Talk:peter out

Definition

My issue with the definition is that it is too difficult to parse with all of the nested brackets and bits of information. I think that the previous definition [1] was already good and that the mining-related history should be mentioned in the etymology. Merriam-Webster also has a good definition [2] Ioaxxere (talk) 18:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

@Ioaxxere: The thing is, peter out is identical in sense to peter, and is derived from the latter which is why I thought the former should be indicated as a synonym of the latter. I don't think it's difficult to parse, and if the mining sense is in fact the original sense (as evidenced by the first quotation) then it should be indicated as a sense and not merely put in the etymology. — Sgconlaw (talk) 19:09, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

If the mining sense is separate, then it should be in a separate sense and marked as obsolete (unless it's still mining slang). If it isn't separate, then it doesn't add anything to the definition. Ioaxxere (talk) 19:21, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

@Ioaxxere: we can do that at peter, but I don't know if we do that if {{synonym of}} is used. (Recall that you previously said we don't indicate separate senses in alternative form entries, such as staunch.) — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:42, 5 March 2023 (UTC)