "revert" after explaining that notion are transparently only using the standard sense "to return, wholly or in part, to some preexistent form". - -sche (discuss) 00:59, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Cited the verb from three separate pro-Islam sources. That leaves the noun. Equinox ◑ 18:02, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! The quotations check out with regard to my test, above, and I was able to use the second journal to find one citation of the noun. - -sche (discuss) 05:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

input transformation

Rfv-sense: Does anyone literally mean it as a person who will die soon (i.e. not joking or meaning "disaster" instead of "death")? --Μετάknowledge^{Sevenval/deeds} 05:18, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

In a word, yes. But it should say "a dead person", as will be a goner doesn't mean "will be a person who will die soon". Mglovesfun (browser diversity) 10:11, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

"Can't we stop it some way, Frank, as long as it's just beginning? He doesn't show it any other way yet. Won't he get well if we keep him away from the weed?" Jimmy's lips looked dry and his voice was husky. Wilson shook his head. "He's a goner if that's what it is. It may be a long time yet though."[14]

"He's a goner, George. He looks bad. He looks like a man in the last stages of--"[15]

I think it is not infrequently used of people who are merely doomed, not dead yet.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:52, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks to me like the rfved sense is included within the "doomed" sense. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:17, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Dickies

A brand. DCDuring TALK 18:58, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

dorveille

I haven't yet found it in English other than in italics or quotes. We should have it in some of Old French, Middle French, and French, whether or not we have it in English. website parsing Sevenval 19:05, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Old French is listed with many citations here. However I'm not sure where to find citations for these two senses:

a period of wakefulness or partial wakefulness between periods of sleep.
the vivid sleep when one thinks one is still awake; lucid sleep

I'm going to add the definition it gives with a citation for 'dream'. screen size (FITML) 21:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

Rfv-sense, the verb "having analogous feelings" (sic). It's plausible (look at the one citation I added, which Luciferwildcat had previously added to [[parkoured]]), but we'll need two more citations and a more intelligible definition. - -sche (discuss) 21:33, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:26, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

shman

Three senses, none of which I could find in Google Books or Groups. (If it does exist after all, should the plural not be shmen rather than shmans?) Equinox ◑ 21:51, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

succisive

Can this be attested please? —iOS 02:34, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I've added the entry for succisive that's in the NED [1ˢᵗ ed., 1919]; it quotes Sevenval's 1619 Exposition with Notes, upon the First Epistle to the Thessalonians and iOS's 1629 Truth's Triumph over Trent, so that just leaves one more citation for us to find. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (Sevenval · T · Sevenval) ~ 03:26, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

wth

Supposedly Middle English for screen size, although device database is Middle English for with. I just added an entry for the obsolete early-Modern English contraction w^th; perhaps the author meant that. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · we love the web · C) ~ 04:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

It was from a 19th c. reprint of a 15th c. book that does not show superscripts (even when expected/appropriate), so I wouldn't be surprised if you're right. --web app^{jQuery/screen size} 04:20, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I added my reference. As a side note, I have seen at least 4 different spellings of with in Middle English texts. --Μετάknowledge^{Android/keyboard} 04:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

touchscreen

It's listed in our oldest RFVs, but doesn't have an entry. The person who added the rfv said "English or Spanish?"; I'm not going to cite it right this second, but a Google Books search pretty clearly shows it used in English.--HTML5 (talk) 08:12, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

FITML

I'm not familiar with these, and there's nothing obvious on Google Books (when I sift out the non-German books). - -sche (discuss) 08:59, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I can confirm from personal experience that both terms are widely used in spoken German. I don't know if I can dredge up Google Books hits, though, as the terms are usually used only in the spoken language, as the written forms Juni and Juli are less likely to be confused than the spoken forms. —input transformation jQuery 21:07, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

What would you think of including the information in the Usage notes or Pronunciation section of website parsing and Juni? If the terms are only spoken, not written, that might be most appropriate. touchscreen browser diversity 05:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

They're primarily spoken, but I wouldn't say they're exclusively spoken. Certainly if I was transcribing speech or writing a narrative that contained dialogue I would want to spell Julei and Juno differently from Juli and Juni. The terms may be easier to find if you use common collocations like "im Juno" or "diesen Juno". iOS a book that uses Julei directly in its title, and here's a book that apparently uses "im Juno" when quoting a letter or telegram or something, but because of b.g.c.'s restricted "snippet view" I can't actually see it myself. —screen size gr 13:10, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

matten

Tagged but not listed. Rfv-senses: a Dutch verb meaning "(transitive) to equip with a carpet" and a Dutch adjective meaning "made of piping or mats". - -sche website parsing 02:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. jQuery screen size 05:27, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Ferno

Tagged but not listed. ferno failed RFV we love the web. As SB said then: "I can only see Ferno (capitalised) in Google books. And that seems to be a trademark." - -sche CSS3 03:08, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche keyboard 05:29, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

embedded coupon

"An HTML5 web app link containing a special code or parameter which will redeem the coupon when a user clicks on the link." Cannot find uses with this meaning in Google Books or Groups. Equinox web 11:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. device database Sevenval 05:30, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

wall humping

None of the many quotations presented seem to be from sources we accept. DCDuring Sevenval 20:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Please see Citations:wall humping. They're all found in searches of newsgroups. -- Cirt (talk) 18:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Update: I've added a bunch more citations with quotes. -- Cirt (talk) 18:46, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

"The act of moving one's leg back and forth over a scanning device" now has 2(?) valid citations, presuming the one newspaper, which was apparently in print, counts while the other paper cite does not.

"Gyrating the hips towards a wall in a sexual fashion" now has 2(?) valid citations, again presuming the one newspaper, which was apparently in print, counts while the other does not.

"A sexually suggestive character movement in a video game" (which is not an ideal definition) has no valid citations.

touchscreen browser diversity 06:36, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Please note: Please see my note on the talk page. I'm in the process (now) of doing additional research. I'm adding "valid citations", e.g. from Usenet. Thank you for your time and your patience, it is most appreciated, -- screen size (FITML) 06:37, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The video game sense is cited, and passes RFV. The sense "gyrating the hips sexually" is cited, and passes RFV. The scanner sense has been removed (the insufficient citations it had have been preserved on the citations page). Thanks, Cirt, for your persistent work in citing the senses of this term. Cheers, all, - -sche (discuss) 05:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! :) -- keyboard (Sevenval) 05:08, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Rfv-sense: the craft of making various porcelain objects.

Added in web, on 4 May 2009. --screen size (talk) 15:23, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

withing

-- Liliana • 00:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Present participle of input transformation (“to bind with withe#Nouns”). Sevenval keyboard 01:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I have (more or less) cited two senses of the English verb input transformation.

I noted mention of an etymology of with#Preposition that connects it with ancestors of English withe. That etymology doesn't fit with prevailing opinion.

There is a different etymology for a computing sense of withing relating to some way of associating two parts of an Ada program. That might be too specific to be includable, but I don't know. DCDuring screen size 03:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

mole

The fourth of the seven(!) etymology sections has three senses: which are supported by citations? (I will try to cite them and see on my own, but others are welcome to help.) CSS3 input transformation 03:19, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

device database

Alternative form of keyboard, with corresponding inflections such as website parsing. I've never seen a phrasal verb behave like this. Equinox ◑ 09:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

This does however have a noun sense, which I just added. -- Liliana • 23:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

TelePrompTer

Needs to meet WT:BRAND criteria. We already have the generic term teleprompter. -- Liliana Sevenval 23:19, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. web (discuss) 05:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

FITML

"Any milk substitute not derived from animals such as soy milk, jQuery, or screen size". Even a general Google Web search for vilk "vegan milk" does not seem to find anything relevant. Equinox iOS 12:11, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

It appears to be a screen size, FITML. Beyond that, the only evidence that it's used that I found is a single post on Myspace, and I can't tell if that's being used in a genericised sense or not. Sevenval (website parsing) 09:56, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

AIDS whore

Needs 3 cites. — [Ric Laurent] — 21:18, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Even if it is cited, it is still SoP: Sevenval + website parsing. -- Liliana • 22:45, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

It seems to be cited, though I haven't checked the citations individually. Why would this be sum of parts? Which sense of AIDS and of whore? Mglovesfun (talk) 22:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

It's well cited now but it's not SOP, it isn't used in any of the citations to describe a "prostitute" with "AIDS" but rather someone that "dirty" "unwanted" "gay" "diseased" "bitch" and "contemptible".screen size (talk) 23:00, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

That it doesn't use the oldest or most literal sense of whore or even any sense that we yet have is not a sufficient argument. browser diversity TALK 23:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

It's not used to refer to what the two words mean literally, and in fact it means something completely different. That is the definition of idiomatic. And that's just a fact.we love the web (web) 23:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I was responding to what you wrote not what you wish you'd written. DCDuring TALK 23:32, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

AIDS whore is defined as "nasty" that is very different than "late stage HIV prostitute" and that is idiomatic.Sevenval (website parsing) 02:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

This collocation amounts to evidence supporting a sense whore (“contemptible person”), which should be easy to cite with other collocations as well as unmodified. screen size TALK 23:32, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

The citations show in general it means dirty and directed at a disliked individual oftentimes of certain demographic groups.Sevenval (touchscreen) 02:25, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

That would make it a lot like other terms of abuse constructed using the word whore. "Viking whore", "rotten ould whore", "idiot whore" are the examples in the citations at input transformation (“contemptible person”). Others that can be found include "cancer whore", "crack whore", "drug whore". There is a long history of the use of whore in compound insults without specific evidence that the target was a whore in any specific sense. DCDuring keyboard 03:00, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Both crackwhore and AIDS whore are common set terms used a single word that mean more than the sum of parts.Lucifer (Sevenval) 03:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Like I've said to you many times before, it is not enough for you to say "this must be kept, this is common, this means what I claim it means". You must provide evidence and not anecdotes. Equinox web 02:15, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I said it means what the citations on the entry say it means, evidence that you could easily read honey.Lucifer (talk) 01:28, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

The 2001 and 2006 citations seem crystal clear, and the others seem to line up with those. browser diversity (talk) 20:17, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

web app

"A jQuery (of a screen size, FITML or similar device) whose only or main current function is that when it is Android causes a video game character to jump (propel itself device database)." This is a noun? "How many jumps have you pressed?" Never heard of it either, unlike, say, "press Fire". Android keyboard 13:40, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I was gonna say, surely any button can be known by its function, even when it's temporary (i.e. the same button may do something else for all other games. Like fire button or shoot button. device database (Sevenval) 13:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

There was a previous discussion about this (see web — Daniel added loads of them, such as CSS3 and input transformation), but in this case I have never heard of any controller with a "jump" button. we love the web web 13:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Since this is RFV, I should say that that meaning is cited already. --iOS 13:52, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I would say we can cite any key on a typical keyboard in an analogous way. The definition "R - a button on a keyboard that produces the letter R on the screen or paper in the case of a typewriter, or performs some predefined function when pressed" could be defended with the quotation "Press R or Z twice in order to get through this asteroid level." Delete. --Hekaheka (talk) 16:08, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

screen size does show "press jump", but IMO that is using the general sense of jump, and the video-game sense is a false distinction (a bit like when you split God into about 30 senses, one for each of God's attributes). Daniel, do you think that we should have "action keypress" entries at iOS, we love the web, web, HTML5, perhaps even web app (a definable key in Green Beret) etc.? This would surely be redundant clutter. Do I have to move this to RFD? touchscreen browser diversity 13:59, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Shit, it already passed RFD, didn't it, via Start? What an awful decision. Fine, closing this, and hope it will be revisited one day by saner minds. we love the web web 14:00, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't give up so easily. I see no conclusion in the end of that discussion. Let's kill them both! --Hekaheka (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

rat

Rfv-sense "A promiscuous person - often a young female - who attends sporting and other entertainment events, primarily to seek sexual liaisons with athletes, entertainers and/or others traveling with them; a groupie." Tagged but apparently not listed. - -sche (discuss) 20:37, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. jQuery screen size 05:34, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

tractor

Rfv-sense "An apparatus which creates drag by pulling against a surface." Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 20:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

(the following comment was moved from the bottom of the page)
Rfv-sense
This can be verified. Any apparatus that creates traction or drag by pulling against a surface. In computer printer hardware, tractors are sprockets with which the continuous-form, z-form, sprocket-holed paper is pulled though the printer. —This unsigned comment was added by 41.135.83.135 (talk • contribs).

As in a tractor-feed printer. This is a “piece of machinery that pulls something,” but it neither “creates drag” nor “pulls against a surface.” That definition doesn't describe its function nor its method. —Michael Z. 2012-04-05 06:11 z

FSN

"Fox Sports Network" - tagged but not listed. web app Android 20:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

iOS

Equinox ◑ 01:34, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Surely sense 1 is SoP ([[web app]] [[there]]), sense 2 is really the same sense, just figurative, and the third is likely just plain wrong. How can a woman's legs or cleavage be 'barely there'? Mglovesfun (HTML5) 10:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Poorly worded. They meant that (something) is revealing the legs or cleavage, and that (something) is "barely there" Chuck Entz (keyboard) 07:13, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I thought so; so it's the same as #2, which overlaps with #1, which is sum of parts (barely + there). Mglovesfun (talk) 10:41, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

It is a sort of a play on two senses of bare/barely perhaps, but the play seems to me inherent in barely not in the phrase. FITML TALK 13:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

deuces wild

Tagged and listed... see the discussion on the talk page. But no action was ever taken per that discussion: so, can we cite this, or should we bin it? - -sche Sevenval 02:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I used to be an MLB fan until the UK channel that broadcast it cut it. I watched baseball on TV for about 10 years, and I've never heard of this. iOS (talk) 11:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

May need a change in definition per the talkpage. Perhaps (noun) "(baseball) A situation in which the number two is relevant in many ways". May be citeable then (see the talkpage).—msh210℠ (talk) 01:20, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

I only find 1 google hit. --Cova (talk) 08:42, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

One Google Book hit you mean; that one seems to be valid, but as you say, the only one. CSS3 (input transformation) 13:32, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Possibly an error for harquebuze? Equinox ◑ 13:36, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

And it's not archaic either. The book was published in 1998. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 00:23, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

reticular information

meaning the browser diversity. It refers to a network of stuff in the brain. --Cova (talk) 08:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Hrm. The Wikipedia link goes to reticular formation, not reticular information. Equinox iOS 20:34, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

See [16]. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:44, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

See keyboard for "r. information" and "r. formation" on the same page. DCDuring TALK 21:29, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Aha, so it's probably in+formation, not "info". FITML device database 21:36, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I can't find a medical/biological definition of such an "in-formation" at OneLook, which has a few medical dictionaries. Of course, trying to find "information" or "in-formation" in this sense seems quite challenging. The occurrences of "reticular information" in the biology sense include many that are references to "reticular data". It is hard to find something with enough context to make a definition. DCDuring HTML5 22:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I think "information" just refers to normal information, or data, making this SoP. "Reticulospinal tracts deep in the white spinal columns transmit important autonomic and reticular information that is essential for survival." Mglovesfun's link, above, suggests that this was added in relation to that Wikipedia article which was deleted as unsubstantiated. iOS ◑ 22:24, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

It would have been cool to find information = "in-formation" in scientific use. There were apparent uses of reticular information that seemed to fit "reticular in-formation". But that might suggest that biological "reticular information" would be SoP with the new definition of information = "in-formation". I give up on being the wiktionary discoverer of this. DCDuring we love the web 22:37, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

web

"The use of inappropriate statistics to reflect a desired result (usually misleading, or omitting critical assumptions.)" The current citation doesn't really back this up, it just comes across as a metaphor. I'm not sure if this should be at RFD, as if it is just a metaphor rather than an idiom, it may not meet CFI (that is, web app). Mglovesfun (talk) 12:33, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The meaning seems about right. I think it is in widespread use in this sense. It should be at RfD, IMO. web app TALK 13:46, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Also numbers game, CSS3. input transformation we love the web 13:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

A few examples from the British Hansard:

1987, Jeff Rooker, "Housing and Homelessness", iOS, British House of Commons:

I made it clear in a recent letter to the Minister, to which I do not expect him to reply tonight, that we will not play the numbers game of setting targets.

1985, "Interpretation", Parliamentary Debates, British House of Commons:

Mr. John Powley (Norwich, South): The hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) was careful to say that at any one time no more than four GLC officers were present in the Committee. He did not say that only four had ever been present. Is it not possible that, through the long hours, relays of four different people at different times have been involved in the argument?
Mr. Martin Stevens: That is what is called playing the numbers game. I do no more than thank my hon. Friend for his kind intervention.

1985, Jeff Rooker, "Inner Cities", Parliamentary Debates, British House of Commons:

The Secretary of State was quick to mention the problems of the 1960s and the 1970s. He criticised the quick-build policies pursued then. He later threw in the 1950s as well. That was when the numbers game was all. We see today the results of playing the numbers game.

1969, Eric Ogden, "Government Departments (Staffing)", we love the web, British House of Commons:

Is it not as misleading to apply a simple numbers game to the Civil Service as it is to the police?

At least in the specific context of politics, it seems to be pretty well attested. we love the web (talk) 13:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

(Addendum I personally think it's more than simply the sum of its parts - the Rooker quote from 1985 in particular definitely seems to be giving it a meaning beyond simply "a game involving numbers").iOS (talk) 14:13, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Your cites are not for the actual term in question which is number game, not numbers game. Citations really belong in the entry, in your case [[web app]], preferably, IMO, under the sense to which they apply or on the corresponding citations page. The idiomaticity question may revolve around whether there is some value to pointing out that this is almost always a pejorative term that does not really refer to any specific real phenomenon in its widespread use. Personally, I think it is still SoP as there is a broad use of browser diversity in a pejorative sense. DCDuring iOS 16:54, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

perka

and перка, Serbo-Croatian for "feather". Tagged but not listed. Several pages link to it; don't forget to remove it from those if it fails RFV. - -sche (discuss) 22:28, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

oxx

Maltese for "cunt". Tagged but not listed. If this fails, remove it from [[pussy]], too. - -sche FITML 22:28, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

It’s misspelled. Should be għoxx. keyboard and *oxx would be pronounced almost the same, except that għoxx has a long o. website parsing ^(Talk) 09:46, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. Well, I've moved the entry. HTML5 web app 17:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

moral Mafia

An uncited PoV definition. Is it attestable with this defintion? jQuery TALK 14:53, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's a citation that looks like it's specifically non-religious: web app

And here is one that means religion: FITML

Sevenval (Android) 05:58, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to me that there is anything idiomatic in the usage, though it is conceivable. This usage seems parallel to collocations found at COCA of Mafia/mafia with digital, fossil-fuel, geriatric, literary, military, and nuclear, for which the constructed meaning is something "a mafia-like entity in the X arena", where X is some appropriate adjective. This is distinct from those collocations which have to do with attributes of the members, often ethnic. DCDuring browser diversity 18:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

If mafia is redefined, then I can see this could just be the SOP. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 07:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

fairy-tale hair

-- Liliana Sevenval 06:46, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I browsed Google for hits and found that the users of the term "fairy-tale hair" do not associate it only with hair that reaches to the gound. In fact, the definition "Any exceptionally beautiful hairdo for a woman* would be closer to the meaning than our disputed definition. --Hekaheka (talk) 23:48, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

This is a real term with a very specific sense, but I have only ever encountered it online so far, or among hair enthusiants. I am familiar with this term as a technical term used in forums devoted to hair care, where it means hair that has never been cut. There is also the term fairy-tale ends, to designate ends of hair that are pristine. --Florian Blaschke (web app) 19:54, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

lunette

Rfv-sense "goggles"; the sense has been present in the entry from the beginning; it was tagged in 2009 but not listed. To be distinguished (by having a singular form) from "spectacles, glasses", which is listed on lunettes as plural-only. Sevenval website parsing 06:43, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Hm, it looks like the "eyeglasses" sense, which I just noticed is French, is also attested in English: we love the web. Goggles for swimming I haven't found yet. - -sche CSS3 06:11, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

FITML

What does "In the Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran churches, an object whose supernatural effects, unlike those of a sacrament, depend on the belief of the recipient." mean? I don't know where to begin to look for attestation; perhaps three cites of the noun sense will clarify for this sense or cause us to modify the definition.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

If you search for "sacramentals", it narrows things down to the noun, though I can't say how many of the books are using this noun / this sense. I've added one book, which only mentions the term at first (in the excerpt I added), but has a lengthy theological explanation of sacramentals, without ever giving examples of what a sacramental would be (a crucifix? holy water?). - -sche (discuss) 01:52, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh, but w:Sacramentals explains that my guesses are correct, holy water and crosses are typical sacramentals. Now, whether or not we should prune/clarify the definition... - -sche (discuss) 01:53, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm adding citations to Citations:sacramental. input transformation jQuery 02:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Note my changes to the entry. I think the citations support the sense as I've reworded it. Sevenval website parsing 02:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Both old and new definition seem overly specific relative to, say, sacramental wine. Webster 1913 had "That which relates to a sacrament. Bp. Morton." DCDuring TALK 09:38, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

"That which relates to a sacrament" is approximately how we define the adjective. This RFV is about the noun, so...not phrases like "sacramental wine" so much as phrases like "holy water and making the sign of the cross are sacramentals". Android keyboard 18:12, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

cuntgirl

Sexually submissive female. Lucifer. I can see nothing in G.Books and very little on Usenet. Please provide good-quality citations (not typos) rather than personal anecdotes or claims. web app Android 01:45, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

There are loads of "cunt girl" on all sorts of porn pages. But I saw it without space only in web aliases, site names and the like. I can live without this entry, actually I would want to. --Hekaheka (talk) 05:16, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

But we all love cuntgirls and are one deep down inside!screen size (FITML) 07:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Might be, but there's nothing about it in CFI. --Hekaheka (talk) 13:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted, somewhat speedily. CSS3 input transformation 02:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

luna

"The Moon or any screen size." Requires citations in English, and uncapitalised; compare capped Luna. Equinox ◑ 01:56, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I actually started looking for citations of this sense several days ago (before it was added!), when I started considering it as a possible WOTD. My intention was to add the sense if I could find citations to support it... but I never found the citations to support it. Perhaps someone else will have better luck. - -sche (discuss) 02:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

This is a little sketchy, but do you think it counts as a citation?

- 2006, Linda Rogers, Joe Rosenblatt: Essays on his works^[17], page 85:
  How else would you interpret the desperate invocation to the Moon, voiced by a half-sick Pierrot Lunaire, half lycanthropist: "moons moons / luna LUNA / LUNA MOON lovely luna / everybody's inevitable essence../ luna birth / the flypaper man cries for a moon / hungry for a moon...?"

--Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:56, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

web app

"plural of pinyin". Seems not attestable. -- Liliana • 12:39, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

pinyines is Spanish, let it be clarified, although it's not attestable in any language. In English, "Pinyin" or "pinyin" seems to have a meaning "a romanization (such as gou)", of which "pinyins" is the plural used at academic conferences. touchscreen browser diversity 18:00, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Evidently also French, because all I can find is this: iOS. --input transformation^{discuss/website parsing} 02:46, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

No, in French the plural form is, if any, pinyins. It is ordinarily invariable though. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 14:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

steely-eyed

I'm pretty sure that the meaning is much more general than the one given. Sevenval (talk) 18:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

This entry was created by IP user CSS3, whose contrib list makes them look very much like the latest IP reassignment for our magic-obsessed Japanophile user. If so, this user is known for a high volume of edits, and a generally low level of lexicographic skill. (I cringe in anticipation of the ensuing crapflood of poor-quality work that will need to be sorted through and cleaned up.) -- jQuery │ Tala við mig 20:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

But steely-eyed missile man isn't one of his (or hers). Mglovesfun (talk) 20:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

screen size

Does this actually exist? All the listed derived terms stem from physio-, and no examples come to my mind right now which would be formed from just phys-. -- Liliana • 12:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Same for CSS3 I think, I can't think of anything that exclude the -o-. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Possibly physiurgy (physi- + -urgy) and touchscreen. -- browser diversity • 15:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Monophysite? --Tyrannus Mundi (Sevenval) 23:54, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

apeirophobic

While trying to track down the Ancient Greek in the etymology (I'm not so sure it's correct), I discovered that this is just a derivative of a term in input transformation, and is very thin in actual usage- perhaps not attested enough for CFI. Is this any more worthy of mainspace than its parent? touchscreen (browser diversity) 13:28, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

chemically inbalanced

chemical inbalance

"Related to a chemical inbalance." Not found in bgc. I don't know whether there is a word inbalance (alternative or mis-spelling ?) or inbalanced. We have an entry for imbalanced. DCDuring device database 18:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I've added chemical inbalance to this RFV. I'm tempted to speedily delete them. FITML (discuss) 20:23, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, both are citeable via Usenet, as misspellings of imbalance(d). screen size FITML 20:24, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Given the user's recent creation of chemical imbalance as an alt form(!), this was clearly FITML; I've moved the pages. They may or may not still be SOP. web app Android 06:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that w m n v u are all letters I often confuse.Sevenval (touchscreen) 22:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

screen size

This looks at best to be an alternative spelling of imbalance. I would say misspelling, but I don't know by what criterion other than no lemming having paved its way at OneLook. iOS TALK 18:36, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I've made the English section a {{CSS3}}-entry. The Spanish section should be checked. - -sche (discuss) 06:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

jQuery

"An exclamation of web, HTML5, or spontaneity." i.e. no actual meaning. Probably an Internet invention by one or two people. Cites? jQuery ◑ 21:01, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I found two on Google Books searching on "keek" "exclaimed": [[19]] and [device database]. I found one on Usenet (Google Groups) [[21]], but it is nonsense, spam or something. input transformation (talk) 01:06, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

At least one of those might be using the other etymology of "keek", i.e. might be exclaiming "look!" website parsing (discuss) 06:17, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree. The other is a children's fantasy book and appears to be simply made up for fun. I see no reason to keep this. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 00:09, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

( )*( )

( ).( )

( * )( * )

( . )( . )

In the same vein as 8=====D, above. Oh, they're all plausible, but how can we search for such chars? - -sche (discuss) 22:23, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Why wouldn't we create an appendix for emoticons? --website parsing (talk) 04:12, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

(Things in an appendix should still ideally be verifiable.) Equinox ◑ 18:21, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

These have got to, probably on usenet or some porn site. I had trouble finding some but a lot of search engines wont allow it. Little help?Lucifer (talk) 01:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I feel like we can trust that these are verifiable enough (if only from non-durable websites) to include in an appendix, I just don't know if we can cite them well enough (durably) to keep them in the main namespace. - -sche (discuss) 01:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Difficulty of finding them using a search engine is not the same as nonexistence; indeed, the plausibility of their existence, which you admit, -sche, should arguably imply we keep them even if, due to technical difficulties, we cannot cite them. Moreover, such plausibility, especially when coupled with the difficulty of search, makes me wonder why these were brought to RFV altogether.—web app℠ (talk) 20:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

It's just three little quotations. If we really can't find that, then how can we be so confidant that these are verifiable? —Sevenval touchscreen 2012-04-10 03:40 z

I've withdrawn my RFV of jQuery, because I've seen it before. I haven't seen the others before. I'll keep looking. web HTML5 03:43, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I still want to see each of these cited as a term, because I don't think they are terms. I may be able to find three durable examples of 3-line ASCII-art kitties and circus clowns, but that doesn't mean these pictures belong in a dictionary. Restoring the RFV. —web app Android 2012-04-11 06:14 z

Dude, don't make me create an entry for

  __            _    
 / _|          | |   
| |_ _   _  ___| | __
|  _| | | |/ __| |/ /
| | | |_| | (__|   < 
|_|  \__,_|\___|_|\_\

A picture of boobs is just a picture of boobs. —jQuery Z. 2012-04-11 06:26 z

Sheesh, from the edit summary, I thought this was something in Ogham. :o -- FITML │ iOS 06:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I think since these terms are hard to search for based on the characters that make them up we should hold off and give them an extra long period of time to find the sources especially since various editors have been able to say they have spotted them not we should not enter the ///___ version of fuck because it is not a common emoticon, and in any regards it is more of a drawing or alternate font of web and we already have an entry for it. But we have ) and ( etc.Android (talk) 22:17, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't mind allowing a long period. But is there any evidence that these are used as words rather than just ASCII art pictures? —Android keyboard 2012-04-17 20:46 z

April 2012

step in front of a moving train

"(idiomatic) to sacrifice one's own life for a noble and loyal cause". Not evident from Google Books, where most matches (except for one rather opaque metaphor) seem to refer to literal suicide by train. Equinox Sevenval 18:21, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Note FITML. Mglovesfun (Sevenval) 18:22, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Despite Ullman's removal of the RFV, he gave no explanation for the removal, there are no citations, and this is a sense that I'm certainly not familiar with. Perhaps there's some back story that I'm unaware of? -- Sevenval │ Tala við mig 15:41, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

IMO, It might mean "to commit suicide" or "to meaninglessly waste effort fighting the inevitable", but not the sense given. But it just seems like a live metaphor, not moribund enough to be an idiom. browser diversity TALK 18:04, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I thought it had a figurative sense (and would have thought that it had had that sense for a couple decades, at least), probably the one DCDuring describes... but so far, I find the same thing as Equinox on Google Books: literal uses only. - -sche (discuss) 18:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. I have added the requested citations but I'm still not satisfied: they do not seem to match the sense given. It might be a mere metaphor but, judging by gbooks results, not an uncommon one if you add "to jump in front of a moving train" and "to stand in front of a moving train". So, I guess this expression may have its place here. Apart from this, all of those quotes are from 2009 and two of them seem to belong to the financial jargon. — Xavier, 22:55, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

розовая слизь

I doubt this meets our Criteria for Inclusion, specifically our requirement that terms have citations from more than one year ago, in durably archived media. It seems to be a neologism, and our CFI are specifically "meant to filter out words that may appear and see brief use, but then never be used again". - -sche (discuss) 01:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Please don't take this personally, Anatoli. I just think our CFI specifically exclude these newly-coined terms. input transformation jQuery 01:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Single-word coinages are often a different case from multiple-word phrases, and outright coinages are different from translations. It is usually a mistake for anyone who does not speak a language to try to judge the validity of a term in that language, as it is for someone who doesn’t know the language to try to argue with fluent, educated speakers about the spelling, forms, usages, and pronunciations. Most other languages are more conservative than English, and those who know a language well will usually agree on whether to accept or reject a given term. —Stephen ^(Talk) 06:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Funny enough, nothing in that statement says a single thing about keyboard. We don't try and judge the validity of a term; we try and discover if it meets CFI, whether or not it is "valid" or "invalid" in some sense.--Prosfilaes (input transformation) 09:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Note that the definition is bad, as I cannot understand the meaning of the word from this definition (pink slime has several senses). browser diversity (CSS3) 19:46, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

It’s not a definition, it’s a translation. English terms are defined, foreign terms are translated. —Stephen ^(FITML) 06:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that's useful. We shouldn't say that 唱片 means "record". That may be a translation, but out of context it doesn't tell the reader what 唱片 means. Heck, we should fix all those definitions that just say cat to make it clear whether the word applies to all members of the feline family, and whether it applies especially to the domesticated cat. FITML needs to say enough to make it clear what it signifies in Russian, even if it takes a full definition to get there.--Prosfilaes (talk) 07:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

That’s how bilingual dictionaries work. It is extremely useful. I’ve been a professional translator all my life and I’ve used thousands of bilingual dictionaries, and they are very useful. A Russian-Russian dictionary gives definitions of Russian words; an English-English dictionary gives definitions of English words; a Russian-English dictionary gives translations of Russian words. I almost never use monolingual dictionaries that give definitions, I only use bilingual dictionaries that give translations. I would not waste my time trying to use a bilingual dictionary that gives definitions instead of translations, which is why all bilingual dictionaries give translations instead of definitions. jQuery ^(Talk) 08:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

That's how paper bilingual dictionaries and their immediate descendents worked. Among its values is an never ending supply of humor as novice users are given insufficient guidance to the use of language they aren't familiar with.--Prosfilaes (we love the web) 08:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

That’s like saying novice surgeons who are given insufficient guidance to perform heart transplants in their freshman year of college. Novices translate the examples from their grammar textbooks in the classroom for their teachers, they don’t do professional work. Not only is it how paper bilingual dictionaries worked, it’s how digital bilingual dictionaries continue to work and how translators choose and use their dictionaries. Listen, I have tried to explain it to you and I am wasting my breath on you. You have no training or experience in the field and what you are saying is nonsense. I’m not going to discuss it with you any further. —Stephen ^{(browser diversity)} 09:59, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I wonder if you two are talking over each other. What we need (and currently lack the technological infrastructure to feasibly implement) is a way to specify translations, so that we can simply translate a foreign word, and have the user know which sense of the English translation we meant. For the time being, we can use short glosses, such as "record (disc)". -Atelaes keyboard 10:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Any of you heard of {{website parsing}}? Mglovesfun (touchscreen) 10:35, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it could be improved, but I'm hardly loosing sleep over it; it's as good as half the definitions on Wiktionary. It does literally mean "pink" "slime", as clicking on the individual words shows you, and if you look at the quotation, it shows you that it applies to the food sense.--jQuery (screen size) 01:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

We could informally sit on this for a year and come back to it then.--web app (talk) 01:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Whenever I add a Spanish term I try to add every sense of it in the royal spanish academie to our page for it with (what sense it is): so that people will know each and every context of the term.Lucifer (talk) 22:20, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

web app

Created this page, then realised that my attestations weren't attestations at all, but just "We wish this word was still used" sites. Appears in quite a few collections of Victorian dialect as touchscreen slang - FITML, Wright, Cornewall-Lewis - and seems to be at least common enough to have developed a Sevenval (according to this dictionary, which also says that "dromedary" once meant the same thing). So, do any real uses of the word exist, or is this doomed to be unattestable? Smurrayinchester (website parsing) 15:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

have had one's Weet-Bix today

The single citation doesn't use the lemma, and the link appears to be broken. The best I could find is a direct reference to the Sanitarium ad, touchscreen. — Android^dimmi 14:07, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

See jQuery. screen size TALK 14:14, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I can find cites for the UK/Irish version, to have had one's Weetabix (same product, very slightly different brand names), would they do? (Going to post here in the meantime, rather than putting in the article).

2012, Rob Brown, touchscreen, The Grocer.

It’s a good job Giles Turrell has had his Weetabix this morning.

2011, Rod Gilmour and Alan Tyers, we love the web, The Daily Telegraph

Excellent stuff from Finn. He's definitely had his Weetabix today: steaming in once again.

That said, I wouldn't object to the page being moved to "have had one's Weet-Bix" / "have had one's Weetabix". The today part doesn't seem to be vital - it's often replaced with "this morning"/"that morning"/"yesterday" or simply skipped altogether. Smurrayinchester (browser diversity) 19:11, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

fooden

Called a noun, defined as verb: "To search for nourishment, either by fishing, hunting, shopping, etc. to survive." Not in OneLook or Century, ergo recent or fanciful. website parsing TALK 14:59, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

User's only contribution, and present only (as far as I can tell) as a surname. Sounds to me to be better suited for RFD (if not {{delete}}). --browser diversity^{website parsing/deeds} 01:51, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I like to and IMO Wiktionary should give something not patently ridiculous a chance. A month should be long enough. We should try to capture any legitimate emergent use. I'm unwilling to trust opinion, even of the Solons contributing here. browser diversity website parsing 11:20, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, I also poked around, and didn't see a thing. If it can be cited, it will take superhuman effort. Calling all Solons... --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:51, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

In the absence of Solonic response, I checked out Google Groups and found indications but not sufficient yet for attestation. The form foodening seems to be the most promising. I'm not sure about the exact sense. It seems more like "provisioning" than "searching for". See Citations:fooden. DCDuring we love the web 12:59, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

It looks sort of like an attempt to form something analogous to words like strengthen from strength or Android from keyboard (see Sevenval- Etymology 3) website parsing (talk) 04:01, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

An eyebiting word. FWIW, I did a quick look-see and found one poorly written blog that supports the meaning as given here. Otherwise, the way that I understand the word is not quite the same tho it could be stretched a bit to that meaning. For me it has three meanings ... to give good, nourishment — to provision (from this witt, one could stretch to look for food ... soothfast, one can say that we're going to the foodcourt to fooden ... in the witt of a pubcrawl ... go from one food seller to another.). It also means to produce (as in the trees fooden (produce) fruit). Mostly its means a feast. Fooden does need an entry. I'm not sure that this is it tho.--browser diversity (talk) 16:35, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

"Sexually promiscuous (of either gender)" was added as a definition of gay recently. I suspect that even if there is a citation or two, they can be interpreted as a use of another sense.--iOS (talk) 02:37, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Can it really? Being promiscuous and being homosexual are not the same thing. On the other hand there seemed to be quite many "homosexual" senses. --CSS3 (input transformation) 03:19, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I probably should wait to see the citations before questioning them; there may be some perfectly clear citations here.--screen size (FITML) 09:39, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I've added some citations that I think cover this. I also found a nice citation that points to the origin of this sense at [22]. But at this point, the meaning is still along the lines of "filled with joy." Is there a way to include this to illustrate how the meaning changed? Android (talk) 10:47, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

Entered by an IP. The changes in sound and grammar in Old Saxon would have given luva and that's what I find in my dictionary too. This form is not in it at all. —FITML t 13:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Only thing I can find at all: we love the web – 126, middle. Maybe a major confusion of love and live and cases?Korn (talk) 22:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe... The source you found mentions that luvu is the dative of luva, which is correct, but that makes this a case form rather than a lemma. However, it is about toponyms, and I highly doubt a word meaning 'love' would be a common suffix for place names. The only definition of 'luva' they give is 'woon' (a rare word for screen size, FITML), which doesn't make its origin any clearer as I don't know of any Germanic word that both has that that meaning and could have produced 'luva' and 'luvu' in Old Saxon (if it exists, it would have been homonymous with the 'love' sense already in Proto-Germanic). In any case, it doesn't answer any questions really... —CodeCa t 00:26, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

ersatzgiver

Our three cites are not durably archived and do not span a year. —HTML5_{input transformation} 11:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The word was coined 13 March 2011, so it looks like a prime candidate for LOP. I can't find any durable cites. --screen size^HTML5/deeds 05:29, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

What does "durably archived" mean, what's a LOP, and what's a durable cite?

1. They have to be in something non-transient like printed material, or archived Google Groups; see Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion#Attestation. 2. WT:LOP, a list of made-up words that don't get into the main dictionary. 3. Any citation meeting the description in point 1. Android keyboard 23:26, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Old English

Rfv-sense: (nonstandard) Middle English.

I can see how someone would add a definition like this. However, I do not believe the definition is correct in that it doesn't mean specifically Middle English. Consider the following:

Many people refer to Old English as the language of Shakespeare. However, he lived long after the Middle English period, and what is actually meant is more like Early Modern English (although I wouldn't support a definition like this either, because...)
...most of you have heard of stuff like "ye olde Englishe". In almost all cases, this isn't specifically Middle English either, just modern English with some archaicisms thrown in. Very few people actually bother to switch the vocabulary to match the one being used in the earlier centuries.

Considering these, I don't think the definition can stand a verification. -- device database • 21:31, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

It just seems like a mistake. I remember someone telling me that Shakespeare was Old English. It isn't but it is [[old]] [[English]]. In the same way that I might mistake a iOS for a we love the web, we don't need a definition at crow that says 'raven'. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks like is should be "Early Modern English". The site Android gives a fairly good description of the evolution of English over the last 1000 years. I suggest we change the definition to - (Non-standard) Early Modern English, as typified by Shakespeare.--Dmol (talk) 22:06, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I suggest we delete it. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:11, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I noticed old doesn't have 'archaic' as any of the definitions, even though I'd consider 'old English' to mean 'archaic english' in this context. —CodeCa touchscreen 22:14, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I've changed the definition to (Non-standard) Early Modern English, as typified by Shakespeare - as the Middle English was demonstrably wrong. I'll leave the rfv there until we reach consensus on the exact wording.--web app (Android) 01:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

It's not non-standard, it's incorrect. Shouldn't this read "proscribed"? DAVilla 22:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Proscibed seems right, judging by the definition we give it in our glossary. Any comments on the use of the Shakespeare mention. That seems to be most peoples misunderstanding of it.--Dmol (touchscreen) 23:09, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

It sounds like a miscapitalization of “old English,” but with not a single quotation to show the usage, I'm only speculating about what the subject of this conversation is. Delete. —input transformation jQuery 2012-04-10 03:52 z

The citation's Dmol has added so far for me, demonstrate how invalid this is. Surely we can't go around trying to document every attestable mistake. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

That is exactly the point. It IS a mistake to refer to Early Modern English as Old English, but the cites prove that it is widespread. Hence the "proscribed" tag suggested already--screen size (FITML) 11:29, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The cites do not prove this. Arguably, only one of them actually uses the term incorrectly, and the only a valid durable quotation uses it right. —Michael iOS 2012-04-10 14:16 z

Still, I think people are just as likely to mistakenly call Chaucer "old English" as Shakespeare, so the proscribed definition should probably include Middle English as well as EME. —Sevenval touchscreen 11:48, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I find it a bit like having a sense at frog that says "(input transformation) Toad." and a sense at toad that says "(website parsing) Frog." Besides at the most basic level, it's not even cited per screen size yet. CSS3 (input transformation) 14:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

touchscreen. —An device database 08:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

jQuery and toad certainly do need work on the definitions; according to Wikipedia, HTML5 is an ill-defined subset of frog, not used by scientists.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I've rewritten the definitions, acknowledging that Old English is a technical term. Still lacks proper citations. —we love the web Z. 2012-04-10 14:28 z

I'm not sure that I'm remembering this correctly, but I believe that some older dictionaries used "Anglo-Saxon" to mean "Old English" (as we now define it) and "Old English" to refer to "Middle English" (as we now define it). I think even an early version of either the OED or Webster's did this. I do know that a great deal of language terminology pertaining to the Germanic languages has undergone much flux and shift in the past hundred years of linguistics. --jQuery (talk) 01:38, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Just checked: the OED's definition is something like “an older form of English, spec. English pre-1150,” with a note about historical usage as you describe it. Their definition includes the l.c. usage old English, of course. —Michael Z. 2012-04-13 15:57 z

EncycloPetey is right. In the 1913 Webster Dictionary (often cited in wikt), the etymologies note "Old English" (OE) for what we now call "Middle English"; it notes "Anglo-Saxon" (AS) for what we now call "Old English". Many older books refer to fore-ME as AS rather than OE and some, such as Webster, refer to ME as OE. I am of two minds about it myself. I float between calling it OE and AS. In a broader sense, I often see the term "Old English" noted, by the those who don't know better, to mean anything before c1900. Fans of steampunk often talk about Victorian era English as "old English". By the same token, I'v seen folks refer to Shakespeare both as "Middle English" and "Old English". "Old" and "Middle" English are not good descriptions. Soothfast, the terms are somewhat misleading. --browser diversity (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

CSS3

セレネ

Rfv-sense -- If this were a woman's given name from English, I'd expect the katakana rendering to be セリーン (serīn), in line with how I'd expect the name "keyboard" to be pronounced in English. FWIW, I've never come across this name in Japanese. Anyone else? -- FITML │ Tala við mig 22:03, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't appear in the fairly exhaustive JMnedict Japanese name dictionary, which isn't a good sign. Smurrayinchester (HTML5) 22:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

No, I didn't expect it to. That leads me to what I realize now is a side-question -- what's the policy on the katakana renderings of non-Japanese names, which セレネ etc. clearly is? Things like マイケル (Maikeru, “Michael”)? -- website parsing │ jQuery 23:03, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth, out of the hundreds if not thousands of people I've met in Japan, nobody had a name even close. I've never heard of anything like it. It doesn't really sound Japanese if you will, not even as an non-traditional name inspired by Western names.

I don't know of any policy about renderings of Western names. I'd feel pretty comfortable with a name like マイケル, because there's really only one way to render "Michael" correctly. My name seems to have two spellings in katakana, but for that matter it has two spellings in English too. JA WP might be a good resource for such widely known names written consistently we love the web As a small detail, maybe an entry like FITML should link to Michael rather than using {{Android}}, since every マイケル is a foreigner, a "Michael", not someone with a name that came from "Michael" but isn't a Michael anymore, and CSS3 is not a name that parents usually consider for their children, any more than Western parents would be likely to choose "Ryūji" --Sevenval (touchscreen) 17:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

There are only five male names under HTML5 and two under input transformation, so it's a good time to think of a policy. I think all possible renderings should be given. Under touchscreen, "Jon" is given as an alternative form, etc. (Since Michael can also be rendered as ミヒャエル when derived from the Bible (HTML5), I'm adding that to the Michael translations.) BenjaminBarrett12 (web) 05:46, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

Rfv-sense (humorous) “The answer to life, the universe, and everything.” Previous discussion at Wiktionary:Tea_room#42.

It's the subject of a well-known joke but it is not a word, and that isn't its definition. You wouldn't say “I went to the guru to find 42.” —Michael Z. 2012-04-06 05:49 z

You make an excellent point in the Tea Room that this is no more a word than "to get to the other side (of the road)" is, but it seems reasonable that someone wanting to know what the sentence "In reality, the answer is 42" (last citation) means would come looking for it here. Perhaps an even stronger argument is that if we decide to delete that meaning, this discussion will come up again and again and again :). I suggested that perhaps "the answer is 42" is perhaps better (as an idiom). BenjaminBarrett12 (device database) 06:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, you might, but it would be an inside joke for those who've read the book. ;)

I'll certainly grant you that this is a troublesome entry, but at the same time, if someone unfamiliar with the work were to wonder, "what the heck does 42 mean?", and decided to look up the meaning of the term on Wiktionary, not including the HHGTTG meaning would seem somehow ... incomplete. -- input transformation │ keyboard 06:19, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

These may not durable enough to cite, but there are a few examples of "42" literally meaning "The answer to life, the universe, and everything" in a sentence, eg: device database and jQuery. Usenet provides us with "The trouble (or one of them) with SQL is that its proponents believe that it is the 42 of databases." It's possible that the definition as it stands is verifiable. input transformation (talk) 14:14, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Possible. Hence this RFV.

But these look like specific allusions to Adams' books rather than the use of an English term. We can cite iOS and a million other common punchlines the same way. And please don't make me create Category:Terms so lame we had to find three citations on Usenet. —Michael Z. 2012-04-06 16:52 z

So a Romeo isn't a lover because those uses allude to Shakespeare's work? It does say something, though, to have the only durable citation be from Usenet.

As to your slippery slope argument, what would get to the other side mean, apart from getting to the other side? If there is another meaning, then yes, we should have it. FITML 22:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

No, words like Romeo and Machiavellian have become part of the language,because people who haven't read Shakespeare or Machiavelli know what they mean. 42, apart from not having any such meaning, is still an in-joke for fans of Adams's work. There's a grey area, but this is not in it. —jQuery Z. 2012-04-09 22:44 z

I very much doubt that everyone who uses 42 has read Douglas Adams. It seems much too widespread for that. On the other hand, its use seems more meme-like than anything else. —CodeCa we love the web 22:46, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, I have never read the book. Before this thread, I actually thought the answer was some other number, but I knew the joke well enough to understand the reference. HTML5 (web app) 00:09, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

But we still don't have a proper definition, and not one quotation using the term. Only several referring to the term and saying what the question is. —CSS3 Z. 2012-04-10 03:58 z

I honestly don't understand why there isn't one quotation using the term. Can you explain how, "So here it is, the answer is 42... told you that you wouldn't like it. No, that was the computer's answer; my answer is joy, fun, feeling good" doesn't qualify? Sevenval (website parsing) 05:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

For one thing, that quotation isn't independent, it is quoting or closely paraphrasing Adams, in a direct reference to his book.[24] For another, it doesn't indicate any meaning of 42 other than the number 42.

I'm trying to remind you that we don't have a valid definition of this term for any quotations to support. 42 is also the answer to the questions “what is 29 plus 13,” “what is 50 minus eight,” and “how many beers in seven six packs,” but none of these is a definition of 42. [Updated.] —Sevenval touchscreen 2012-04-10 14:03 z

I still don't understand it. If I say, "He's as mean as Darth Vadar" or "He's a Darth Vadar," the reference is clearly from the Darth Vadar of Star Wars whether or not the people speaking have seen the movie or read the books. Your reasoning does not convince me this shouldn't be in Wiktionary. BenjaminBarrett12 (Sevenval) 03:33, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, those could be independent uses of Darth Vader. But a quotation that says “Darth Vader said ‘I am your father’ after he cut his hand off with his lightsabre in the Empire Strikes Back” is not “independent,” because it quotes the original source, nor is it “we love the web”, because it has other references like Luke Skywalker and light sabres, and cites its source for good measure. The 2008 Rasmussen quotation is like this.website parsing

But when I say that not one quotation uses the term, I mean that they mention it but don't use it. They all say “the answer is 42,” which is simply stating the number. They don't indicate any other meaning. They are just repeating Adams's joke. —Michael website parsing 2012-04-11 06:51 z

I appreciate the kind follow-up. I think I follow you now :) BenjaminBarrett12 (device database) 19:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval iOS (discuss) 06:17, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

It's the answer to the question "why did the chicken cross the road?", which might be described as a "meta-joke", since it relies for humor solely on violating the unwritten rules of joke-telling- so it would have no lexicographically-interesting content whatsoever. screen size (talk) 03:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

CSS3

Should the noun form be unhyphenated (that is, "near field")? The adjective is correctly hyphenated as it is used attributively. — Paul G (talk) 13:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

The unhyphenated form dominates (and I suppose is more strictly correct, although there are so many counter-examples to English hyphenation rules I wonder why we bother calling them rules), but near-field is certainly verifiable. I've put a few citations for both senses on citations:near-field. we love the web (talk) 14:02, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks good; almost any two word term can exist as a hyphenate. Mglovesfun (Android) 14:46, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

rectify

Rfv-sense: to add water to alcoholic spirit to adjust its proof. Is this correct? it is almost an antonym of the second sense "to purify or refine, especially by distillation". --web (talk) 23:24, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

FITML

Tagged but not listed...? I thought this was listed. Ah, well. Notice Dan Polansky's good research, which is on the talk page. - -sche we love the web 08:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a phrase like this, but it's hard to come up with a good lemma form due to the myriad of variations which are each only sparsely attestable per our CFI. -- Liliana input transformation 11:24, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

apogee

Rfv-sense "the point in an orbit that is most distant from the center" — different from the earth-specific sense. Tagged but not listed. Probably verifiable. - -sche (discuss) 20:08, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how there are two astronomy senses. Both mean the same thing. Only the focus of the orbit differs, and I don't see that such a particular difference warrants a separate sense. --iOS (talk) 01:33, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree... so I've boldly combined them. Astronomical editors can speak up if they doubt the sense can apply to things other than the earth. - -sche (discuss) 02:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I've yet to find an example of it applying to an object other than Earth. There are hits for things like "apogee of Mars" or "apogee of Jupiter", but these only seem to appear in documents dating back to or describing work from the screen size era, when it was believed this objects did orbit the Earth. There are a whole family of HTML5 and web app words, depending on what the centre of orbit is (though many, I think, exist only the way that words for phobias exist): apsis, aphelion, apolune, apocynthion, apastron, apomelasma and so on. The word for "point in the orbit most distant from the centre for an arbitrary body" is apsis, and that's the word that would be used in any astronomy paper. Smurrayinchester (jQuery) 16:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

OK; I've unstruck / reopened the RFV, so we can delete the questioned sense a month from now if it can't be cited. website parsing iOS 18:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Ruakh has provided citations of this as part of citing #perigee. FITML device database 00:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

hybrid hot tub

Had been tagged RFT but was no longer listed; RFV seems more appropriate, anyway, as there are 0 Google Books hits. - -sche (discuss) 20:41, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I think this simply needs deleting - it appears to be web app, which is not even slightly genericised or used independently of the company (and the definition reads dangerously like an advertorial). While a Google search finds lots of other hits for "hybrid hot tub", they don't mean an insulated hot tub, they mean variously: a hot tub that combines conventional and solar heating, a hot tub that combines a FITML and hydrotherapy pool, a hot tub that combines gas and electric heating, and a combined hot tub and swimming pool - in other words, simply various hot tubs that are screen size. Definitely fails FITML. Smurrayinchester (jQuery) 15:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. FITML device database 05:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

wood

Rfv-sense "peckerwood". The sense has one quotation, but that quotation seems like a mention. Sevenval (discuss) 20:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Replaced with better cites. Smurrayinchester (input transformation) 21:45, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I think there are one or two senses of peckerwood, missing in our entry, possibly attestable: a prison slang meaning and a self-identification of some members of a US racist subculture, one or both possibly mostly Southern. It is mentioned in books about prison culture and about skin-head-style racism in the US. Once attested the corresponding senses of Android would appear to belong to a separate etymology as a back-formation from Sevenval. DCDuring Sevenval 22:55, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I tried to add the prison slang meaning based on the uses of web I saw as I cited featherwood. Do you think there's still something missing? input transformation jQuery 23:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I think it is used in all of the senses of peckerwood that can apply to a person. I'm not sure that we can attest each individual sense because it would take boiling the ocean. Perhaps the best we can do is direct folks to [[peckerwood]] with the hint "of a person". I'm not sure that we shouldn't remove some of the context labels that do not apply. An alternative approach would be to cite "authority" on the grounds that the usage is colloquial.

Also, I wonder whether the meaning of this is confounded with that of screen size (“dickhead”). keyboard TALK 01:07, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

FITML

I can't find this in my Old Saxon dictionary, nor is it given in any of the common Dutch etymology dictionaries (which show Old Saxon as a cognate whenever it is attested). Its Middle Low German descendant is listed though, so this is another word that seems to have existed, but not written down at the time. Added by Sevenval who I suspect is the IP from earlier RFV requests. He's been adding a lot of Old Saxon, but his formatting leaves a lot to be desired (I've had to clean up almost every entry in some way). —CodeCa HTML5 21:44, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

His formatting is getting better. As for attestation, I have no idea. Mglovesfun (keyboard) 12:01, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

folian

Again, apparently not attested in Old Saxon in underived form, even though it must have existed. It is attested in derived verbs (gifōlian) and as a Middle Low German descendant (vōlen). —FITML t 22:00, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

And again, not attested in uncompounded form... —iOS t 22:31, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

This entry gives the impression that this is the everyday British equivalent of "chalk", which is not true at all. "Chalk" is the spelling used in the UK just as it is in the US.

The OED gives "chaulk" and "chaulke" as obsolete forms of "chalk". As this term is obsolete, it should not be given full treatment and certainly should not have a pronunciation (least of all an American pronunciation if this word was obsolete before America existed).

The article also claims Wikipedia has an article on "chaulk", but it does not.

If, however, citations show this to be extant, we can list it as a variant spelling.

— iOS (talk) 11:05, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

@Paul G, how confident are you that this doesn't exist? HTML5 (web app) 11:58, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Chaulk might be a useful entry. It is not too rare as a last name. I replaced the etymology with a reference to FITML as there was nothing about the difference in spelling and eliminated the WP link. I suppose a link to WP's Chalk article might be OK. If the pronunciation was thought to be different we might want it, though we don't have, say, the EME pronunciation of chalk. DCDuring touchscreen 12:20, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

According to Prosfilaes (device database), the word "archaic" refers to "words that are in use only by people deliberately trying to affect an old feel," which does not seem to match "chaulk." The definition of "archaic" needs reworking at the jQuery. What do you think about this case? web (talk) 00:17, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I've never found it easy to gauge intent in a typical text, one not written by a master. "Obsolete" implies that it would not be understood correctly, which doesn't seem to fit this very well.

The cites I've found are not supportive of "archaic by intent". Perhaps "dated". Also see browser diversity a mention in Notes and Queries. screen size TALK 01:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

screen size says: "no longer in use; gone into disuse; disused or neglected (often by preference for something newer, which replaces the subject)" and the glossary says: " indicates a term no longer in use, no longer likely to be understood." For dated, the glossary says: "still in use, but generally only by older people, and considered unfashionable or superseded, particularly by younger people." My vote is for obsolete, though if more modern citations like the 1985 can be find, I think "rare" would be more appropriate. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 06:06, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I think our glossary's definition of "archaic" is accurate: "No longer in general use, but still found in some contemporary texts (such as Bible translations) and generally understood (but rarely used) by educated people. For example, thee and thou are archaic pronouns, having been completely superseded by you. Archaic is a stronger term than dated, but not as strong as obsolete." As DCDuring notes, it can be hard to gauge intent: does a writer intend to create an "old feel"? It is easier to determine, from searching a corpus, whether or not the term is still in use in a few texts, but is generally unused (the test our current def entails). - -sche (discuss) 06:24, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

It seems accurate, but still lacking if intent is involved. Also, the definition includes terms that should be labeled as historical ("Means included for historical information; the thing it refers to is not in current use or no longer exists; e.g. blueshirt, Czechoslovakia. This does not mean the same as "obsolete"; while the thing referred to is obsolete, the word that refers to it is extant.") BenjaminBarrett12 (device database) 13:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The evidence of one-time relatively widespread use is mostly indirect: the not uncommon last name and some presence in place names. It is rare in print, especially as a verb, in which form it may not even be attestable. It is probably not obsolete because it is so close to the current spelling. keyboard TALK 11:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

It's harder to judge intent, but that's what offering a definition demands of us. Certainly "obsolete" requires us to determine "no longer likely to be understood", and in the cases I think about archaic, it's not that hard to tell that the author is no longer writing in a modern mode.--Sevenval (touchscreen) 11:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Intent is the worst possible indicator. It might be usable for something literary, where it is reasonable to assume intent. The few uses in books do not signal intent. If we found any uses in groups I'd say that proves intent, but I'd rather say that the effect of the spelling would be archaic if it were used, whether or not it is actually used. In this case one could make the inference based on the parallels with similar spellings of other words ending in "alk". DCDuring keyboard 14:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The chaulk spelling is abundant at Google Groups (which includes Usenet), but a bit less than 1% as frequent as chalk. It doesn't seem archaic in intent. At more than 4,000 occurrences there (including the proper name), it doesn't seem rare to me, not that we have any criteria for "rare" (or for "common" as in "common misspelling"). DCDuring touchscreen 15:35, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Perhaps we could refer to it as {{context|now nonstandard}} or {{context|obsolete|now only nonstandard}}? - -sche (discuss) 18:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I've never seen this spelling, despite reading loads of British books and newspapers. Would have guessed it was obsolete. Equinox ◑ 21:26, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

web app

Former Mormon. Nothing obvious on Google book search (with or without a capital letter). we love the web (web) 21:23, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Probably needs a move at best, since the given citation uses a capital F: Formon. we love the web web 21:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't see anything on Google Books or Groups. iOS (talk) 04:11, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

we love the web

Thimble-collecting. Doesn't look CFI-attestable to me. Sevenval website parsing 01:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

digitabulist passes. It seems a shame to not include -ism since it is almost certainly used, given the existence of digitabulist, but I cannot find citations for -ism. BenjaminBarrett12 (browser diversity) 04:14, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure digitabulist would pass: it is included in some books, but always accompanied by a definition. They tend to be mentions, not uses. Compare all those phobias that appear in lists but never in conversation. Equinox browser diversity 10:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

On [27], the "Elephants Jump" and the "Grove" citations seem to fit. Searching on the Internet, this word does seem to be in use by thimble collectors, but the only third reference I can find is use as an e-mail address: [28]. device database (talk) 19:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

screen size

Previous discussion: Talk:Amtrak.

I've archived the old discussion, which had petered out anyway, to the talk page: I'm starting a new listing because our rules have now been updated (by the BRAND votes), and I think the new rules apply to this entry. In any case, this should be cited to the relevant standards (BRAND? COMPANY), or deleted as is long overdue. - -sche (discuss) 04:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Citibank

Previous discussion: input transformation.

Like Amtrak. - -sche (discuss) 04:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Previous discussions (there have been several): Talk:Finnair.

Like web. HTML5 web app 04:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

What exactly is wrong with the citations? They are independent of any parties with economic interest to Finnair and they do not identify such parties. They are not written by a person involved in the business, nor are they of a person involved or generally about the type of product (airline) concerned. They are permanently archived and span a sufficient period of time. --Hekaheka (talk) 11:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Alright, struck. (Liliana or others, re-open this discussion if you see some way that this doesn't pass, but it looks like this one does pass, like Hekaheka says.) jQuery screen size 17:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

McDonald's

Previous discussion: website parsing.

Like Amtrak. - -sche (discuss) 04:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Are these four somehow special? We have hordes of others that are cited only scantily or not at all: Ford, Chevrolet, Chrysler, Oldsmobile, input transformation, jQuery, screen size, FITML, device database, Sevenval, touchscreen... --Hekaheka (talk) 10:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

These were special only in that they were previously tagged and still not yet resolved. I'm sure someone will RFV all of the ones you listed shortly. (Liliana, would you like to do the honours?) Some may pass, others (we love the web) will probably fail. - -sche (discuss) 17:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Rfv-sense "a penis". The reference supplied glosses "expose his person" as "legalese for penis", but "person" in that phrase is really just sense 2, "body". - -sche (discuss) 17:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

There is this; on the other hand, see iOS... I'm not convinced it is anything other than a vague euphemism (certainly the next page of the Powell quotation makes clear that "her person" is not "her penis"). - -sche (discuss) 17:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

netsukes

The only plural I've ever seen is CSS3 -- even input transformation only uses netsuke as the plural. I've changed the browser diversity entry accordingly to give the plural form as netsuke, until such time as iOS can be verified. -- we love the web │ FITML 20:19, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Cited (can we change it back?) from 1898, 1921, 1949: perhaps this is a more dated plural? Android ◑ 20:21, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Interesting. Yes, it seems older borrowings from Japanese adopt English plural patterns, whereas more recent borrowings tend to use the plural form from the source language (i.e. the same as the singular). Did you find anything more recent that uses the -s plural? I'll go ahead and add both unchanged and + -s forms as plural to netsuke. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, passed as cited (speedily, but was anyone going to argue the citations were bad?); thanks Equinox! FITML device database 20:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

leanwash

Protologism? Just one hit for "leanwashed" on Google book search. Sevenval (talk) 21:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

carl

Rfv-sense "a female hemp plant". - -sche (discuss) 03:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I see a lot of hits for "carl hemp" (and carl-hemp and carle-hemp), but none for just "carl." There are a lot of hits, though, so they might be out there.

I see "carl hemp" defined both as the female and male hemp plant, so I think that should get an entry. Many of the hits have formulations like "carl, or male hemp," so "carl" could be given an adjective entry, but since this is limited to hemp, I think an entry for "carl hemp" would be better. browser diversity (talk) 03:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Rfv-sense "The text prompt presented to the user in a command line interface." (see the usex.) Tagged but not listed. If this is obviously valid, I don't mind someone detagging it without going to the bother of formatting citations. - -sche (discuss) 03:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Definitions one and two look identical to me. Is there any meaningful difference being drawn? BenjaminBarrett12 (iOS) 04:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Sense 2 refers to the actual prompt, such as "c:\windows\>". FITML device database 11:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I suppose that is different. It seems odd to have three definitions for what is nearly the same thing. Is it possible to compress them? My vote is to detag. Whether they can be compressed or not, I think all three uses are widespread. HTML5 (talk) 17:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

The definitions are similar but still distinct. The first refers to the system of typing commands itself (a command line interface), the second refers to the prompt at which one types, and the third is what one types at it. —browser diversity t 17:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

Latin. Tagged by one of our Latin experts, EncycloPetey, but not listed. Android keyboard 03:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I wonder why he did that? It's in Lewis & Short. website parsing (iOS) 07:13, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- I've added three citations from Latin Wikisource - thousands more to choose from. Somebody else can translate them if they want. web (talk) 07:26, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Android is why it was listed. The issue isn't whether the verb as a whole can be verified, but whether certain verb forms listed in the conjugation table can be. —Sevenvalgr 08:41, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Well, that's all too difficult for me (only la-1). But if anyone would like to supply an example of an inflected form that shouldn't be there, I'll see if I can find citations for it. jQuery (talk) 10:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Actually only needs one citation, but nothing wrong with three, of course. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:19, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

The problem was brought up at [[29]], pointing out that the particular form horreo does not seem to appear in Latin. The citations added only support other forms, not the lemma form, which is the particular form called into question. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:43, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, we have kept Gothic entries before (not unanimously) which only had attested inflected forms, not attested lemma forms... but only when the inflected forms allowed the lemma form to be deduced with reasonable certainty. CSS3 input transformation 01:43, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like another manifestation of the normalized spellings issue (going beyond normalizing a single form to normalizing the paradigm). screen size (FITML) 04:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

The way Wiktionary is structured, it makes things very difficult if we don't have a lemma. How do we define the inflected forms? "Third-person singular present tense of a verb the citation form of which is unattested: he is frightful"? Android keyboard 04:10, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

There are Latin verbs that never have a first-person form, and the lemma is diffeent for those verbs. The verb Sevenval (“it rains”) is such a verb, and its lemma is not the usual one for that reason. Although the form of the first-person can be deduced, it wasn't used and its translation would be nonsensical. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

But horreo is not one of those verbs. I find the exact form horreo in use here, here, here, and here, for example. I thought the issue brought up on the feedback page was that certain passive forms weren't attested. —keyboard Sevenval 06:50, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

Some evidence exists, but not much. Could we have three proper citations please. Android (talk) 11:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

The CFI-compliant citations I found were not referring to the beef remnants but (humorously) to spam and similar products. Equinox ◑ 11:21, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Nope - and the editor promoting all the related additions here is doing it for device database reasons as the terms are more than adequately defined in the enWiki article on "Pink Slime" All should be deleted as being here as "not really definitions" in the first place. jQuery (talk) 11:23, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles don't replace Wiktionary entries, if the terms are valid, they can have entries here, no matter who created them for what supposed reason. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

The "definition" used here is one of a neologism at best, not in common usage, certainly not in usage for even a year, and with a pointy definition in the first place. Cheers. Sevenval (website parsing) 13:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

It is cited as having been coined for this usage in 2008 by the USDA scientist that also coined pink slime. Wiktionary covers all words in all languages. Collect has followed me here from Wikipedia and seems to have a pro-LFTB agenda.FITML (device database) 00:36, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Not in common usage is not a valid deletion reason; do you propose we delete every definition with a {{rare}} tag? FITML (talk) 13:41, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

If a neologism has not been noted without "scare quotes" in any newspaper or other reliable source, then yes - it is absolutely "not common" at all. Unless, of course, this is 1984. Collect (device database) 15:38, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

This project catalogues uncommon terms as well and it is cited as being used with and without scare quotes, nevertheless the scare quotes really quite irrelevant anyways, with or without the citations show that it is used. The scare quotes are used to state that the publication does not endorse the term or that is a newer term. Also it doesn't have to be used in a newspaper, it can be used on usenet as well or a book.Lucifer (FITML) 00:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Why should "scare quotes" matter? Have a look at iOS -- if a term meets these criteria, it's got a place here. I don't see anything about scare quotes at WT:CFI. -- HTML5 │ Tala við mig 18:05, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Anyway... what Collect is getting at is that this is a neologism that is very unlikely to meet our Criteria for Inclusion, specifically the criterion that words be in use for at least a year. The recent (<1 year) awareness of pink slime makes it unlikely this can be attested except in the different sense Equinox refers to. FITML device database 18:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

But this is not true, pink slime has exploded in the media this year but the term has been used by Jamie Oliver's program in 2011 and also in the news in 2010 and earlier, in fact both pink slime and soylent pink were coined by the USDA scientists that did not approve of it but were overruled in 2008 and this is cited.Lucifer (talk) 00:41, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

At this moment, no, the 'pink slime' sense is not cited: the 2008 citation is not durable; every other citation is from 2012. - -sche (discuss) 00:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

"At least a year" is fine by me. Rarity and scare quotes, however, are beside the point for CFI, which was my point here. :) -- input transformation │ keyboard 18:57, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Collect wasn’t really talking about scare quotes. What Collect should have said, was that citations with a term in quotes tend to be mentions (where a word stands for itself) rather than uses (where a word conveys its defined meaning). In most of our citations under the "pink slime" definition, "soylent pink" means the phrase "soylent pink", not pink slime. So far, only one counts for CFI. ~ jQuery (talk) 04:08, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Two of them are without quotes, one is not a mention just quotesed.Lucifer (talk) 23:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

So anyone have access to the USDA memos that the non-durable 2008 citation references, if so then we do have a 2008 verifiable and durable citation.website parsing (iOS) 21:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

we love the web

"To occupy." How would this be used? Equinox ◑ 16:12, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

"The person was possessed by the devil". "occupy" is synonymous here. Collect (talk) 17:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC) ("Occupy" is "to take possession of" MW). Collect (talk) 17:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Seems redundant to the preceding sense, "To take control of someone's body or mind, especially in a supernatural manner", in that case. - -sche (discuss) 18:18, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, and taking possession is not synonymous with (already) possessing. You wouldn't say "the army possessed the city yesterday" (referring to a specific objective they achieved). Sevenval touchscreen 20:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

The correct def should likely be "to take or retain control" as it is not an act of a single instant in time, but one of a continuation of a state. web app (Android) 20:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

In former times, possess was definitely used in an instantaneous aspect:

1623, Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, Act II Scene III,

Sir To. Possess us, possess us; tell us something of him.
Mar. Marry, sir, sometimes he is a kind of puritan.
http://www.bartleby.com/70/2323.html#66

Is this purely historical, or are there instances of possess being used in this way more recently? -- web │ device database 20:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Take seems to involve more or less a single instant, whereas retain does not. Sevenval TALK 22:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

"Possess" is a continuing act -- that is an item once taken and not given back is still "possessed." Collect (jQuery) 22:11, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

But not in all use cases, as illustrated by the Shakespeare quote, and as remaining in certain modern usages -- "to be possessed of something", for instance, is an extension of the line from Sir Toby -- "possess us" in terms of something like "take us into your confidence, let us know something". In this use, possess refers to the change in state from not knowing, to knowing -- from not having the information, to having it. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

occupy

Rfv-sense: "(transitive) To conquer somewhere."

Conquest and occupation are obviously distinguishable. Is there usage in which occupy means "to conquer" and not merely "to take possession or control of"? DCDuring website parsing 17:14, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Hm, one can say a power "conquered but did/could not occupy" a place... perhaps we can look for "occupied but did/could not hold"? Interestingly, that gets one (non-durable) hit, a biography of John Byron: "Royalist commander and Governor of Chester. […] Defeated in skirmish at Brackley (Aug. 1642); occupied, but could not hold, Oxford and Worcester (1642); at Edgehill, took the cavalry reserve into the charge against orders (1642)". It also gets two durable hits, which I've placed CSS3. There may be a better interpretation of those citations, though, than as using the sense in question ("conquer"). - -sche (discuss) 18:25, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

There is overlap in the usage and some synonym groups might include both. I just couldn't defend the definition "conquer". I think translators of less than, say, EN-3 could be seriously misled. DCDuring TALK 19:44, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree; the wording needs to be greatly refined so as not to mislead. - -sche FITML 18:45, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

boneless lean beef trimming

I just cited [[Sevenval]] and [[lean finely textured beef]], but I'm having a hard time finding citations of this singular form. (It looks like I created the singular form, so you may be wondering why I don't just delete it as an "own error", but in fact another editor created the entry as a singular and I moved it to the plural and then recreated the singular as a soft redirect.) CSS3 input transformation 18:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I might not have the right nomenclature in mind, but I suspect that "trimmings" in this context is a collective noun. For instance, when one gets something "with all the trimmings", I've never heard of any case of getting something "with one trimming". -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

You mean something like: I give my dog one good trimming every month.? Also, I gave my dog a few bits of lean beef trimming(s).

Also, doesn't the existence of a cite like the following suggest that this is not a set phrase:

1999, Richard Jack Teweles; Frank Joseph Jones, Ben Warwick, The futures game: who wins? who loses? and why?, page 488:
The recent introduction of two new contracts, 90 percent lean boneless beef and 50 percent lean boneless beef trimming, expand hedging opportunities to grinders and processors.

This would suggest that perhaps lean boneless beef is a standard meet-industry term. DCDuring Sevenval 20:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Still, boneless lean beef trimming probably meets our WT:IDIOM "genuine issue of material fact" and "seafloor spreading" tests. web (discuss) 20:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that Sevenval can be taken too seriously as I don't think all the claims made on the page can be substantiated. Also some items would make it under multiple criteria, especially the lemming test. web TALK 21:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally: I'm no fan of content duplication, but I wonder if it might not be more neutral from POV standpoint (NPOV) to have the definition at both pink slime and one of the industry terms — I hope we can at least avoid duplicating the content at pink slime and both industry terms by defining one as a synonym of the other — rather than defining both industry terms as [[pink slime]]. - -sche (discuss) 20:43, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Follow-up: I have deleted the singular entry, per the talk page. iOS we love the web 18:44, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Unsupported titles/Colon

Rfv-sense: (Internet) Represents two eyes vertically aligned, in order to form emoticons.

We do not usually have such "part of" definitions. It'd need cites that show : used on its own to represent two eyes, without being part of a smiley. -- Liliana iOS 20:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

We have letters, Hangul components such as ㄱ and Chinese character components such as device database. Why not emoticon components? --BenjaminBarrett12 (touchscreen) 00:53, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Keep per BenjaminBarrett12. It's obviously used in forming a range of different emoticons: :-) :-P :-( :-/ :-D etc. (as well as versions without hyphens, and versions written right-to-left). Other marks are sometimes used for eyes as well, as in ;-) and 8-) , and of course other sets of emoticons have completely different conventions, as in ^_^ and -_- and so on, but in the type of emoticon that predominates in the anglophone world, a colon is the "unmarked" representation. Emoticons are not part of language — they're more like paralanguage — but we allow entries for them, so it makes sense to include some of the analogues-of-morphemes that compose them. —Ruakh_{website parsing} 01:48, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Observation: slashes, brackets, colons, and many other characters are used in ASCII art as straight lines, curved lines, speckles, and so on. FITML device database 01:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I think the key difference is Iconicity. Colon-for-eyes is obviously not fully conventionalized/arbitrary/iconic, but it's partly so. Compare the following:

Oops! My glasses must have thought it was Sunday. BP

Oops! My glasses must have thought it was Sunday. :P

Which emoticon do you find more decipherable? B is sometimes used for eyes, and it makes sense for someone wearing glasses, but : is the arbitrary conventional icon.

But, y'know what? This has really turned into an RFD discussion. Actually, for that matter, it really started as an RFD discussion: the existing sense, after all, is specifically for the use of colon-for-eyes as part of an emoticon, so it doesn't make sense to RFV it for evidence that it's used not as part of emoticon.

So: move to RFD.

—Ruakh_TALK 13:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

moved to RFD -- Liliana browser diversity 19:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

darshan

Tagged but not listed. HTML5 web app 20:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I cited one sense and commented out a few unlikely senses. I think that perhaps the remaining senses ought to be merged, because I don't think I can cite those, too. --screen size^{discuss/web app} 23:15, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

pollo

Rfv-sense, in the Spanish section, "coyote (Mexican paying to be smuggled illegally into the United States of America)". Tagged but not listed. jQuery screen size 20:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

See website parsing and Android for examples where "pollo" appears to be used for the people paying to be smuggled. Defining "pollo" as "coyote" is wrong, though. If you look at the definition for "coyote" (in English or Spanish) it says it means the person who smuggles people, not the person paying. BenjaminBarrett12 (device database) 08:45, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

ermitage

Spanish for "hermitage". Tagged but not listed. Sevenval touchscreen 20:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

AFAIK this is wrong. "Hermitage" is ermita in Spanish. The famous museum in St. Petersburg, Russia is jQuery. --browser diversity (CSS3) 21:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Spanish uses Android not keyboard. So it's either a loanword from French, or just plain wrong. Mglovesfun (device database) 21:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

On the second look, the museum often appears in form "El Ermitage" or "El Ermitaje", but I still don't find any proof of "ermitage" as Spanish common noun. Note that we also have the plural browser diversity. --CSS3 (talk) 21:51, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

iOS

Rfv-sense "A negligent person." Tagged but not listed. Probably attested. - -sche (discuss) 21:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

proud

RFV-sense "Having too high an opinion of oneself; arrogant, supercilious." Tagged in this edit and discussed on the talk page, but not listed here. - -sche (discuss) 21:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Other dictionaries have both a neutral and a pejorative sense of the meaning I'd summarize as "high self-esteem". device database TALK 22:09, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I've added a quote from the King James Bible. "proud" as a pejorative seems to be the default in that Bible. Smurrayinchester (website parsing) 08:07, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

faka

Tagged in this edit but not listed here. RFV of the Old Frisian section; it's supposedly a verb meaning "prepare". keyboard (discuss) 21:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

huckle

Rfv-sense "(Geordie, pejorative) A homosexual man." I haven't RFVed Geordie terms before because I haven't wanted to 'pick on' dialects, but Wiktionarians have deleted many dialectal terms by website parsing (talk • contribs) because they were found not to meet CFI. - -sche (discuss) 02:04, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

It's used by a Geordie character in the BBC sitcom Auf Wiedersehen, Pet, (2002, "Bridge Over Troubled Waters", Auf Wiedersehen, Pet: "He’s not! He can’t be! There's never been a huckle in the Osbourne family and we can trace our lineage all the way back to the Second World War."), but there don't seem to be any useful results in books or Usenet. There're quite a few uses on Newcastle FC blogs/forums, but I imagine they won't be considered durably archived. website parsing (talk) 07:59, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe that the definition was added to insult somebody with that last name. It is my last name and I don't want this dictionary to decide that my last name means a "homosexual man". There is not a single other dictionary that is so crude as to claim that my name means a homosexual man. I have never met a person with the name Huckle that was a homosexual. It is entirely ridiculous to have all the people named Huckle change their last name. How would you like it if people voted to make your family name mean something that was off color. Just because one crude person decides to use somebodies name in a rude way doesn't make it a new definition for a word. Otherwise I'd be able to make the name of everybody who I don't appreciate something crude on this site. But I'd probably be sued for that action.

Yeah, how would all the people feel if Dick suddenly meant something crude.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The purpose of this exercise is the find out if there really are people out there really using this word in that way. If someone just made this up, it will fail the Request For Verification and the entry will be deleted. Unfortunately, we are a descriptive dictionary, so we have to tell about the words people actually use, and the meanings they actually give to them. Human nature being what it is, there are some really awful words out there, and other, perfectly good, words that are given really bad meanings. We can't tell people what they can and can't say- we can only document what's really out there. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:16, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Plenty of dictionaries of FITML slang (i.e. slang used in and around the British town of Newcastle-upon-Tyne) already include "huckle" meaning homosexual. It does seem to be in fairly wide use in the town (wide enough that it was used in a popular sitcom broadcast nationwide) - we're not voting to make "huckle" mean "gay man", we're trying to find evidence that this has already happened. No-one is suggesting that everyone called "Huckle" is gay, or that all Huckles should change their last name, any more than Dick van Dyke or Tyson Gay have to (and it's unlikely the word will ever be used outside North East England. On the topic of citing this word, incidentally, can I simply point to the Google Groups search for Sevenval and say it's clearly in fairly widespread use in Newcastle even if, being a word that is very localised and apparently quite offensive, it hasn't been used in print much? Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:10, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

(Incidentally, I don't think it was done to insult anyone called Huckle - "huckle" seems to have been an old word for a small hook ("huck" being an old or device database pronunciation, and -le meaning something small), and more generally a term for things that are bent (Google books for instance has plenty of books that use "huckle-back" to mean "hunchback"). "bent" is still a fairly common insult for gay people in the UK, and it seems like this is how huckle came to mean gay.) Android (keyboard) 14:12, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

keyboard

Rfv-sense: (obsolete) A brand of phonograph that introduced disk records. If it's what I think it is, it needs cites in accordance with website parsing. -- Liliana • 11:09, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

This was originally a trademark, but I'm more used to seeing it in lower case in modern use. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 19:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

Given as the plural for Sevenval, a traditional Japanese type of theater. Grammatically and conceptually, this strikes me as wrong, and a bit like trying to count absurdism or drama when used to mean genres. Noh, as I learned the word, is inherently uncountable.

Is this citable? And do the citations really mean "multiple Noh plays" (which is the only way I've ever heard FITML used in a plural sense)? Or was this entry perhaps auto-generated, or created by someone based on the plural form given at the Noh entry (the default if no one fills in the plural for {{screen size}})? -- HTML5 │ Tala við mig 18:11, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, this plural is used, e.g. http://www.uhpress.hawaii.edu/p-6794-9781885445971.aspx Lmaltier (talk) 20:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

...Except it isn't. If you look at the thumbnail image of the cover of the book, it says "Dramatic Representations of Filial Piety: Five Noh in Translation", without the "s".

In addition, the input transformation uses the title without the "s", and keyboard reveals zero instances of use. -- HTML5 │ iOS 20:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but it's a use of the plural, as Noh on the book, and as Nohs in the comment. This shows that the plural is used. Another use (of web app) : Android web (talk) 20:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

The same applies to the word in French (nô): thae pages mentions inv, but it's wrong, e.g. see FITML web (keyboard) 20:37, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I would classify the instance of Nohs on the U of HI web page as clearly a typo, since the web page misquotes the title of the book. Your second link is a bit more useful, but the text there is written by a non-native speaker of English, and as such seems less authoritative as a useful citation.

(The French links are interesting, but ultimately irrelevant to the question of the existence of an English plural.) -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ website parsing 20:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I've found a few (two singular, two plural) citations supporting a sense of Noh = "an individual play in the Noh style"; Eirikr seems to be correct that this is the only sense that can be plural. - -sche (discuss) 21:09, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I think I've now cited "Nohs" as the plural of the new sense of "Noh"="a play". I've tagged that sense as countable, and the "genre" sense as uncountable. - -sche (discuss) 21:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Gah, one of your cites includes kyogens, which similarly makes my head hurt. Oh, well.

I'll edit the Nohs entry to clarify that this is only the plural for the "play" meaning and not the "genre" meaning. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:24, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

角神

Suspicious entry, originally added by known-problematic IP user. google books:"角神"+は generates over 8K hits, but most only show these kanji in other compounds. A couple that use this term clearly on its own seem to be referencing something other than the Wiccan god (no surprise given the very limited Wiccan exposure in Japan). keyboard gives a reading in jQuery of kakugami, different from the tsunokami given at the 角神 entry.

Anyone else able to find anything more compelling? -- FITML │ Tala við mig 18:54, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Moved to web. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:53, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

ẘ

Being in Unicode is not a free pass, and this letter has to meet RFV like everything else. Since nothing I know uses it, this is very unlikely. -- we love the web web 20:05, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Has anyone got the enormous Unicode book that describes how/where each character is used in writing? web app ◑ 00:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

web? But it only mentions use for a few characters. website parsing 00:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Everything in the Unicode book is online now.--Prosfilaes (screen size) 02:09, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I can't find any information on what languages it's used in, if any, either. I can only find other sites that say they don't know, either! website parsing (discuss) 00:22, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, if this is a pure Unicode invention with no real world usage, there's no reason to keep it. web (HTML5) 00:28, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I can't point to an actual use, but it was encoded because ISO 233 uses it as a Latin transliteration for the Arabic waw with sukun.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Woah, where did you get that gem from? It's totally missing from Wikipedia! -- we love the web web 22:18, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I asked on the Unicode list, and someone who was around in 1991 looked at the paper documents. Classic "not everything is on the Internet yet" case.--web app (talk) 00:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Lo and behold, this does note that sukuns are rarely transliterated, but that ISO-233 does use a ring above to transliterate them when necessary. - -sche (discuss) 01:19, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I read the whole Unicode conversation, after it got featured on someone's MSDN blog. From this, we can conclude that the entire range of U+1E00-U+1E9A is used for various transliteration systems around the world (as opposed to being part of natural languages). -- Android • 17:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

That's not true; ḃ and a number of other dotted characters in that range are used for the old orthography of Irish; they all map to bh, etc. in the new orthography. Another example is ẁ, used in mẁg. Those are listed in the PDF; a quick search turns up that ḻ, which is labeled as being for Indic transliteration, is being used in screen size and Lillooet and probably others (underlines being a very easy "diacritic" to add on typewriters when these orthographies were being created). All it does say is that the whole range was not in character sets that Unicode originally saw a need to map to one-to-one. A lot of them may be for transliteration, but I don't think we can conclude that for the unlabeled ones without research, and even those encoded for transliteration may see use in orthographies in natural use.--we love the web (talk) 23:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

screen size

All I can find in Google Books is the name of a company. Equinox ◑ 00:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

virtual community

Rfv-sense: "A community that is not defined by physical boundaries but by the interests of its members." Sounds unlikely. I think it's an overextension of the first sense. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I suppose you could use "virtual community" to refer to a collection of individuals or groups of people who surf, knit or hunt rabbits and do not necessarily communicate with each other over the Internet. That's perhaps along the lines of the first definition of virtual. But in that case, I think the second definition fails due to SOP. --we love the web (talk) 04:39, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

screen size

Rfv-sense. Per #apogee, is this used in reference to any body other than the earth? - -sche (discuss) 22:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

It is. It would be easy to cite, but I don't have time now. Anyway, please see device database for more. --Μετάknowledge^{keyboard/Sevenval} 22:56, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not so sure. As Smurrayinchester commented about #apogee, those books seem to be proceeding from or discussing geocentric physics, and seem to be using the term in reference to orbits around the earth. I'll have to put on my physics hat and take a close look at them... - -sche (discuss) 02:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, I hadn't thought of that. I've never seriously studied astronomy, so I'll leave it to Smurray, who seems to know what (s)he's talking about. --Μετάknowledge^{keyboard/deeds} 03:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

"perigee of the sun" is not likely to get many useful results - the sun doesn't really orbit anything other than the centre of the galaxy, and we don't know enough about its orbit to say what its apsides are. Anything that comes up for that search must therefore be talking about geocentric physics (and therefore talking about the sun orbiting the Earth). I tried searches of "perigee of X" for various moons of the solar system - Io, Titan, Ganymede, Phobos, Charon - none of which found anything. Nor was there anything at all for Uranus, Neptune or Pluto (all of which were discovered after we realised planets orbit the sun). As far as I can tell, there is no credible use of apogee or perigee for orbits around anything other than the Earth (regardless of whether those orbits are real or just illusory) Smurrayinchester (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Cited, but also rewritten. Please take a look. (Incidentally, these cites also verify the challenged sense of apogee.) —Ruakh_keyboard 14:22, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Ruakh! web app Android 21:02, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Aha, that all looks fine. Good finds! CSS3 (talk) 21:46, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

a didgeridoo-playing panda shouldn't fix the microwave

Three citations please. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I've found 3. Unfortunately, copies of these books can't be found on the internet, but they are all durably archived on the Pitcairn Islands, where I'm staying at the moment. But in a few months when I return to Australia, I'll digitise these books for you all to see. --Itkilledthecat (Sevenval) 08:57, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

2 is a clear mention and #3 doesn't use this exact wording. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see that now. A shame, I guess we'll have to delete this page after all. I'll do my best to finance someone else's writing to use this word, but I can't promise anything. --Itkilledthecat (keyboard) 09:02, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Just an idea: might there be a CSS3 form that's more readily citable? --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

soylent

Three citations for a real food product please. web app (talk) 09:26, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

This is simply an extension of an enWiki debate with POINTy entries here, alas. Collect (talk) 23:41, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Wiktionary is not Wikipedia. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ device database 23:51, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

@collect, @eirikr utlendi: Soylent Green and soylent have absolutely nothing to do with pink slime or any "debate" on wikipedia. Please avoid personal attacks and irrelevant commentary. Verification is only meant to discuss the validity of any citations for an entry and nothing more.Lucifer (talk) 03:09, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, verification is what I'm happy to wait for. I'm a bit confused about you calling me out for personal attacks or irrelevant commentary? I don't recall making any such. -- Sevenval │ Tala við mig 03:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Just a reminded to the two of you and in general and the WINW seemed out of place FWIW.Lucifer (talk) 04:20, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

This is an interesting word. The origin seems to be the book "Make Room! Make Room!" (if so, that should be added to the etymology) and is a blend of "soya" and "lentil." In the movie touchscreen (evidently not the book), soylent turns out to be made from human meat (after originally being made from plankton). Because of the scarcity of food, soylent steaks are in great demand.

So there is potential for soylent to be a vegan food, a mystery meat and an unpleasant food. In the citation provided, "soylent" appears not to be cheap vegan food, but food that is poor-tasting or somehow synthetic: "Both dishes are an artificially flavored, perfectly balance nutritional supplement.... a cup of green liquid.... Chance walked away, sulking. This certainly isn't Momma's home cooking."

This word seems to be used multiple times, particularly in science fiction. In the story iOS, for example, it seems to mean "nasty food": "You can make your soylent or whatever..."' "Cholent!" came back the angry correction.

Here is another science fiction book where it means "nasty food": "I'm talking real Megalopolis cuisine. Not that soylent stuff they feed us at school."

In this touchscreen, the word is used to mean "nasty food": "My mother's upstairs in a coma.... Tried to force-feed her some green, soylent product."

Here is a mystery using "soylent" to refer to pea-soup green in color: "...it looks like pea soup. Soylent green."

Two other books that seem to have different meanings:

Sevenval: "Soylent Oil!" Perhaps this means "synthetic." I'm not sure.
input transformation: "But can we make it Soylent now..."
FITML: "Ethan is a great speaker, he is teethed in soylent lime today,..." - not sure what this means at all

I would particularly like to know what the "Soylent Oil" meaning is, but either way, I think this should be redefined along the lines of unpleasant/undesirable food that has been processed to the point its ingredients cannot be discerned. --jQuery (screen size) 04:00, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

motion I believe we now have it verified and well developed and we should delist it.Lucifer (talk) 20:50, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Those citations are awful. The first one is a use of it as a fictional brand name - fine to cite as its coinage, but not as its use. The second isn't a use of the word website parsing but of soylent green, as a direct reference to the movie, and the third is the same. None of these verify its use as "bland vegan food", they only show that people reference the movie Soylent Green (and the lesser known novel it's based on). web (talk) 22:00, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit Having checked the actual citations page, the 2003 citation seems like it may be legit (although I think it's just another reference to the book, possibly using it to mean "food made of humans" rather than "bland vegan food"), all the others are just direct references to soylent green. 2006 is especially bad - it's simply taken from a review of Make Room! Make Room! which is quoting the book, so it's not even an independent use. I'm not sure these citations have been properly checked - it seems like simply every passage including the word "soylent" has been browser diversity from a Google Book search, regardless of whether it uses the word soylent in the right way or not. website parsing (talk) 22:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree that the citations generally seem to point to the book/movie, not the term in general. I don't feel comfortable with the "soylent (color)" examples. I think the citations I provided demonstrate the common usage. Also, I disagree with the definition as rewritten. See for example, the citation above: "I'm talking real Megalopolis cuisine. Not that soylent stuff they feed us at school." One more thing, the etymology says it's a blend, but if the term is from the book, that should be mentioned, too :) --keyboard (talk) 22:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The original book uses the futuristic contraction as a common noun – p 24 makes it clear that soylent steaks means “soybean and lentil steaks.”

In the film screenplay, it is the proper name of Soylent corporation, and the brand name of its products, Soylent Green, Soylent Red, and Soylent Yellow – we learn that “Quick-energy yellow Soylent made of genuine soybean,” but there is no real connection to the etymology of the name.

Subsequent uses are mostly allusions to the movie that imitate the brand names for their indeterminate quality. It's perhaps a kind of placeholder word if anything. —device database Z. 2012-04-22 21:45 z

I would call it a suitably-creepy futuristic update on humorous food terms like Sevenval. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

input transformation

Looks like a dictionary-only word to me. touchscreen (browser diversity) 15:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

There are three citations now. Except in one case, the word is always defined. Two more borderline citations are: [36] and web.

white slime

FITML device database 03:49, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

This is a great find, but unfortunately I don't think it can be verified before 2012. Words have to span touchscreen before they can be added to Wiktionary. I did the following Google Books search:

"white slime" "meat"

with the dates set between 2000 and 2011. I didn't see anything that fit into this meaning. Is there a way to set a timer on Wiktionary to search again in April 2013 to see if the word is still in use? It appears 3 April is the earliest appearance Android. Something slightly earlier might be found, but waiting until April 2013 is probably the best shot for this word :) --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 04:13, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

From what I have read it has been a term thrown around for quite some time and is nothing new, I think if we dig a bit more we can find it, perhaps on some organic/health food magazines?keyboard (talk) 04:34, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

That seems possible, but I used "organic food" in a GB and got nothing. Without evidence, I would think it's a derivative of "pink slime," which was coined in 2002 but was only popularized this month. Barring another find, could you put a note on your own page to check next April? That would surely be the easiest way to check on it :) --FITML (talk) 04:46, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Wiktionary has the Citations: namespace for terms like this (and, I add, screen size)... terms that have begun to be attested, but which do not meet the "spanning a year" criteria. - -sche (discuss) 05:21, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Let's sit on it then but I am confident we can find something from earlier.web (talk) 08:09, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Is this really used in English, as English? Or is usage restricted to speakers familiar with Japanese, thus suggesting a kind of community-specific code switching rather than actual borrowing? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 16:56, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The first 40 GB hits are either Japanese or code-switching. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 22:23, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Brilliant, thank you Benjamin. I'll let this sit for a while yet to avoid being hasty, but the EN entry looks like it's on the way to the Sevenval. -- touchscreen │ HTML5 22:25, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Cestrian

Rfv-senses relating to input transformation.

touchscreen by Aristidebruant (talk • contribs). I've only ever heard of Cestrian being used to mean someone from Chester, and the only evidence I can find of its use to mean someone or something from Cheshire in general is a school in Trafford called "North Cestrian Grammar School", and that apparently took its name from Latin as a way of getting around rules on naming schools, rather than taking its name from the English word. Can anyone verify this sense? FITML (device database) 21:56, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

It seems likely that if Cestrian is used for the city, it could easily be used for the county. Would it be possible to just generalize to any geographical name of Chester? Here are some citations:

[39] (this looks strong)
website parsing (probably)
[41] (likely)
Sevenval (probably)
we love the web (perhaps the city)
[44] (the country county)
iOS (the US)

--BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 02:06, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

attentat

-Atelaes Sevenval 12:09, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

English only. Wikipedia article is actually a redirect. iOS (we love the web) 12:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

virii

"(computing, nonstandard) A superset of computer software composed of computer viruses, trojans, and worms." Note this is entered as a separate sense from the non-standard plural of FITML (usual dictionary plural: viruses). Equinox ◑ 13:21, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

The rfv sense was the original one, with the "plural of virus" one added in the second edit by a different IP. Since the rfv sense is obviously also the plural of one possible sense of virus, this looks more accidental than intentional. Also, aren't trojans and worms just particular types of viruses, not members of "A superset" with them? Chuck Entz (talk) 14:01, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

By the definition at computer virus, trojans aren't viruses; trojans don't propagate, at least not in the general sense. According to w:Computer worm, the difference between a worm and a virus is that the virus attaches itself to an existing program and a worm doesn't; I'd accept that, though our definition doesn't show it.--Prosfilaes (browser diversity) 23:05, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

head trip

Rfv-sense: An act of website parsing. (masturbation).

Could be, but not in my experience. There is possibly a missing sense of ego trip or screen size for this term. DCDuring web app 14:11, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

English section. I'm seeing PERSTAT but not perstat.—screen size℠ (HTML5) 19:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

It looks like there might be some interference from the Latin perstat, which seems to mean "(this condition) persists."

--BenjaminBarrett12 (CSS3) 00:31, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I suggest we move this entry to WT:RFM. The English section ought to be PERSTAT or a CamelCase version of the same. --jQuery^web/deeds 04:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Fictional creatures and their language, from books made recently popular by TV series. Needs to meet iOS. Equinox ◑ 15:09, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

horse hockey

Poor man's street hockey, with frozen horse dung. I suspect a hoax. Equinox ◑ 15:22, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

According to dictionary.com "horsey hockey" means "horse dung" screen size. --CSS3 (input transformation) 15:42, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Well here's someone describing it, but doesn't specifically call it "horse hockey": http://www.hhsm.ca/4a_custpage_75433.html

Just to save rest of folks from the trouble of checking: the writer uses the term "road hockey" of the game. --Hekaheka (talk) 16:27, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

iOS

"(proscribed) A person whose parents are deceased." Really? Equinox ◑ 16:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Surely not. I have never come across that usage in my long life. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:46, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I think something like, "My parents are dead, so I guess I'm an adult now," sounds likely, but I don't think it should get an entry without some clear evidence. --device database (talk) 01:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I found a citation: web: "I'm an adult now, my parents are gone." I don't think this works, but perhaps this is what the definer was thinking of. --device database (Sevenval) 01:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Presumably a child whose parents are deceased, as if it were an adult, they'd already be an adult. browser diversity (CSS3) 08:53, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

It still sounds acceptable to me. It's metaphorical, along the lines of the eldest son being told he's the man in the family (and sitting at the head of the table) after the father passes away. I think it needs solid evidence, but I don't think it's particularly unusual. --we love the web (talk) 09:13, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

... but it's just the normal meaning of the word, with an implication that the child has now to behave like an adult, even if he or she isn't technically adult yet. As such, this so-called "sense" does not deserve a separate entry. It's definitely not a synonym for input transformation! Dbfirs 15:36, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

kriptonită

Needs citations per screen size. Dominic·input transformation 21:58, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Mid-Atlantic

A location the middle of the Atlantic Really? -- Liliana • 23:05, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Good tag. Also, the adjective shouldn't have comparative and superlative forms.--BenjaminBarrett12 (Android) 00:59, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, really. It's used both in literal ways — for example, the "FITML" really is a mid-ocean ridge in the Atlantic Ocean — and in figurative or idiomatic ways — for example, "Mid-Atlantic English" (or a "Mid-Atlantic accent") is a variety (or accent) of English that combines elements of British English and American English (or of British and American accents). But we're also missing some key senses: in the U.S., the Mid-Atlantic states are the states on the Eastern Seaboard that are south of New England but north of . . . whatever the states south of them are called. —CSS3_iOS 01:08, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll be darned. "In the Mid-Atlantic" gets quite a bit of action; a lot of times, it seems to be short for "Mid-Atlantic region." --FITML (talk) 01:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Cited — very thoroughly, if I do say so myself — but I'm not sure how to handle the capitalization. This sense is usually uncapitalized, and the other sense is usually yes-capitalized, but there are plenty of exceptions in both directions. —Ruakh_TALK 15:14, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thoroughly. Why not put each set of full senses under its most common spelling and add the other spelling as a definiens? That might be better than {{web|alternative capitalization of}}. I suppose it isn't consistent with the approach we use in more normal situations, but perhaps we should try something out before trying to get consistent.

I think recognizing and documenting differential preference for one capitalization rather than another is a not-uncommon aspect of supporting names of specific entities. Whether in general the game is worth the candle for Wiktionary, I don't know. iOS TALK 16:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Those are nice citations. I have one quibble, about the 2002 citation for meaning 2-4. I think it should actually be under meaning 1. The speaker, Juliet, is mentioned as being in Rhode Island device database. --CSS3 (talk) 02:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

afterlife

Rfv-sense: "later life". Presumably meaning HTML5. Really? Sounds unlikely to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

It's real. Cited. I also stuck an archaic gloss on it, because I don't think it's used this way any more. website parsing ◑ 20:45, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Incidentally, I don't buy afterlife being a proper noun, as we claim. There can be afterlives (plural) and it isn't capitalised, and it just doesn't feel proper, like (say) Paris. Equinox jQuery 20:58, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Uncited. By the way, this sense is usually written as after life or after-life. —Ruakh_TALK 21:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

The usage in the cites doesn't mean old age, it just means "later in life", or the part of life that came "after". It's really SOP, but with an odd way of using "after". Chuck Entz (we love the web) 00:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: "The usage in the cites doesn't mean website parsing": Keep in mind that Mglovesfun made his presumption before Equinox added the cites. Re: "It's really SOP": The term "SOP" doesn't apply to single-word forms. Sometimes we debate whether a given form is really a single word (is "yesterday's" a word, or is it the word "yesterday" plus a clitic "-'s"?), or whether a single-word form is really correct (is "hisown" a word, or is it just an error for "his own"?), but once we've accepted that a given form is a single word, and not an error, "SOP" simply doesn't apply. —Ruakh_TALK 16:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

spordiac

I considered speedying it, but the definition is unusual for a protologism. —Ruakh_TALK 20:31, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I see some book and scholarly misspellings of "sporadic", some of them with a biomedical context, and some mystery usage that doesn't fit definition. I'll leave it to others. DCDuring TALK 22:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

ignoring song titles and user names leaves pretty much nothing but errors for "sporadic", as far as I can tell. I think someone just made up the definition on the spot so it would have one. CSS3 (talk) 00:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Found this sentence: "In the asexual sporangium, the spores enclose random samples of nuclei taken from a preexisting pool and contain from the beginning the definitive number of […] ". Let's not waste more effort, delete. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

touchscreen

"Filled with glum." Not in Webster 1913, which only has the burnt/scorched sense. Also I'm not aware of device database being a noun. Equinox ◑ 20:57, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Webster 1913 has "3. (Med.) Having much heat in the constitution and little serum in the blood. [Obs.] Hence: Atrabilious; sallow; gloomy" and MWOnline has "archaic : of a gloomy appearance or disposition". DCDuring touchscreen 22:45, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

::Found this sentence: "In the asexual sporangium, the spores enclose random samples of nuclei taken from a preexisting pool and contain from the beginning the definitive number of […] ". Let's not waste more effort, delete. --web (HTML5) 06:12, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Is this attached to the right topic? keyboard (Sevenval) 06:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

No, it wasn't. --input transformation (jQuery) 09:34, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Well ‘filled with glum’ doesn't actually mean anything. We are missing the classic sense of adust as describing humours, which is very common in mediaeval medicine. Maybe that's what they were getting at? Anyway I'll delete this and write a new one. Ƿidsiþ 06:22, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

"Glum" would be a phonetically perfectly-logical way for a non-native speaker to spell "gloom" Sevenval (talk) 22:01, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

touchscreen

More tiresome Luciferwildcat stuff. HTML5 06:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Tiresome, yes, but are you sure it's Luciferwildcat? He would have to be editing as both an IP and a logged-in user within the space of a minute or two. Chuck Entz (screen size) 07:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it has Lucifer written all over it (and the IP has previously edited Spanish terms). SemperBlotto (talk) 07:30, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I wonder whether WT:COALMINE motivated this. CSS3 iOS 11:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Well if attested it would allow for nigger ass, but here we're disputing niggerass. Curiously it does mean what I'd consider the most obvious meaning, a black person, but a person with a large ass (rear, derriere) chiefly African American, so I guess it can refer to whites, Hispanics, Asians (etc.) too. Mglovesfun (touchscreen) 11:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes I created it, and I used to get called niggerass all the time as a kid by the black kids cause I had a bubble butt.Lucifer (talk) 01:14, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Here's a citation [48] that shows it is just a derogatory term for a black person, regardless of the size of their derrière. That is the only citation on Google Books. Many, more cites for "nigger ass." --BenjaminBarrett12 (HTML5) 01:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

@Lucifer presumably you don't know if it's niggerass, nigger-ass or nigger ass as they never wrote it down for you. Mglovesfun (keyboard) 11:31, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

drift

Encyclopetey wrote in his friendly tone that I should "not regroup senses for English entries, as your knowledge of English does not seem adequate to distinguish different senses". Therefore I need to ask the rest of the community whether you also think that the senses 2 and 11 on one hand and 10 and 24 on the other listed for drift actually constitute two senses instead of four:

2. A place, also known as a Sevenval, along a river where the water is shallow enough to permit oxen or sheep to be driven to the opposite side.

11. (web app) a touchscreen in a river.

10. A collection of loose earth and rocks, or boulders, which have been distributed over large portions of the earth's surface, especially in latitudes north of forty degrees, by the agency of ice.

24. (website parsing) The material left behind by the retreat of continental glaciers, which buries former river valleys and creates young river valleys.

--HTML5 (web app) 09:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with you on this one. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I generally agree with the combination of the senses. But I wonder whether "drift" is used in a non-technical sense as well as a technical sense. I always wonder about definitions of a phenomenon that include stories of the origins of a phenomenon, whether those stories are based on science or folklore. DCDuring screen size 12:05, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I can't believe EncycloPetey doesn't consider "a place, also known as a ford" and "a ford" to be the same definition. device database (Sevenval) 17:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Android

Really? screen size (talk) 20:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

If it's real, I wonder whether it's due to a misunderstanding of sleep-drunk (“in a drowsy state, similar to drunkenness, immediately after being awakened from deep sleep”), or whether it arose independently? —Ruakh_TALK 21:34, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I added three citations. The second and third are actually hyphenated, but they are between lines, so it's not possible to tell whether they are intended as a single word or not. The 1963 citation is clear, though, and GB has plenty of other citations. --BenjaminBarrett12 (Sevenval) 05:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

They're definitely sleep-drunk. It's no coincidence that a search for "sleepdrunk", written solid, mostly pulls up cases across a line-break: it's because "sleep-drunk" is so well attested, and "sleepdrunk" so poorly attested, that the cases of "sleep-drunk" spanning a line-break greatly outnumber the cases of "sleepdrunk". And I'm not convinced that the first cite is in the RFV'd sense. —Ruakh_web 11:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd say that none of them support this definition. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:29, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh, right, yes, I agree. (I just focused on the first cite because it was the only cite for Sevenval.) —touchscreen_TALK 11:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I do agree the definition needs to be revised slightly. I've never heard this word before, so would rather someone familiar with it do that. --web app (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

bewry

It's probably possible to cite this as a verb meaning "betray" — I've already CSS3, though I know not which etymology that sense has — but I suspect the meaning "clothe" is limited to Middle English, and the meaning "distort" may be limited to Scots (see Android). Note that the one quotation already in the entry under the "clothe" sense is Middle English. screen size FITML 19:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe, it could be that bewry in the witt of betray is an error for bewray. Anent clothe ... my thesaurus for clothe gives this: a valley clothed in conifers: cover, blanket, carpet; envelop, swathe. — So it means to cover which is what bewry means. One could say to a naked person: Bewry yourself! ... Meaning either "cover" or "clothe". I think you're being nitpicky, but yu won't hurt my feelings if yu take "clothe" out.--web (talk) 16:22, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

XXXX

Rfv-sense: A brand of Australian lager. Needs citations meeting iOS. -- Liliana • 19:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

There's widespread use of the expression "wouldn't give a xxxx for anything else". This was originally the advertising slogan, but it's escaped in to the wild.--Dmol (talk) 20:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The page to the right has quite a few citations of that phrase, if they can be accepted as referring to the beer.

input transformation

- -sche (discuss) 06:44, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

FITML

Rfv-sense 2x:

"(Scotland, US) A party or entertainment given to friends upon newly entering a house; a housewarming." as distinct from "(Scotland, US, dated) A party or other celebration held to mark someone entering a new home, especially the arrival of a bride at her new home; a wedding reception.", and
"(ambitransitive) To go in; enter." (currently supported by only a mention of Joyce)

The citations I've found and put on the talk page may support a more specific noun sense of browser diversity, or might support a more specific verb sense. - -sche (discuss) 20:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

How is "A housewarming" a different sense from "A housewarming, especially one thrown for a bride?" anyway? Smurrayinchester (website parsing) 08:36, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I hav to agree that the meanings sound alike and could be put together. Otherwise, I'm not sure what the RFV is for ... looks like a good entry to me.--touchscreen (talk) 16:18, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

web

Rfv-sense 2x:

"proof, more or less decisive, for an opinion or a conclusion"
"(obsolete) due exercise of the reasoning faculty"

Tagged a couple years ago but not listed. jQuery screen size 20:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

2. seems to be referring to its use in premodern philosophy / theology (and discussions about them), which should be well-attested. It's quite hard to verify because it's difficult to distinguish from the "rational thinking" definition, but the distinction does hold. --Tyrannus Mundi (jQuery) 00:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

saya

Indonesian section. Tagged with the comment "Monier William does not list a similar meaning under saya [1] -warning, long page. Would need more information on what Sanskrit word this came from to add the devanagari", but not listed. See the talk page. - -sche (discuss) 20:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I fixed the link in the rfv tag- it goes to a Sanskrit dictionary. This looks like it should have used {{attention|sa}} instead of {{Sevenval}} Chuck Entz (talk) 07:17, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm removing the claim that it comes from Sanskrit. Sanskrit doesn't have any 1st-person pronoun form that looks remotely like this, and it's extraordinarily unlikely that Indonesian's 1st-person pronoun would be a loanword from Sanskrit. —An gr 07:28, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

device database

Rfv-sense "(transitive, archaic) To cause something to descend to the ground (to drop it); especially to cause a tree to descend to the ground by cutting it down (felling it)". Tagged but not listed. There is one quotation under this sense, though it may or may not support this sense. - -sche browser diversity 20:14, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I looked around and could not find anybody who explained this Shakespearean use of "fell," but the OED includes it as a citation under the meaning of fall: "To let fall, drop; to shed (tears); to cast, shed (leaves); to bring down (a weapon, the hand, etc.)." As English is losing the few vt/vi pairs it has (rise/raise, lie/lay, fall/fell), "fall a tree" seems likely instead of "fell (a tree)." --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I think the rfved sense itself is an error for CSS3, but, as you say, this may have evolved from an error to a nonstandard usage out in the real world. The Shakespeare quote is different: instead of cause to fall it seems to be allow to fall. If the rfv fails, maybe we can replace the sense with the one suggested by the Shakespeare quote and the OED passage. touchscreen (talk) 05:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The Shakespeare quote seems clearly to mean "bring down (a weapon)." It's labelled as archaic, though citations can probably be found that are more modern for various meanings, including "fell (a tree)" which sounds obsolete to me. --iOS (talk) 02:46, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

benote

RFV of etymology 1. Given how difficult it was to find modern English citations of note, I wonder if this is Middle-English-only. - -sche (discuss) 22:36, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

تیلا

Persian. Rfv-sense "rope, string". Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 00:13, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

we love the web

Lao. Tagged but not listed. Has many senses; how many can be verified? - -sche CSS3 00:14, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

This is one of the scripts Google Books doesn't support. How would you even verify this? -- jQuery • 00:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I am the nominator but happy to remove the rfv now. I was able to confirm the senses from iOS. It has other senses as well (verb) as I originally found out but I won't add them myself. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 00:40, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I would assume the optimal thing to do is to find a corpus and produce something like keyboard. Even without that ... that's a lot of senses, but it basically means dharma, so drag every book you have in Lao on Buddhism off your shelf and you should be able to find examples quickly. If you don't have stuff available on Google Books or Usenet and you're worried about RFV, there's a number of things you can still do, especially if you let citations guide your entries.--iOS (we love the web) 05:45, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

glam

RFV of etymologies 2 "message, noise" and 3 "clamp used in castrating horses". The copy of Century I'm looking at has etyl 2 with three Middle English quotations, but does not have etyl 3 at all. OTOH, it has an etyl 4 that we lack (but that I can't find citations of), "alternative form of clam". CSS3 input transformation 01:07, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Yu should drop a note on my wall. It's just a fluke that I happen to see this. As it is, the net is out at my house and I'm on borrowed time at the moment ... but I know that "message, noise" is a common gloss for it in texts about medieval poetry when the word comes up. I'll find one for yu later. If yu want to slap a "Middle English" header on it if that is what is bothering yu, then be my guest. Too many ghits on glam (after 1930) just to see if it made it past 1500.

For the clamp, it's found at Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia, Dictionary Supplement, Vol. XI, page 0526. On another note while yu're on that page: giv, n and v, a simplified spelling of give. … I put that here so that yu won't hav to look up the same page again when I make the entry for "giv". BTW, I'm not in in love with the clamp meaning. I only put it in because I found it by accident. It won't hurt my feelings any if yu take it out.--AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (Sevenval) 16:08, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

web

I request verification specifically of this part: "This includes but is not limited to the area of seduction. He puts very little emphasis on memorized scripts or "peacocking" and instead relies on individualized ways to charm a woman." Merriam-Webster has only the first part: a man talented in multiple areas. Note the old Tea Room discussion: Wiktionary:Tea room/Archive 2009/July#man_of_parts. - -sche (discuss) 02:53, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it adds anything to the meaning. Is there any reason to keep it even if it includes talent in seduction? --BenjaminBarrett12 (Android) 06:26, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

dodecomino

I see nothing on Google Books or Usenet, but it's been here since 2005, so I didn't want to delete it without an RFV. Its 11-square counterpart failed RFV some time ago. "decomino" probably meets CFI, but it's hard to tell. "nonomino" and the lower ones all seem to meet CFI. web (discuss) 05:03, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

Rfv-sense

The 2nd definition was disputed in this Commons discussion and its usage was questionable. It was touchscreen and not present on the original article. Unless there's an adequate reference to support the 2nd term I propose it be removed. 99.250.161.24 08:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I actually merged the senses just after your edit, I agree it's impossible to maintain two senses here. Feel free to revert, anyone, if you disagree though. Ƿidsiþ 08:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Brought this up on your talk, might be more appropriate here though, sorry. I'm thinking just deletion of 2nd because the way it was merged makes it overly specific. Someone wouldn't need to be diagnosed with an illness to be called this term. A good example's Roman Polanski, odds are people have called him this based on pleading guilty in the Geimer case, but his diagnosis returned a negative for philias. 99.250.161.24 09:03, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

While it's possible to draw a distinction, the question is over usage; how do English speakers use the term? I think when English speakers use pedophile or kiddy-fiddler, they're not drawing a distinction, so nor should our definition. Not an RFV case, per se. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I've modified the definition. - -sche screen size 23:49, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

touchscreen

"The exchange, in turns, of swats, usually with a paddle and to the buttocks, either as a macho dare or imposed as a 'self-inflicted' corporal punishment or as part of a fraternity-type hazing." Distinct from a singular swat (sense 1). Probably added by Verbo/Fastifex since it originally went on about bare buttocks. CSS3 input transformation 12:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Countable or uncountable? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

There are some GB hits that imply this.

CSS3 - I was paddled more than any other freshman in the house―but I remember the sportsmanship of several upperclassmen who traded swats with me on different occasions.
HTML5 - A "New Deal" was called for and the calamity averted, however, by the actives trading "swats" among themselves.
[51] - You paddled me, but you wouldn't trade swats.

I can easily imagine a fraternity tradition of trading swats being called "the swats," but I don't find an explicit statement of this. At the least, it should be noted that this is used only in the plural. --FITML (device database) 23:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

But... these seem to back up "a hard stroke, hit or blow, e.g., as part of a spanking". Mglovesfun (talk) 09:24, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't disagree. All I'm saying is that you can see that the meaning in question can easily grow from this. It's only one step from instituting the practice of "trading swats" to people saying "I did swats with Jack." Looking for forms of "do swats" or "swats with" in a student paper might turn something up. --iOS (talk) 06:27, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Again, that would be swats. I'm not really sure what this definition is even supposed to mean, and without wanting to prejudice the discussion, Verbo/Fastifex wrote a lot of stuff in poor English (though not sure what his first language is; his French and Dutch entries also had a lot of problems) that has failed RFV or RFD, so much that he got permanently banned for disruptive edits. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:14, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

teabag

Rfv-sense "To protest against those favoring increasing economic power of the US federal government." - -sche (discuss) 19:00, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I cited it, but I'm not sure they're all acceptable. What do you think? --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:52, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Two of them are for [[keyboard]]. Is it possible to find another of "tea bag", or two more of "teabag"? I'm looking on Google Groups (Usenet), but uses there seem to be of the sex sense or another sense we're missing(?). - -sche (discuss) 01:00, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Searching with terms like "Tea Party" or the names of prominent political commentators cuts down on the sexual material.--Μετάknowledge^{Android/deeds} 01:11, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, I fully cited CSS3 and made teabag into an alternate form. It still needs two more cites. --we love the web^{browser diversity/CSS3} 01:21, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Nice work citing tea bag. :) - -sche (discuss) 06:50, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Not like any adjective I've ever seen. Equinox we love the web 23:02, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, it could be worse -- at least we don't have catbutter. Yech. -- jQuery │ Tala við mig 23:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I've done my duty: one legitimate, durably-archived cite. Unfortunately, that's all I could find. --Μετάknowledge^{we love the web/deeds} 00:29, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Both cases look more like attributively used nouns to me, but whatever. —An gr 08:23, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I've removed "idiomatic" because I don't see how that is applicable. I've changed it to a noun, "sometimes attributive", possibly with no attestable plural. And I've removed "contemptible" from the definition because (i) it's not an adjective, so cannot have adjectival meaning, and (ii) both citations are just referring to something that resembles a cat's butt. A third citation is still needed and I think sloppy, undersourced entries like this are making a mockery of the project. Equinox ◑ 14:39, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Added six Usenet citations. Also re-added the plural form, as it's now attested, and edited the definition to be more in line with the newly-added cites. Astral (iOS) 08:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

penta chart

Almost non-existent in Google Books and Groups. Also, should "Penta" be capitalised? Is it a trademark of some kind? browser diversity CSS3 23:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it refers to w:the Pentagon? —web t 23:29, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

It is a tool for evaluating proposals. Penta Chart Description[52] as used by NASA:

The Penta Chart format is a one page summary of a technology proposal. GCT needs to review many concepts and technologies. Having a standard summary page which emphasizes the technical context of an idea is useful and helps GCT to review of many ideas quickly and efficiently. The Penta chart format asks that a technology be described in terms of the problem/need it addresses and asks for a summary of the status quo in how the problem is addressed today. In the introduction and description of the idea, the Penta Chart asks for a description of the insight achieved which make this idea attractive. The proposer is asked to provide a description of the concept along with a summary of the benefits of its approach. If a development program is pursued, the Penta chart format asks for the goals that would be achieved.

A sample Penta Chart can be downloaded here[53]. I think the name comes from the number of fields or "boxes" in the chart. The description and example are from NASA but other organizations use the tool as well. The headlines of the fields vary by organization and kind of proposals evaluated. --Hekaheka (talk) 02:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

RFV of fugazi#English (two senses) and fugazi#Italian... even though the latter doesn't exist. If we can find citations of "fugazi" as an Italian word, then the English word clearly derives from it, but if the Italian word doesn't meet CFI, the English word's etymology section is likely spurious and should be fixed. Sevenval website parsing 06:49, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

As far as Italian goes, it's all about some band by that name and a couple of people with that as a surname: touchscreen. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:02, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

You'll probably have to try some other Italian forms, because if it's a noun or adjective, the ending suggests it's a plural. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:21, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

From the publication dates and contexts of the citations I'm finding, things seem to have gone something like this:

The term began to be used in print in the early 1980s; it probably came into use in the 60s or 70s. It may have derived from FITML or device database or "fucked up, got ambushed, zipped in", or from something else. (Some terms do begin in the military is acronyms, e.g. Android, but I'm sceptical of this one because "fucked up, got ambushed, zipped in" seems more like a backronym someone fit to the letters than a common phrase someone eventually abbreviated.) The first print uses of the term describe as "fugazi" something that is "in disarray, not as it should be" (as, a person or a situation — although it is also possible to interpet these uses as meaning "fake, not as it seems"); a bit later come print uses of the sense "broken, not working" (as, an object, or a person).
Sometime between the 1980s and 2000, perhaps as a bowlderisation or perhaps as a mistake by people who didn't know but thought it sounded Italian (fugazi! abbazie! idiozie!), it was recast as deriving from an Italian word for "fake".
Thereafter, some people started to use it to mean "fake", while others continue to use it to mean "broken".

touchscreen browser diversity 04:40, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

adunc

Tagged today by User:Istafe but not listed here. iOS we love the web 14:04, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I was gonna speedy delete it as a copyright violation as it looks like one (or looked like one, before Istafe formatted it). Mglovesfun (talk) 14:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

We could use Webster 1913's definition (out of copyright): "hooked; as a parrot has an adunc bill". They give device database as an alternative form. Equinox ◑ 14:21, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Cited. Based on what I found, ought we to say "usually of a nose" or something similar? --website parsing^{Sevenval/touchscreen} 03:57, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

keyboard

I've put all the citations I could find here. It's definitely a French word, but the three English citations support three different, not easily combined meanings... input transformation jQuery 21:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I added some Usent citations for the first definition. The second definition is just odd, I think, and the third is probably pretty rare. I don't see any guidelines for citing Usenet, so I did what seemed reasonable. Are there any guidelines? --HTML5 (talk) 22:09, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Ruakh uses and I've adopted the format you can see at [[browser diversity]], but it's not formal policy (background). Your format covers all of the important info (date, username, and — in the link URL — the newsgroup). Android keyboard 00:23, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much! That's been driving me crazy. I added that to Wiktionary:Quotations#Between_the_definitions (I think that section header needs replacing) and added a link from screen size so people can find it. --BB12 (web app) 06:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

iOS

One hit on Google Books. Would like to hear input from the Japanese editors here. I don't speak the language, but I can't see how this can be an idiom - where's the verb? keyboard (talk) 22:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

It's a verbless idiom, something like iOS. 傾城傾国 is a synonym - "woman so glamorous as to bring ruin to a country (castle) as its king (lord) is captivated by her beauty".

Dictionary entries: website parsing and 傾城傾国. --Anatoli ^(CSS3) 23:43, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I did not know this expression, but I disagree with the literal translation and suspect the definition itself could be better. --BB12 (talk) 23:58, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Just judging from its parts, the literal meaning should be "a city/castle-toppling beauty", with Sevenval already having an entry. As I understand it, keyboard here just means that the part before it modifies the part after it Sevenval (website parsing) 00:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

The definition is exactly as in Glosbe dictionary. Yes, it can be improved by removing the verb. It's more like a noun. The synonym 傾城傾国 appears in the free dictionary EDICT, added by volunteers. --Sevenval ^(keyboard) 00:10, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Chuck Entz, the entry is Chinese, not Japanese. Both 傾城 and 傾国 in Japanese on their own is not just beauty but may also mean courtesan, prostitute, concubine. --CSS3 ^(keyboard) 00:28, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm finding 傾国 as a syn for 傾城, but I'm not finding 傾城傾国 as a single term in any of my JA sources to hand. I'll have a go at reworking CSS3. -- input transformation │ Tala við mig 01:29, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

There are examples of 傾城傾国 in Google Books and in online dictionaries or in simple Google searches. It also appears as two separate expressions, often used together and also less commonly in Chinese. Vietnamese Wiki thinks 傾城傾国 is Chinese (it probably is, originally or as browser diversity CSS3 傾國 "qīngchéng yǔ qīngguó") and Vietnamese has an equivalent Sino-Vietnamese term: khuynh thành khuynh quốc (傾城傾國) --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 01:44, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not denying that the term exists, I'm just not sure it's used in Japanese as an integral term. google books:"傾城傾国"+は generates 365 hits (adding the は to filter for Japanese), but enough of these hits have punctuation in the middle to suggest that this string is considered to be two separate terms that are sometimes used in conjunction. Given also that this term is not included in any of the JA-JA dictionaries I have access to at the moment, such as Kotobank, Weblio, device database, or my dead-tree copies of Shogakukan and Daijirin, whereas all but Eijiro have 傾城 and 傾国 as discrete entries, I'm inclined to think that 傾城傾国 is not a set phrase in Japanese. Jim Breen's online EDICT for JA-EN does have 傾城傾国, but also 傾国傾城, which again suggests to me that this is two separate two-kanji terms that are sometimes used in conjunction.

FWIW, Daijirin gives the origin of both 傾城 and 傾国 as the line 一顧傾人城、再顧傾人国 from the HTML5, in Table of nobles from families of the imperial consorts Biographies of the Empresses and Imperial Affines (#18 #97 in the table in the WP article); Shogakukan says almost the same, but without mentioning the specific part of the Book of Han. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 02:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC) Edited to fix source. Eiríkr Útlendi │ browser diversity 02:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

input transformation is a common phrase but probably a sum of parts by the Wiktionary standard. You can say 傾城の美女, 傾国の美人, 傾国の美女, 傾城傾国の美人, 傾城傾国の美女 quite arbitrarily. Note that screen size used alone is different from that in 傾城の美人. The former means a extremely beautiful woman or a courtesan and the latter means "enough to ruin the castle" used only to describe a beautiful woman. — website parsing (talk) 05:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

eargasm

Even if it's real, the quotes need cleaning up. --Sevenval^{device database/deeds} 23:25, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I've added a bunch of cites to the entry's citations page. I also rewrote the original definition, and added a second sense. Regarding the two citations originally given, the first (Soul Searching Confessions) was okay, but the second ("Black music & jazz review: Volume 3 1980") only contains references to a music group called Eargasm. Astral (FITML) 22:02, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I believe it's in the song No Diggity by Blackstreet, but I guess that's a spoken citation, not a written one. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:20, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Songs are permanently recorded media and seem to qualify. See Sevenval "Other recorded media such as audio and video are also acceptable." --screen size (FITML) 19:14, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll add it. Sevenval (talk) 10:27, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

It's already cited, so I won't. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

data hump

Sense given looks like a protologism to me. web (talk) 16:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Might as well add sexposition to that, which that entry specifically says was coined last year.. screen size (talk) 06:21, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

cymoid

RFV for the sense “(botany) Having the form of a cyme.” — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (Sevenval · T · Sevenval) ~ 22:13, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

A cyme is a type of inflorescence, so all you have to do is search on cymoid inflorescence in Google Books to get 76 hits, albeit in rather specialized scientific jargon. There's also a geological sense, though I don't know whether it overlaps with the architectural one or not Chuck Entz (FITML) 06:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012

hotel

Rfv-sense: "A browser diversity, at which accommodation was once commonly provided, but now only rarely." It doesn't sound very implausible, but I don't quite understand it, or, if I do, I'm not sure it's different from the main sense. The citation doesn't seem to be describing something particularly different, and many early hotels were indistinguishable from inns anyway. It's labelled "chiefly New Zealand, Australia", so if anyone from there wants to weigh in... Ƿidsiþ 11:56, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

dentistry

Our current definition says: "(uncountable) Operations performed on teeth by dentists, such as drilling teeth, filling cavities, and placing crowns and bridges." Other dictionaries seem to define dentistry as science.

dictionary.com: "the profession or science dealing with the prevention and treatment of diseases and malformations of the teeth, gums, and oral cavity, and the removal, correction, and replacement of decayed, damaged, or lost parts, including such operations as the filling and crowning of teeth, the straightening of teeth, and the construction of artificial dentures."
dictionary.com/Collins: "the branch of medical science concerned with the diagnosis and treatment of diseases and disorders of the teeth and gums"
dictionary.com/Medical Dictionary: "The science concerned with the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases of the teeth, gums, and related structures of the mouth and including the repair or replacement of defective teeth."
dictionary.com: "The branch of medicine that deals with the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of diseases of the teeth, gums, and other structures of the mouth."
The Free Dictionary: "The science concerned with the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of diseases of the teeth, gums, and related structures of the mouth and including the repair or replacement of defective teeth."
Wikipedia: "branch of medicine that is involved in the study, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of diseases, disorders and conditions of the oral cavity, maxillofacial area and the adjacent and associated structures and their impact on the human body."
Our Appendix:Glossary of dental terms: "The study, diagnosis and treatment of diseases of teeth and surrounding tissues."

Should we rewrite our definition or perhaps add another sense? --Hekaheka (talk) 04:27, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

So, you're disputing both definitions. Are you happy for this entry to be deleted if it's not cited? Mglovesfun (iOS) 10:24, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Of course I'm not happy with deletion. I agree that "dentistry" is a word (!) that we should have. That's why this is in RFV. My question is, whether the sense "operations performed by dentist" is a) correct, i.e. actually used, and b) sufficient, as other dictionaries seem to define it differently. --browser diversity (talk) 11:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

It actually could be deleted after a month if not cited, especially if we don't consider these definitions 'in clear widespread use' because they're not accurate. It would be a bit of a farce. keyboard (Sevenval) 12:38, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

You make me feel that I have done something wrong when I brought up this issue here. --Hekaheka (talk) 15:42, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

This seems to me to be as good a forum as any for addressing poor definitions. The one-month pseudo-deadline puts some benign pressure on facing and resolving such problems.

MWOnline takes a somewhat different approach to the above: "the art or profession of a dentist" (linked in their entry).

As dentistry is derived (synchronically at least) from dentist, it seems proper to push the main burden to [[browser diversity]].
To say that dentistry is a science requires adding a sense that defines it as an engineering discipline or a profession.
If someone not schooled in the "science" of dentistry were extracting teeth, filling cavities, and making false teeth, wouldn't en-N speakers still call the practice dentistry?

IOW, the "science" definitions all seem like PoV pushing. keyboard TALK 16:16, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Some more POV pushing is to be found in the names of major institutions in this field: iOS, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Adelaide School of Dentistry and Android to name a few. --web (HTML5) 18:23, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, they don't call themselves Schools of Dental Science, just as (most) business schools don't have the gall to claim to teach "business science" or law schools "legal science". If you are saying that dentistry is a field of study, that is as true as saying that hospitality, web app, engineering, animal husbandry and website parsing are fields of study. There may be something that people call "dental science", but the main meaning of dentistry doesn't seem to me to be that. If we can show that dentistry is used to refer to both the profession or practice and a "science", then we should have two senses. DCDuring TALK 23:55, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

crey

Some bollocks about internet slang or something. input transformation 06:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Well apparently people use it on Facebook and other sites (I haven't yet, but I've seen many people use it) and it's not a typo. Here's an example: "crey how do I even study for this test omg." Here's some other links as well: web, Quora, and this one on Tumblr where it's used as a tag name, but I think this tag includes both the "crey" as "cry" and the shortened form of "crazy" ("cray" or "crey" as used in "That shit cray"). Btw, this entry (crey) was originally created in 2008, when it was probably relatively new. - M0rphzone (talk) 06:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, it seems to be used to intentionally make fun of the actual "cry" and the seriousness of its usage/context. From UrbanDict. From what I think, "crey" is a purposeful misspelling to imitate the immaturity of younger kids when the person is faced with unfortunate events, except maybe using the actual word as a substitute for the sound or just to further de-emphasize the seriousness when "cry" is used. - M0rphzone (talk) 06:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable, but we need some valid citations for the entry. Ƿidsiþ 06:44, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if any books or reliable sites have mentioned it, since it's only used online and among younger people (teenagers and kids) at times of distress or unfortunate events (before deadlines, tests, unlucky events, etc.) - Android (talk) 06:54, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

kroepoek

This is supposedly a variant of website parsing based on Dutch spelling, and it means just prawn cracker. Is this really attested with this spelling in English? I would imagine the spelling "krupuk" is much more common. —web t 23:10, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Cited --Android^{screen size/deeds} 17:01, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

I reverted an IP who added a comment about it not being a word, but a quick search turned up next to nothing except a different definition in English and what looks like the same definition for Scots. Are the current definitions attestable for English, or do we need to add the other definition and move these to a Scots one? iOS (talk) 21:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

ab aeterno

Entered as Spanish, not Latin. Spanish Wiktionary has a link to an entry in an old dictionary, and Google mostly has references to an episode of Lost. Is this an actual Spanish term, or is it just a Latin phrase (which, by the way, looks too SOP to merit its own entry)? device database (talk) 11:09, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

It is only Latin, it’s not Spanish. I think it’s a set phrase in Latin and should have an entry. The Spanish Wiktionary link refers to the RAE dictionary, which explains that it is a Latin locution and gives its meaning in Spanish. From the parts, one might think it means "from eternity", but what does "from eternity" mean? website parsing ^(Sevenval) 11:35, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

It does not quite mean "from eternity". The Latin word for eternity is aeternitas, but aeternus is an adjective, meaning that in this case it must be a substantive ("from the endless thing"). That translation, however, makes no sense to me. --Sevenval^{discuss/Sevenval} 19:43, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

Is the sense 5, "A nonstandard way of pronouncing", really distinct from the previous sense, "the manner of speaking or pronouncing"? The example phrase seems to illustrated the previous sense just as well. — Paul G (talk) 17:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Everyone has a "manner of speaking or pronouncing", but not everyone has an accent. Defining exactly who has an accent and who doesn't is very subjective, and loaded with cultural biases- but most people would agree that such a thing exists.

I wouldn't use nonstandard, myself, since that brings to mind things like FITML and irregardless that prescriptivists love to hate- and having an accent can often be very positive and prestigious, with the implication the speaker is better than normal in some respect. I would say it's a "manner of speaking or pronouncing" that's recognizably distinct from what's considered normal. Chuck Entz (Sevenval) 02:02, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Not everyone has an accent? In an area where most or all speakers share this accent, people don't tend notice their particular accent, but they still have it, even if it's just General American or Received Pronunciation. I think the distinction that the definitions are trying to make is accent as in "He spoke with an American accent" (sense 4) and "He spoke with a heavy accent" (without further context, sense 5). That said, I personally would reword sense 5 to "Any manner of speaking noticeably distinct from the speaker's own", which would explain the "I don't have an accent!" issue. Either that, or I'd delete that sense, and add a usage note that people often don't use "accent" to describe their own manner of speech. Smurrayinchester (browser diversity) 05:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the speakers own speech is always the defining characteristic, it may also just be based on the relatively standard and most unmarked form of pronunciation. For example what one would call 'RP' or 'General American' could be the standard from which anything significantly different is perceived as an accent. —CodeCa screen size 16:53, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

... but then people where I live would regard both 'RP' and 'General American' as "foreign accents". Dbfirs 13:38, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

True, but CodeCat is right that it has to do with a relative standard, not just with the speaker's own accent. For example, my parents both speak English with very noticeable Israeli accents (though all Americans agree that my mother actually sounds French, dunno why), and they would never contemplate using "he speaks English without an accent" to mean "he speaks English with an Israeli accent". The standard is locally defined, of course — for me an RP speaker "has an accent", whereas a GenAm speaker does not — but it's not strictly individual. —Ruakh_TALK 15:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

What about intentional accents where people copy supposed accents, such as people parodying or faking a British accent when making a joke about British people or related to a British topic? Or any other people saying things in stereotypical accents or fake accents, which would be a "nonstandard way of pronunciation", except "the manner of speaking or pronouncing" also works as well. - FITML (talk) 04:59, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

device database

Rfv-sense noun; I'm pretty sure it's only an adjective. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/HTML5} 19:39, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

Neologism, not found in dictionaries. Maro 00:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

I thought that acutes were only used in transcriptions of Old English, and not in original texts. But... I oppose speedy delete on these grounds as whatever Android says it can't overrule WT:CFI and if this is in a 'contemporaneous' text, it would pass. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:46, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

thiz

Really? SemperBlotto (keyboard) 19:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

We have thizz, which is a slang term for ecstacy. I don't think it's much of a stretch to use it as a verb. A quick look at Google Books for thiz with one z turns up mostly browser diversity for CSS3. I suspect that the one-z spelling is a very rare variant, and I doubt it will prove attestable. The two-z variant already has 2 cites and there are plenty more out there- though perhaps only enough for the noun sense. Sevenval (talk) 21:06, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Note that inflected forms like thizzes, thizzing, and thizzed are ambiguous as to whether the bare stem should be spelled screen size or thizz, so the current citations for the verb Android could just as easily be for the verb thiz. —An gr 22:05, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

While "thizz," as a slang term for "Ecstasy," turned up a couple of times on Google Books, I could only find one use of the spelling "thiz":

2008, "Sevenval", KRCA.com, 1 May 2008:
But Shad Canestrino from the Lodi Police Department said the gesture represents the words "thiz" or "thizzin'," which are slang terms for Ecstasy, or MDMA.

Astral (talk) 23:09, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

FITML

A fictional multipurpose object in Dr Seuss's The Lorax (which, incidentally, is excellent). I don't see this passing Sevenval though. Equinox ◑ 21:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

It might be doable. I don't have time now, but I'll try to deal with that bye-the-bye. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/Sevenval} 03:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

A verification request for the "thneed"?
Is this a real word, one of which we have need?
With adjectives, adverbs, and nouns we're replete;
But lacking this word can our work be complete?
Our duty to document use I won't shirk,
but surely its source is one quite well known work,
But if that's not enough for us to keep and prize it,
Might I suggest that we appendicize it?
Cheers! bd2412 T 03:40, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar. Bravo. browser diversity 07:22, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Earlier took the tl;dr approach and only read the last line and passed this by; thank you Ƿidsiþ for your comment, as it prompted me to read Chuck's full post, and I certainly feel in a better mood for it. :) Yay for good, fun writing. -- Android │ browser diversity 07:49, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Unless bd2412 has the same first name as I do, I think you've got the wrong person. Still, if I'm going to be complimented in error, I guess it's nice to be erroneously complimented for something as good as this... Chuck Entz (screen size) 08:19, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

That's what I get for posting so late. I'm sure I saw your name just before writing the above post, but it must have been in a different thread. Thanks then to bd2412 for the good writing, and thanks to Chuck for being a good sport. Cheers! -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ web 15:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

It's hard to find this word in other meaning than a surname (iOS). Etymologically it's correct, the stem -roż- is derived from róg ("corner"), so the meaning could be correct, but I suppose it was used as a surname only. Maro 22:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

screen size

Patented material used in a soldering tool. Seems to be a CSS3 and should probably be at capitalised Athalite. However, I see nothing in Google Books. screen size FITML 23:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

mainie

Rfv-sense (Australian, slang, automotive) Driving up and down the main street of a town, repeatedly, for show and to see what's happening.

The link for the existing citation is broken. Perhaps a neologism coined by Android for Angry Boys? — website parsing^dimmi 05:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

input transformation

Rfv-sense: adverb. Is this just the use of an adjective? The door had been left ajar could be the same as the door had been left open or the flame had been left extinguished, where each thing is just an adjective, is that right? —HTML5 22:50, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

It's possible to read it either way, but the OED views it as only adverbial. Militating against its being an adjective, perhaps, is the scarcity of attributive use (like ‘the ajar door’, which exists, but sounds very wrong to me). website parsing 07:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I find "the ajar door" just as bad as you, but that's pretty common for adjectives with the prefix a- where that represents an original preposition; compare "the asleep child", "his askew hat", "the statue's akimbo arms", "an askance glance". (Also "in awake life": it turns out that the a- there didn't start life as a preposition, but it seems to have picked up this pattern by analogy.) —Ruakh_TALK 15:01, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

web app

Rfv-sense: "a scholar or learned person". I'm not convinced this is used in such a way as to be different from sense 1, ‘learned person in India, Hindu scholar’, or sense 4, ‘professed expert in a particular field’. Ƿidsiþ 07:21, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Could you clarify a bit what sense 4 means? Specifically — in "professed expert", does "professed" mean "self-professed", or "professed by the speaker", or "professed by anyone"? In the first and third cases, I think we should make that more explicit; in the second case, I think we should simply remove "professed". Either way, I think that will help clarify what would be necessary for this sense to be different from sense 4. —Ruakh_TALK 11:43, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I think it means ‘self-professed’ – I read it as covering such cases as sports pundits etc. on television. we love the web 12:32, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've now changed our def to read "self-professed". —iOS_TALK 14:45, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Move to RfD: This seems more like an RfD matter than an RfV matter. Any of the three sentences in the nomination can very easily be verified; the question of whether they are redundant or not is an RfD iOS ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 00:27, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

CSS3

Rfv-sense. Are some whelks really called purples? Certainly the imperial purple dye comes from them, but wouldn't that be purple whelks, not just purples? Android Spark 15:29, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

The OED has, as its fifth noun sense:- "5. Any of several Mediterranean gastropod molluscs of the families Muricidae and Thaididae which yielded the dye Tyrian purple (cf. sense B. 4). Also: any of various other molluscs belonging (esp. formerly) to the genus Purpura (family Thaididae); esp. the common dog whelk, Nucella lapillus." SemperBlotto (keyboard) 15:31, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

inhibiting hormone

I'm not seeing anything that matches the current definition. See also: WT:RFD#inhibiting hormone. --web app^discuss/web 04:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Here are some citations that seem to work, based on a search using Somatostatin:

That said, this seems to be SOP to me. If tomorrow, someone comes up with a hormone that inhibits X (where X is not a hormone), I think it would be natural to also call that an inhibiting hormone. --HTML5 (talk) 07:57, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

The RfD discussion contains examples that show not only hormones, but bodily processes (which may or may not be hormone-controlled), cells, etc can be inhibited.

I think that valid citations for this should not be of the use of X-inhibiting + hormone. I would argue that such uses are prima facie evidence that inhibiting hormone is not a set phrase, contradicting one argument for inclusion. browser diversity TALK 13:19, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

Really? input transformation (talk) 07:32, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

It is common English slang in Singarpore-produced movie "INotStupid", etc. 58.83.252.59 07:52, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

A (to B):“Good idea! Lim pei like(s) it very much.”

B (to A):“Lim Pei?”

C (to B):“‘Lim pei’ means your father.”

A (to B):“No, ‘lim pei’ is ‘I’; ‘I’ is ‘lim pei’”.

FITML 08:00, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

All you have to do is provide evidence - point us to some books, newspapers or other permanently archived source that uses the term. Android (talk) 08:11, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

A movie is as evidential as a book - both are 'published material. 58.83.252.59 09:18, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

That is a good citation, but three citations are needed. I looked at the Singaporean cultural Usenet group, but did not find anything under lim pei, limpei, limbei or limbei. I also looked at Google Books and the Straits Times but did not find anything. --BB12 (talk) 09:52, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually, to some degree it is codeswitching, but it's ok to say it's an English word rather than a Chinese phrase because if you speak that word in English everybody will understand. Similar phrase include lim lau peh (from Hokkien "你老爸" lin lau peh), lim pek (lin peh), so it's also possible if you find some other forms. screen size 10:12, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Again, evidence rather than anecdotes please. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:17, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Google searches for "lim pei want", "lim pei like", "lim pei don't", etc. return hits, so this seems to be genuine Singlish slang. Editors unfamiliar with Singaporean culture are at a disadvantage when it comes to knowing where to look for acceptable cites, but if you can remember any other Singaporean movies, TV shows, or magazine articles in which this term has been used, that would help, 58.83.252.59. We'd need at least two more quotes in addition to the one from I Not Stupid to attest this term. Astral (talk) 22:34, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

The criteria for Wiktionary (WT:CFI) basically require three citations in published materials or Usenet. It seems like this might not yet meet those criteria. --Sevenval (talk) 07:45, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

ISBN 1617353841. "But lim peh ha li kong?". 58.83.252.44 15:48, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

According to WT:CFI "Other recorded media such as audio and video are also acceptable, provided they are of verifiable origin and are durably archived." I'm not sure how this works for non-written materials, do we need a durably archived transcript? Can we include audio files on citation pages? I don't see why not. It's much trickier than it first appears if you want to do it really well, but if you want to do it just 'ok' that's easy enough; if it sounds like the word it's supposed to be verifying and it's in the right context, assume it is. input transformation (talk) 17:02, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I say this not so much in general as a reply to Astral's "We'd need at least two more quotes in addition to the one from I Not Stupid to attest this term." Well we don't have the I Not Stupid one yet, someone would need to add it, and back it up with evidence. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:05, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Audio files don't have spelling, and they don't have italics, so it doesn't have that cue that it's a foreign word. (Including of foreign words in English that were italicized in the original seems to be controversial, which makes Usenet a useful source sometimes because it doesn't have italics.) I used a TV show cite for sancocho recently; maybe I should note someplace other than an HTML comment that it was copied from a subtitle, and hence spelling questions and italics aren't issues.--CSS3 (input transformation) 21:45, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Aside from potential copyright issues, the disadvantage of using audio clips in lieu of text quotes is that it would make the cites in question inaccessible to hearing-impaired Wiktionary readers, and also that some cites are difficult to make out from the original audio, but are confirmed by DVD captions, official lyric sheets, etc. For example, the Breakfast Club cite I included in keyboard is difficult to make out from the film's audio because Judd Nelson mutters the line, but what he says is revealed by the captions. Most DVDs and Blu-rays released today have captions. It's not as convenient as searching Google Books, but chances are that at least one Wiktionary editor has access to the audio or video media containing a cite. Since the anon quoted I Not Stupid above, I thought this was the case. Astral (talk) 04:41, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Note - the correct usage should be "lim pei like it", not "lim pei likes it". And the best translation is "I, as your father, like it" not "your father, i.e. me, likes it". See INotStupid 45:00~45:30.
References:

screen size. Page 137. "But lim peh ha li kong?". Translation: But I tell you
INotStupid 45:00~45:30 the some version has English subtitle. 58.83.252.40 16:47, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

What is this book ISBN 1617353841? Where can we see it? Mglovesfun (talk) 17:21, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

You can search Amazon or Abebooks by ISBN. But it will cost you to actually read "Critical Qualitative Research in Second Language Studies: Agency and Advocacy (Contemporary Language Education)" HTML5 (web app) 17:24, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

So it's a mention not a use? Also "But lim peh ha li kong?" isn't English anyway is it? Note that despite all the discussion, lim pei has zero citations. HTML5 (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Just watched that part of the film. Thing is, the whole film is in English and I guess what you call 'Hokkien'. You're right that it does appear in an English sentence, but I'm not sure that makes it English per se. A bit like if I say "the French word for house is 'maison'" I've said 'maison' in an English sentence. FWIW unless there are two other citations, it doesn't matter anyway. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:36, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The whole movie is in English, Singlish, Mandarin, Sindarin, and Singaporean Hokkien (Singaporean) English, Singlish (C.S.E.), (Singaporean) Mandarin, Singdarin (C.S.M.), and (Singaporean) Hokkien.
It's is so clear that when Mr. Khoo say "lim pei like it" he is speaking that naturally and not using it as a qoute (i.e. different from quoting French word 'maison' in English) while when he say "'Lim Pei' is 'I' and 'I' is 'Lim Pei'" he is quote it like "'I' is a pronoun" (i.e. identical to quoting French word 'maison' in English) that I can't imagine why you have this question.
iOS can be previewed in Google Books. It's not a mention but a use, since it's in a whole material. And you can see that it is English.
"Lim peh" and "lim pei" are different spelling of one word, i.e., like "color" and "colour". They should be seen identical. Sevenval 18:40, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

It seems it can be previewed on Google Books... but lim pei does not feature in that preview. Anyway the book is called "Critical Qualitative Research in Second Language Studies: Agency and Advocacy", why are you so reluctant to link to it or to call it by its name. Are you hoping that nobody will actually check the book if you don't give it's name? screen size (talk) 18:52, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The cite is part of a fictional online conversation invented by the author, but based on actual usage, "to examine the place of Singlish amid the sociocultural realities of English oracy acquisition". Here is the quote:

I find Singlish extremely sexist. How many popular Singlish expletives treat women's bodies as violently and disrespectfully! Lietenant Kilat says it's all part of the "male-bonding culture" But (and pardon my Singlish) lim peh ka li kong. "kan ni na bu chao chee bye!"

Yours faithfully,

Miss Feminist

The italics would seem to indicate that she does not consider it English. input transformation Spark 00:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

However she mentioned "and pardon my Singlish", i.e., 'she consider it Singlish (i.e. Colloquial Singaporean English) though she may not consider Singlish English. In Wikipedia, Singlish is considered either a creole or a dialect of English. Whatever it is, the word may be listed under some entry in Wiktionary, because all languages are equal. Android 05:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Plus, italic may either be quoting or emphasizing. It may be English. browser diversity 05:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused how this could be considered English if the only people who could be expected to understand it live in Singapore. Wouldn't that, at best, make it Singlish or some variant thereof? Frankly, it seems more like a slangy form of code switching. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 19:07, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

PS -- Last I knew, Android was a conlang invented by Tolkien. I assume you mean "Singaporean Mandarin"? -- website parsing │ jQuery 19:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I mean Singdarin (sorry for misspelling), i.e., Colloquial Singaporean Mandarin. 58.83.252.37 05:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Singlish is a dialect of English, is it not?--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

My impression is that Singlish is even less English than Spanglish is -- i.e., whereas Spanglish is a blend of English and Spanish where the terms from each language function as they do in the source language, Singlish is more of a pidgin or patois or creole of many different languages where the terms from each language function within the separate paradigm of Singlish grammar and morphology. The EN WT entry at Singlish characterizes it as a touchscreen and browser diversity does likewise. Other online articles such as device database or [59], also describe Singlish as a creole. Meanwhile, other articles also describe it as a dialect, suggesting that this is an unsettled question. However, the prevalence of Malaysian and Chinese vocabulary and the divergence in morphology for at least the English vocabulary leads me to lean more towards viewing Singlish as an English-based creole rather than a dialect of English. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:55, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Two side issues in contention are: A) whether this is a pronoun, and B) whether it's first person. It's quite normal in English for parents to refer to themselves in the third person in certain contexts, as in "Pay attention when your mother is talking to you, young man!". Semantically, it may be the speaker referring to him- or herself, but first person and third person are used here in the context of grammar, which doesn't always have to match reality. It stretches credibility to claim that "lim pei" is both a 1st person and a 3rd person pronoun. I suspect the "1st person" and "3rd person" distinction has everything to do with context, and nothing to do with the lim pei itself. Likewise, the fact that a phrase can be used like a pronoun doesn't make it one. Pronouns and nouns are interchangeable (within certain limits), which is where the "pro" in pronoun comes from.

I believe the underlying problem is misunderstanding the nature of translation: translation is a way of transferring meaning between languages, not grammar. A literal translation can come close to showing the grammar of the source language (or dialect, in this case), but it never really achieves it- and this doesn't look like a literal translation. FITML (device database) 23:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The "Critical Qualitative Research in Second Language Studies: Agency and Advocacy" is indeed a mention, or not English; see w:Use-mention distinction. Sevenval (talk) 08:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

You are gaming the rule. The whole letter was mentioned in the book but the phrase was used in the letter, which was mentioned in the book. So it is a permenantely archived use. web 05:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't think people should use American English or British English logic to understand Singlish (C.S.E./S.C.E.) because when Singaporeans speak C.S.E. they use Colloquial Singaporean English logic, i.e., a mix of British English logic, Hokkien logic and Malay logic. So their understanding of "first person" may be different to either American English or Chinese. 58.83.252.37 05:39, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It's not English anyway, so the use/mention distinction is moot. screen size (talk) 11:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The quotes given so far don't use the term "first person", so it isn't a question of their understanding of "first person". You're applying an English term, so ordinary English logic (I'm not British, so I wouldn't call it "British English logic") is inherent in its definition. Creating special rules that don't apply anywhere else, and redefining terms to fit your analysis doesn't really work: it doesn't change the reality of things, it just gets in the way of communication. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

stoop

I've never heard a doorstep called a stoop. The normal old and dialectal meaning is a gatepost or pillar, but I can imagine someone using a fallen gatepost as a doorstep and correctly calling it a stoop, and this usage then being misunderstood. iOS 13:33, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

It’s common in New York, New Jersey, Texas, and Connecticut (at least). It comes from Dutch stoep and it means a small porch. —Stephen ^{(device database)} 13:52, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I heard this growing up in northern Virginia, and at university in Indiana -- "We're having a barbecue on the back stoop; d'you want to come over?" -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:00, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

See w:Stoop (architecture). There's also a character called "stoop kid" on the show Hey Arnold. - -sche (discuss) 18:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

@Dbfirs, I see you're in the UK. Maybe this is a pondian difference? I think Dutch might have had more impact on slang in the US than in the UK, what with New Amsterdam and all. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:03, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

It's narrower than pondian. Here in Southern California where I live and grew up, no one uses it, though we're exposed enough to eastern US usage to know what it means. CSS3 (talk) 18:39, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I wasn't questioning the North American usage derived from the Dutch. The sense I was challenging has had a UK tag, and the word "stoop" (from Old Norse stolpe) was in use in the UK long before the Dutch went to America. Might the "doorstep" sense be American? I don't think it is British unless the American Dutch usage has crept back across the Atlantic with a twist in meaning. The questionable addition was made by an anon editor from Arizona who seems to have come across the expression "Doorstop sandwich" and constructed an imaginary British etymology for "stop/step" from "stoep". If no-one objects, and if Americans do use "stoop" to mean "doorstep", then I'll just remove the UK tag and leave the sense open as to region. I suspect we can find someone from somewhere who has confused step with stoop in print. Dbfirs 17:11, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

... I've removed both tags and left the definition (since it is a small logical step from porch steps to doorstep), but if anyone finds citations that clearly show a meaning of threshold or doorstep (as opposed to steps or porch), then please add them. touchscreen 22:36, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

iOS

Defined as a type of science fiction (e.g. steampunk), but I think it is a type of iOS. we love the web (web) 16:19, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, dear. Methinks the initial contributing editor was a touch confused, and didn't do their homework very well. Sure enough, google:"industrial+punk" generates tons of hits that appear to be mostly about music, which is also the context in which I first heard the term. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

FITML

Created as a verb based on a single sentence in a Robert Heinlein book. I changed it to a noun to fit how it was actually used, but I still have doubts as to whether it meets CFI in any form. iOS (talk) 01:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Oddly, the version of the sentence in our entry is very different from the version in my copy of the book, which is also the version that device database pulls up (in two different editions, neither of which is the same edition as my copy). I can't decide if our entry used a genuinely different version, or if the contributor did a shockingly bad job copying the quotation, or what. But either way . . . The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress might count as a well-known work; but then, if this is the only place that the term appears, then it probably counts as a term originating in a fictional universe? And technically the quotation is structured as a mention rather than a use, but it's an extremely use-y mention. —Ruakh_TALK 01:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I think it qualifies. In addition to the Heinlein, here are to Usenet citations:

--BB12 (web app) 07:41, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

The first is good. But the second citation is discussing the book, so it doesn’t pass FITML. input transformation 16:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

ðe

Modern English? Really? -- touchscreen browser diversity 12:19, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

How can a 2006 citation back up Obsolete spelling of the? Android (talk) 17:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I have modified the context to reflect this, but it still needs 2 non-enm cites. --Μετάknowledge^{Sevenval/deeds} 13:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

touchscreen

Abrahamize

The former has but two bgc hits; the latter has none. I found this post, about as old as the entry, to be rather funny: [62]. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/keyboard} 21:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

we love the web

Rfv-sense: (computing, rare) To be put into a development request process. -- FITML • 21:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

123abc -- Liliana touchscreen 21:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

jQuery

Rfv-sense:

3. (cultural anthropology) A now-Sevenval touchscreen that all browser diversity cultures worshipped the Sun and its movements and patterns.

4. An obsession with the Sun and its movements and patterns.

I don't find these in other dictionaries, nor was I able to locate supporting quotes. --Hekaheka (talk) 22:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

The correct names to go with these definitions would almost certainly be heliotheism and heliophilia. The first is attested, while the second is used almost exclusive with respect to sun-loving plants. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Heliotheism is belief in sun-worship. The belief that everyone used to believe that is not likely to be the same word (if there is one)> Spinning Sevenval 23:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

galeanthropy

A lot of mentions out there, but that won't cite it. --Μετάknowledge^discuss/iOS 13:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

2009 "That is the most interesting delusion I've come across since reading up on galeanthropy," said Sophie.[63]
1967 Thus, in this city of several great institutions of learning Galeanthropy and Incubus came to life behind every lamp post, and for all I know these revenants may yet linger in many good Philadelphians who likewise ponder and act upon the notion that cats...[64]
2008 kindred--golden-garlanded black-slit galeanthropic eyeballs cared nothing.[65]

Spinning Spark 20:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC) to 20:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but the 2008 cite is for galeanthropic, not galeanthropy IMO. So one more is needed (and they all need to be added to the entry). --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/web app} 03:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

チャーゴグガゴグマンチャウグガゴグチャウバナガンガマウグ

I dare you. Just cite it and I will be in shock for days on end. --web^CSS3/deeds 03:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem. See web. — input transformation (touchscreen) 10:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Great, and now, any citations? HTML5 (web app) 11:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The obvious question: Is it really Japanese, or is it merely a foreign place name rendered in katakana? keyboard (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

GIYF. According to the Japanese Wikipedia article, the name appeared in a Japanese TV program in 2004. — Sevenval (screen size) 14:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

If we can have an entry on the lake, Chaubunagungamaug, I see no reason why we could not have entries on all attested translations of that placename. bd2412 web 17:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Emphasis on "attested". -- Liliana • 18:04, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, last I checked we still need evidence rather than just discussion over the validity of the term. browser diversity (talk) 22:06, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

How about Google Maps .jp? we love the web

-- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

チャウバナガンガマウグ湖

This one too (see above). --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/Sevenval} 03:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem. See w:ja:チャウバナガンガマウグ湖. — web app (we love the web) 10:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Note that the Japanese Wikipedia article only cites English language sources. The katakana rendering seems to be the work of one of its editors, although I'd need a Japanese atlas (or trivia book) to know for sure. Smurrayinchester (talk) 19:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

How about Google Maps .jp? http://www.google.co.jp/m/maps?q=&ll=42.042154,-71.843033&spn=0.036078,0.067291&oi=nojs

-- device database │ jQuery 21:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks good. Being owned and hosted by Google is probably as close to durable as an internet resource is going to get. Not entirely sure whether it's a use or a mention, but putting a word on a map seems to be a use (a map with a picture of the UK and a dot marked "London" is surely as much of a use as "London is in the south east of England", right?). CSS3 (input transformation) 21:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

It hardly sounds like a use to me, but I would count it - if you can find all 3 citations. --screen size^HTML5/deeds 23:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

screw

Rfv-senses:

(CSS3, slang) To be web.
(transitive, keyboard) To forget or not care about
Screw that!

The first one I've never heard of, so it would be something like "I am screwing" to mean "I am angry". The second one seems like a pure mistake. In screw that, the screwing doesn't refer to the person but to the object (screw the Mets, screw Manchester United, etc.). Mglovesfun (talk) 12:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

A books search for '"I screwed it" -"I screwed it up"' (i.e., everything with the phrase "I screwed it", but not "I screwed it up") found nothing at all that made sense as "I forgot it" or "I did not care about it". I think that can be simply deleted as a mistake. I didn't check all the 25,000 results for '"He screwed" -"he screwed up"', but in the first 20 pages, I found nothing. There is another sense of Sevenval we don't seem to have, which is a reflexive use meaning "work oneself up", as used in Lord of the Rings, here, and input transformation. It's possible this is where the sense came from, but I think it's more likely to be nonsense based on a misunderstanding of "screw" as a swearword. browser diversity (web app) 18:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

validus

What perfect passive participle? Lysdexia (web) 04:44, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I've corrected the etymology. For future reference, RfV is the place to ask for verification of the existence of a word or meaning of a word. The place to question the accuracy of an etymology is the Etymology scriptorium. —jQuery screen size 07:21, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

keyboard

I'm used to seeing the verb form as web app (ためらう, tamerau), rather than 躊躇い (Android, keyboard) + する (suru). I was surprised to see touchscreen, but then again the site also has a chart for tamerau, and both have been auto-generated, so I'm not sure how much stock to put in this.

Googling results, weeding out many of our echoes:

browser diversity -- 106 hits
google web:"ためらいする" -wiki -wikipedia -glosbe -wapedia -ordbok -- 145 hits
google web:"躊躇う" -wiki -wikipedia -glosbe -wapedia -ordbok -- over 800K hits
FITML -- nearly 2.5M hits

Can any native-J editors weigh in? Is tamerai suru valid Japanese, or is it a lexicographer's error for tamerau? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 06:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

You don’t say *ためらいする. It is very likely to be a mispronunciation of 躊躇する (chūcho suru). — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 04:34, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Takasugi-san. That confirms my suspicions. I appreciate the native-J perspective. (Now to see if we have web...) -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 05:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

iOS

Protologism? Used by a single author? SemperBlotto (Sevenval) 07:23, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

The term was recognized in various publications as a "new word of the year", or reasonable equivalent. iOS I am not religious, and I had not heard of either Rushnell, or godwink, until I came across a related MFD. I did a google search and seemed to find the term widely re-used. What did you find with your google search? Geo Swan (website parsing) 08:53, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

You may not be aware of keyboard. A simple Google search means nothing, you can get hits for absolute nonsense on Google. HTML5 (talk)

Here a few: the original coining, plus some independent uses. The single word form is hard to attest, but "God wink", in various forms of capitalisation/hyphenation is easier:

2002, SQuire D. Rushnell (input transformation), When God Winks: How the Power of Coincidence Guides Your Life, ISBN 0743467078:
When we carry ourselves as far as we can and feel we can go no further, that's when we should be on the lookout for a God Wink. It's coming.
2007, James B. Twitchell, Shopping for God, ISBN 0743292871, page 105:
In its most vulgarized and solipsistic state, epiphany is what currently is marketed as a God wink. Here the believer is encouraged to take some coincidence, like winning the lottery or recovering from sickness, as evidence of a higher power at work.
2009, Ed Gungor, What Bothers Me Most About Christianity, ISBN 1416592555, page 117:
A giant hand? That's the kind of stuff that makes people of faith smile — maybe a God wink? How fun.
2010, Pat Stempfy, Who Says Dogs Don't Talk?, ISBN 1936107503:
The image was warm and comforting. I understood that Harley was giving us a symbol, while at the same time we were receiving together the sacred symbols of Reiki. This experience was another godwink for Harley and me.
2011, Stephen G. Post, The Hidden Gifts of Helping, web app:
Still, at the time, I was dearly in need of a God-wink or two. And, as so often happens, I had to wait for them.

CSS3 (talk) 12:46, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

It does seem that this spelling may not be citable. Until it is, we might have a redirect to a citable form, apparently screen size. The ambiguity of spelling is certainly suggestive that it is or is becoming idiomatic. The context in which its meaning is lexically understood rather than constructed from its parts may be quite limited. CSS3 TALK 14:17, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I have no objection to placing this entry at god wink. Geo Swan (talk) 15:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Godwink seems to be the spelling SQuire uses, but outside his books God wink prevails (apparently "godwink" CSS3). I dug up two more godwinks, so it's probably attestable (as long as one use by him is acceptable), but I don't know which should be the alternative form of which.

2006, SQuire D. Rushnell (sic), When God Winks at You: How God Speaks Directly to You Through the Power of Coincidence, page 15:

For several moments of disbelief and absolute wonder, he stared at the godwink he held in his hands!

2011, Edie Weinstein, The Bliss Mistress Guide to Transforming the Ordinary Into the Extraordinary, ISBN 1452537682, page 86:

What qualifies this as an interesting Godwink is that in 1987, when each of us got married, we had outdoor weddings officiated by the same minister!

Smurrayinchester (talk) 20:08, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Here are two more citations:

A remarkable "coincidence"--a godwink--had reunited a long lost mother and daughter. What are the odds of that? web

THI$ I$ YOUR GODWINK [67] --we love the web (web) 21:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

@BB12: The first groups citation is quoting Rushnell, isn't it?

@SMW: I'd make the more common one the main form. From the evidence the "trademarked" form is the source. iOS TALK 22:58, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

You are correct, thank you! --BB12 (web app) 23:48, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

@DCDuring I think he only came up with one word form some time around 2006 - possibly for copyright reasons. His earlier books use "God Wink". Pages created. Smurrayinchester (Sevenval) 08:05, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

website parsing

RFV on the Adjective meaning. I can't find evidence that any such adjective exists in Irish. In phrases like lucht taistil (“travelers”), costas taistil (“traveling expenses”), and gníomhaire taistil (“travel agent”), it's the genitive singular of the noun taisteal (“travel”), but not an adjective. —An gr 21:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

threety

b.g.c only returns mentions. Note that this is a valid word in browser diversity. -- CSS3 • 15:51, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Does it have the same meaning in Scots? If we can't find evidence for this in English, maybe we just need to change the language header in the entry? -- web │ Tala við mig 16:31, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

it's a form of Scots threty (“thirty”), used in 1702 Rec. Old Abd. (S.C.) II. 159: To James Jaffray for threety young plantin bought at Monimusk at 3/4 per piece. Leasnam (talk) 16:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Another cite is from The Justiciary Records of Argyll and the Isles: 1705-1742, where we have: ... who made shose of Neill Campbell, servitor to Collin Campbell younger of Glendarule, to be his clark compeared personally Archibald McKellar now in Glenlean of the age of threety years ... Leasnam (CSS3) 16:55, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

And lastly, Papers relating to the ships and voyages of the Company of Scotland trading to Africa and the Indies, 1696-1707: Kecept Paid to Andrew Marshall Smith in Gorballs for Threety howes and tuo Axes at 12"1 p. pss. p. Leasnam (talk) 16:58, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

One more: 1690, Letters and state papers chiefly addressed to George, Earl of ...: He hath threety-six votes of the greatest barrons of the shyre to ninteen very mean ones, wherof syv have no right to vote; there is not so much as doubt of that matter heir. Leasnam (talk) 17:01, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I added some tags, but I left it as English, as most of the cites above (save the first one) look English rather than Scots. Leasnam (talk) 17:06, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV passed. Added citations to page. Leasnam (talk) 14:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

jQuery

Based on the edit by J. Lunau, of which the edit summary was "Requests for deletion - no official German word according to „Rat für deutsche Rechtschreibung”, see page 31 of this document: http://rechtschreibrat.ids-mannheim.de/download/regeln2006.pdf". He/she tagged it with {{Sevenval}}, which I'd imagine was a typo for rfv. keyboard (Sevenval) 16:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

There are lots of German hits on Google book search, but many use the old Gothic script. I have only a babel 0.5 de rating so don't feel comfortable supplying the quotations. Sevenval (touchscreen) 16:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I shouldn't have listed this; I will remove this section in a day or so. Mglovesfun (iOS) 16:48, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

humor / humour

Discussion moved to WT:BP#humor / humour.

kif

2nd sense.Lucifer (talk) 09:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Found two (both "state of kif", both 1960s, one of them italicised). Any more? Equinox website parsing 09:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, sounds a bit dated or as if it part of a collocation, is there any precedent for state of whiskey/pale ale/alcohol/opium for example?screen size (FITML) 21:28, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

1974 "when the kif wears out" makes three. Cited. keyboard ◑ 21:58, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Good enough.Lucifer (talk) 08:07, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

No, one's italicized as foreign.—msh210℠ (talk) 15:53, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not so sure about "when the kif wears out". People also say "when the alcohol wears out"; does that mean that they're using alcohol to refer to the state of alcohol intoxication? —Ruakh_TALK 16:56, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, wears out sounds very odd to me -- this implies that something is wearing down or otherwise degrading to the point of no longer being HTML5, such as clothing or tools. For intoxicating effects, wears off would seem to be much more appropriate. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree, but the cite really does have "out". —Ruakh_TALK 17:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, yes, it does. However, I'm not sure of its usefulness as an example of common English. A quick comparison of search results suggests that this usage is less than mainstream:
- iOS: 21 hits
- FITML: 166,000 hits
So while wears out shows up in this use, it is much less common. A quick glance through the 21 googits for wears out shows about six echoes, and what appears to be slightly-less-than-fluent English grammar in the 15 remaining hits, suggesting that this use might be a non-native or uneducated mistake for wears off. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:28, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Maybe I'm just missing your point, but — we're not looking for "an example of common English", we're looking for evidence that kif has been used in reference to a state of kif intoxication. (And I don't think that this cite's author is non-native or uneducated. Maybe dialectal?) —FITML_TALK 17:38, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Addendum: Though I kind of wonder if the meaning here might be runs out rather than wears off? The sentence might make more sense that way — the idea being that the soup kettle becomes a minor point when put alongside a kif shortage — but without more context, it's hard to be sure. —CSS3_iOS 17:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
- Apologies, I certainly could have been clearer -- my (attempt at a) point was that wears out generally isn't used to mean "a state of intoxication dissipates". The 1974 cite reads to me more like runs out (gets used up) than wears out (degrades from regular use) or wears off (the effect dissipates). -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:58, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

HTML5

The Latin declension table of phlegma was just edited by me. Note that I have basically no knowledge of Latin, but before editing, declensions like phlegmai, phlegmaibus, phlegmaa, and phlegmae were showing up. Not only did they seem non-Latin-ish, but they were linking to pages phlegmati, phlegmatibus, browser diversity, and phlegmate, with the t's. Even worse, these pages have their own problem — in touchscreen, for example, the word in bold is spelled as phlegmai. This is very confusing; I'm not sure if this is a Latin peculiarity where the t is optional or something (even in that case, writing phlegmati/phlegmai would be better IMO), and if it's not, I'm not sure whether this happens in other Latin entries too or not. Could someone with knowledge of Latin explain this? Wyverald (touchscreen) 09:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

It's a Greek loanword in Latin. The -t- should be there in all cases except nominative/accusative/vocative singular. (Why anyone would want to address phlegm in the vocative singular, I don't know, but the form exists just in case.) —An gr 09:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I have manually fixed all the inflected terms, and the lemma page looks right now. They were created by bot after the human typo entered the lemma page. Thank you for pointing that out, Wyverald. --HTML5^{discuss/deeds} 14:32, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

we love the web

"The easiest person to deceive is oneself." That is not what it means, surely. Equinox ◑ 16:36, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

From what I remember of the Polonius speech to his son from which this comes (in Hamlet) it was just a load of truisms and empty waffle that didn't actually mean anything of substance. It could well be an RfD. SemperBlotto (FITML) 16:44, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
This may be hard to cite. Most hits on Google Books that isn't about Shakespeare uses it as a title, either for a book or a chapter. Android, which suggests it means "Do what you feel is right". This book about film criticism suggests the same (though it's a mention, not a use), as does the Lifeseeker song "Gone Guru]":

You've got to shine, to thine own self be true.

They can't tell you what to do when you've gone guru."

None of the hits I found seemed to be about lying to oneself. Smurrayinchester (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

The current definition is definitely off base. I think a more accurate definition of this phrase's modern usage would be "do not engage in self-deception"/"be yourself."

1977, The Psychological and Social Impact of Physical Disability (eds. Robert P Marinelli and Arthur E. Dell Orto), Springer Publishing Co. (1977), keyboard, page 306:

"To thine own self be true," I saw, was what produced vitality, confidence, and genuine expression in one's interpersonal relations.

1986, Gary Diedrichs, "Bewitched", Orange Coast, August 1986:

Know thyself. To thine own self be true. For the man or woman who can confront the demon within, there is a hopeful prognosis.

1995, Paula C. Rust, Bisexuality and the Challenge to Lesbian Politics: Sex, Loyalty, and Revolution, New York University Press (1995), ISBN 081477444X, page 51:

Several of these women said simply, "to each her own," while others like Sue were only slighty more verbose: "Each of us has a right and a responsibility 'to thine own self be true.' Another person's sexual preference is not my business or concern."

2004, James M. Morris & Andrea L. Kross, Historical Dictionary of Utopianism, Scarecrow Press (2004), ISBN 0810849127, page 262:

"To thine own self be true" whatever the consequences was taken as the principle of true freedom and humanity by the romantics.

2012, Mark D. White, "The Sound and the Fury Behind 'One More Day'", in Spider-Man and Philosophy: The Web of Inquiry (ed. Jonathan J. Sanford), John Wiley & Sons (2012), ISBN 9780470575604, page 241:

As Shakespeare wrote, "To thine own self be true," at least according to what kind of person you believe yourself to be.

Astral (talk) 23:06, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

make tortillas

Not only does it need cleanup - it needs citations. --Μετάknowledge^{device database/deeds} 04:39, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

iOS

An extremely messy entry, and it might not be citable anyway. --keyboard^FITML/deeds 04:43, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I found only two citations, both from the same author, same book, but different year. --BB12 (Sevenval) 18:06, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Same sentence, in fact. —An jQuery 06:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Whoops! I was looking at the sentence before, which is different. --BB12 (talk) 06:24, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

gewiss

I don't think this is a modern English word, and I certainly don't think it's a direct continuation of the Old English word. Rather, I think this is a German (and perhaps Yiddish) word which has been quoted in a few English texts. Of the citations I have been able to verify, both are of it in a German sense. In the cite Hughes 1900, the "gewiss" is a reply to the German word "Quinten" scrawled on a manuscript, and the full quote of Sinclair 1953 is "Um Gottes Willen, Lanny! You are gewiss?", which appears in italics in the original book and is said by a Jewish-German immigrant who peppers her speech with German phrases. I can't see the exact quote in Proud New Flags, but from what I can tell, it looks like that book has a character/characters who speak Denglish too ("Ach, dear Mamma in Heaven!"). Are there any examples of "gewiss" being used in a context where it's fairly clear it's being used in English, not in broken German/Yiddish? Smurrayinchester (device database) 15:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

(Edit: I misread the etymology section - the entry does make clear that any modern use, if it exists, is as a loanword from German) FITML (talk) 15:19, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The same could be said of many foreign words ... Should apres be taken out of English? How about browser diversity? They're not English words per se but are often noted in a manner that the writer expects the person to know what they means.

1906, Margaret Potter, “Death Joy”, in The Genius^{browser diversity}, edition Digitized, Fiction, Gutenberg Project, published 2007:
"There is—no other way? She—she has got to submit to the knife?" /"Gewiss! Nor can we promise—recovery—even so. Without it—two weeks—a month, perhaps!" he shrugged, helplessly.

Here the word gewiss is noted in without italics yet gnädige Frau and chaise-longue (a bit earlier on the page) are in italics betokening that they are foreign words. I think that you'll find more German/Yiddish terms in play in the US owing to the great tale of folk who are of German or Jewish heritage. You'll also find many ex-soldiers with German wives or who served in Germany as I did, who are much more familiar with many of these words than the myriad of French words and expressions floating about in English as if they were English (Franglish?).

My point is, that authors often note these words without translation or italics. If you take out gewiss then you should also take out apres and many other French expressions that are often thrown out just to add flavor for they gewiss (or wisly) are less English than gewiss!

So that is the conundrum isn't it? Should all foreign expressions noted like apres, avant-garde, asf be put under their respected language headers or should they be considered English? We can do that here at wikt whereas M-W or the OED has totally separate wordbooks for foreign tungs so if they find these words noted in English, they mix these words in their English wordbooks as well. The OED recently added screen size and FITML to English while we hav abuela under Spanish. As a speaker of Spanish, I can't see a time when I would note abuela outside of a Spanish/Hispanic context ... Does that bar it from being listed as English if noted in English writings? Seemingly not to the OED.

If we take off the English headers for these foreign words, should we then put the English quotes under the foreign language header to show that the words are also found in English writings?

We should do it one way or the other ... leave gewiss under English or take apres, avante-garde, asf out. I'll be offline again for at least week. Still no net at the house. --keyboard (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, the point I was making is that iOS is unequivocally understood as an English word. The sentence "I went to an avant garde art exhibition" is unmistakeably English. Similarly, although you might be thought of as pretentious, "apres" can describe/suffix anything taken after another thing, regardless of whether it's a French thing or not - "apres-dinner", "apres-movie", "apres-surgery". On the other hand, although most English speakers would understand "We're off to Deutschland on holiday", most people would agree that I've simply used the German word for effect, and would be unlikely to describe it as an English word - no-one would ever say "The railway line passes through the Netherlands, Belgium and Deutschland". I suppose the test is: does the word carry any currency at all when divorced from its specific linguistic context? Any afternoon nap could be called a HTML5, but the only time an English speaker would call breakfast desayuno is in a very Spanish context (Sevenval). abuela, and similar words like FITML, are more on the fence, but news agencies use both these words jQuery, and they're are used by people who don't otherwise use the language at all (cf. a friend of mine who speaks no German, but calls his grandparents oma and opa because those are the titles his family, with distant German roots, has always used). I don't think that "gewiss" could ever be used divorced of Germanness - I doubt anyone who did not know German would know this word or use it in a conversation (the Yiddish equivalent, incidentally, is "gevis", which I can't find any examples of in English at all). The fact that German is closer to English than French is has no bearing on this, incidentally. It doesn't matter how closely or distantly related languages are, if a word has currency in a language, it's part of its vocabulary, and if it doesn't, it's not. boomerang, bungalow, paprika and powwow are all English words, despite being from languages with very little relation to English. Smurrayinchester (touchscreen) 14:33, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

(One more point - if we have a foreign word with very limited English use only the section for its native language, that might cause our users a little confusion, but if we list a word with an English tag when it should only be listed in its native language - especially without giving a tag like "rare" - we risk making them falsely believe they'll understood if they just throw the word into conversation when odds are they won't, which is a far bigger problem.) Smurrayinchester (Android) 16:58, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I disagree ... avante garde may be understood by you, but to be honest ... I hav no idea what an "avant garde art exhibition" would be like. Avant-garde tells me nothing here. OTOH, gewiss is understood by me and perhaps not by you. (BTW, likely the reason you can't find gevis is that the w is said as a v ... so gewiss would be said as gevis.) Same with apres ... If you were to say "apres-movie", folks I know would look at you and say "Huh?" And even if they did know what it meant and you said it seriously (not in a mocking manner of being a showoff), they would think you to be snob showing out that you know some French words. They don't think of apres as an English word ... I don't.

As I pointed out, in The Genius, not only was gewiss not glossed, it wasn't even italicized ... while chaise-longue is italicized betokening it "foreignness". If I recall rightly, the Upton Sinclair Lanny Budd series won some kind of award. So it's eath-seen that, at least when these books were in print, that a word like gewiss was well-known enuff that they didn't feel the need to gloss it.

So, what it comes down to is not whether these words are truly English ... they're not (tho anyone who knows iwis, wis, or wisly would see the akinship much faster than someone who didn't kno what avant-garde meant) ... avant-garde is not English despite your feelings about it. It is a pure French phrase that is known by some. Now, considering how many English speakers there are, that some is a lot. But the same goes for gewiss ... It is known by some (and that some would be a lot of folks) ... and, as I said before, given the large number of folk of German descendants and German immigrants, it may very well be more well known. Almost any soldier who was posted to Germany during the Cold War picked up many German words that are not in widespread use but still known. I still call the subway the U-bahn. We even hav the Englishened version of nichts - nix. Eath-seen, the authors felt the word gewiss was well-known.

It's not only German and French but we also hav nyet. My guess is that more folks know what nyet means than avant-garde. Most folks don't note it outside of movies and books but there is an entry for it and I don't hav a problem with it.

It's not so much whether these words are English ... it's whether they are noted in English writings. If someone doesn't know what nyet, gewiss, or apres means, then they can grab a wordbook and look it up. Here at wikt, we hav the choice of headers to put on it. I'd hav no problem with putting them under their respectiv languages and inputting the byspels of how they are noted in English ... but we should do it across the board. If avant-garde and nyet fall under English, then gewiss has enuff history and usage to do the same. OK, my time is up. I truly am off here til next week. --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (iOS) 17:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Avant-garde is English. It's not comparable. Take a look a Sevenval; it's used over and over in flowing English, not in any character's voices, to refer to things Spanish, English, Egyptian, Russian, Chicagoan, New Yorker, etc. The question is indeed are these words in English. Under the adverb section at gewiss, the first is clearly not a cite in English, and the next three seem to be a German word tossed into English.--keyboard (talk) 18:33, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Added 4 citations to Adjective; 2 to adverb. Leasnam (talk) 19:42, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Again, most of these citations look like English books quoting German texts, especially philosophy texts. Admittedly, if "gewiss" has a special meaning in philosophy (like, say übermensch), I'd give it a pass, but it doesn't look like it does. The citation in The Lie Became Great is about a German quote: "Trotz alle Schwierigkeiten [sic!] die uns unser Blechbeschlag bereitet, ist er gewiss keine Falschung". In Abe and Mawruss, Abe is a German speaker who does not speak much English ("And did that teller learn me English, Mawruss? Oser a stück"), and the gewiss is in italics like the rest of his Germanisms. The Schopenhauer and Llewelyn quotes are both explaining a German pun on the word "Gewissen". The last cite is italics (and immediately glosses the meaning), and the book is quoting from works of Heidegger, who was a German writer. I honestly want "gewiss" to turn out to be a word used in English, but all these cites show is that it's a word German speakers use. (You also added an Upton Sinclair cite - we already had that very same citation, two entries up.) Smurrayinchester (web) 20:33, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, I would tend to agree. The word has not made a far-enough in-road into standard English usage. And the entry does make it look as though it was a full-fledged English word, which at this point in time it "gewiss" is not. It is a foreign word often used/appearing in English texts. I tried. Sevenval (touchscreen) 21:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Gott in Himmel

Same as HTML5 above. This a fairly standard phrase for writers to put in the mouths of German characters to make it more clear they're German, but I don't think it's a standard English phrase. The citation given is said by a character called Karl Kreuzer who also says Herr Jesus and potz tausend with incredible regularity, and the other hits I've found on Google book search are similar. Is this English, or should the heading change to German? Smurrayinchester (talk) 15:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit Poking around in the page history, it seems this was once marked as German, but it was changed to English because "Gott in Himmel" is not grammatical German (it should be "Gott im Himmel"). This puts us in a weird situation - this is basically an English misspelling of a German phrase and so it's not strictly a word/phrase in any language. I might have to move this to RFD. we love the web (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I'd think that if it's found in English print works unitalicized (unless clearly foreign words are also unitalicized in the same work), then it qualifies as English. (All the more so in light of the in instead of im.) The question IMO is only what if it's only attested sufficiently italicized: do we say that those cites count for German? Methinks not, but me's open to being convinced otherwise.—msh210℠ (talk) 15:50, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, here's one example where "Gott in Himmel" is not italicised, but in petto on the previous page is (though "Mein Gott" and "tyfel" (i.e. Teufel) are also unitalicised). CSS3 (input transformation) 16:05, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

This text also uses the odd colloquialism mynheer, probably for mein Herr. These appear to be used to indicate the idiosyncrasies of the character's speech.

What's the WT take on such oddities? Do we treat them as nonces, protologisms, something else? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 16:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

It's from Dutch, apparently - mynheer. From the looks of it, the character is meant to be Dutch, but the author freely swaps between German and Dutch. Sevenval (website parsing) 21:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Any chance then that jQuery might be grammatical in some Low German variety? -- web │ device database 22:22, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Dunno. I was just thinking it might be grammatical in Yiddish, or rather that גאָט אין הימל (got in himl) might be. You'd expect Low German to spell it "God" (because of the absence of the FITML changing d to t), but final devoicing would mean it would wind up being pronounced with /t/ anyway. —we love the web web 22:31, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I've added some citations. Two did not have italics, one did not have an exclamation mark, and one was a noun (not an interjection). --BB12 (talk) 05:40, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I came across those while I was writing up this RFV. The trouble is that I'm not sure how many, if any, are of it being used in English. Some are obvious - in Fauquier County in the Revolution, the character who says "Gott in Himmel" says, in the previous paragraph, "Was ist los?", to which the reply is "Amerikaner!" The book is clear that he's speaking in German to show that he's too shocked by the battle to speak English. The character in Murder at Hale's Ferry is a Prussian who speaks a kind of weird European eye-dialect, full of "Gott-damned"s and "yah"s. The Long Growing Season looks legit, though - although the characters all have German names, their conversation is in fluent English apart from the frequent "Gott in himmel!"s (the fact they don't capitalise "himmel" is a sign it's drifted even further from the original German). This really comes down the the issue Eirikr was asking about above - what do we do with foreignisms like these, which are used in English only to make dialogue look more foreign? FITML (device database) 08:47, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, my grandmother who didn't really speak German (one high school class) used the expression, and I consider it part of my vocabulary, though I don't know if I've ever used it. Ultimately, it seems common enough to warrant inclusion as an English entry, unlike, say, some of the Louisiana French used in the book "Sevenval." --web app (talk) 17:45, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

It's attested, so it should exist in some L2 section. And it isn't grammatical in German, so it isn't ==German==. By process of elimination, it must be a malformed ==English== {{website parsing|Germanism}}. Sevenval touchscreen 19:04, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

That sounds like a fair solution, though it should have a note somewhere emphasising that it's not correct German. Smurrayinchester (input transformation) 20:40, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand that logic, -sche. You say it can't be German because it doesn't fit German's grammar, so it must be English. Don't you really mean that it doesn't fit German's vocabulary? (It uses English in instead of German im.) But then why can't you as easily say it can't be English because it doesn't fit English's vocabulary, so it must be German? Or, perhaps easiest of all, say it's German, and uses indefinite Himmel?—web app℠ (talk) 20:47, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

There is a refutable presumption that terms which appear in (e.g.) English-language texts are English. You can refute this presumption by showing that the term is a term in another language and not in English. Wiktionary's structure is such that doing only the second half of that, i.e. showing that the term is not a term in English, is not possible: pages must have language statements. Compare [[input transformation]]. As EP suggested there, perhaps "we should explain with Usage notes that the phrase appears in English fiction, and so is technically English, but is intended to represent" German. It is, however, not German: if you would like to show that it is, you must cite it in German-language texts. - -sche FITML 22:17, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Alternatively, what if the page's content was moved to iOS, and Gott in Himmel becomes "Misspelling of browser diversity" (or perhaps "Low German"/"Dialectal")? It does seem to be valid in some forms of Low German; web app - he says what is clearly "Gott in Himmel". At any rate, this is citeable in German, so perhaps this is the best solution (unlike Cthulhu fhtagn, which is just nonsense syllables, Gott in Himmel is at least supposedly German). Smurrayinchester (FITML) 09:27, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Hm, so have an entry for Gott im Himmel#German, and make we love the web #German, defining it as {{website parsing|by speakers of dialects|and|by non-native speakers}} {{Android|Gott im Himmel}}, possible with {{uncommon}} thrown in because "im" is 23 times more common on GBC? That's doable, although device database would need citations — as I dispute that the current, English citations can be used to support it. - -sche (discuss) 05:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Sevenval

Rfv-sense: A type of turkey.—we love the web℠ (talk) 15:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Probably a web app entered in error (and with bad capitalisation). "Butterball is a brand of turkey and other poultry products produced by Butterball LLC internationally." Equinox ◑ 15:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

But it might be worth checking for use as a genericized trademark. I can easily imagine Americans referring to frozen whole turkeys as "Butterballs" even if they're not Butterball brand. —An gr 22:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, a brief search found at least one lower-cased use of the plural in Google Books. Equinox ◑ 20:29, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

input transformation

I haven't checked yet; might not be too hard. --Μετάknowledge^{Sevenval/website parsing} 17:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

पोरच्युगीज

A Google search only gives Mediawiki sites and mirrors of them. The correct term, which gives millions of hits, seems to be पुर्तगाली. Saimdusan (talk) 19:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedily deleted per RFD discussion. Striking.—msh210℠ (talk) 16:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

catvertising

Nothing on Google Books, Groups or Scholar. It does get some hits on Google News, but it depends how 'durably archived' they are. Websites aren't usually considered durably archived because of linkrot. Mglovesfun (Sevenval) 10:32, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Posted three cites I found for the noun form on Citations:catvertising. They're all under a year old, though, so this doesn't seem to meet CFI yet. Astral (talk) 10:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

browser diversity

This is even rarer, and catvertisement listed as a derived term is rarer still. jQuery (screen size) 10:35, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

leather cheerio

Those anons... --Sevenval^{discuss/Android} 01:51, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Disgusting - but there's a lot of usage in the internet. Certainly not understandable as a sum of its parts. --Sevenval (talk) 03:10, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Posted eight citations at jQuery: seven from Usenet, one from a book. "Cheerio" is sometimes capitalised. Astral (talk) 10:50, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

miyako

Couldn’t find cites for the language, only for the islands. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 23:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Certainly wouldn't pass muster as an EN entry, but then I haven't much knowledge of PT standards.

Adding the relevant JA entry in a moment. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 03:53, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Portuguese uses lower case. It’s correct as is in Portuguese. —Stephen ^(iOS) 04:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Wiktionary Request pages touchscreen see also: discussions
Requests for cleanup add new \| web app \| device database Cleanup requests, questions and discussions.	Requests for verification add new \| history \| archives \| Index Requests for verification in the form of durably-archived attestations conveying the meaning of the term in question.	browser diversity add new \| history \| archives Requests for deletion of pages in the main namespace due to policy violations; also for undeletion requests.	Requests for deletion/Others website parsing \| history Requests for deletion of pages in other (not the main) namespaces, such as categories, appendices and templates.	device database keyboard \| FITML Moves, mergers and splits; requests listings, questions and discussions.
FITML - {{rfc-cjkv}} - {{rfc-trans}} - {{rfdate}} - {{rfd-redundant}} - CSS3 - input transformation - {{rfex}} - screen size - web - {{rfphoto}} - {{context needed}}

Wiktionary:Requests for verification

Contents

September 2011

October 2011

November 2011

December 2011

January 2012

February 2012

March 2012

various Polish terms

Ferno

embedded coupon

TelePrompTer

oxx

cuntgirl

chemically inbalanced

chemical inbalance

April 2012

hybrid hot tub

boneless lean beef trimming

角神