Open main menu

Wiktionary β

User talk:Equinox

Ditto re revolving door syndromeEdit

Hello Equinox -- I just noticed that you recently changed the POS for revolving door syndrome to "Proper noun" (and I see, above, that you've already got another challenge regarding this sort of change). I've always had the highest regard for your judgment and can probably imagine why you're inclined to think it's a proper noun, but, alas, I'm not so inclined. A major criterion I've long had in mind is that a proper noun should have a unique referent. But revolving door syndrome names a whole class of qualifying situations. Heck, Eq, the term even has 3 distinct senses, all supported by citations. Nothing unique about this big bundle quivering with potential referents. Old EncycloPetey has a subpage on the issue of what qualifies as a proper noun here: User:EncycloPetey/English_proper_nouns. What do you think? Any chance you've wandered a bit off the reservation with your POS-ing? -- · (talk) 06:00, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

We've had this conversation before. I was unable to convince Eq. of the error of his ways and just gave up. Perhaps you will have more success. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:45, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
How would you prefer to classify "X syndrome" and "Y disease" entries? Where there isn't an attestable plural, they are often entered as "uncountable" ({{en-noun|-}}), but that doesn't seem right because the count-mass distinction is that between (say) "three loaves, one bottle" and "some bread, a little milk". It's a syndrome, a disease, so in theory countable (syndromes, diseases) — but it's one particular thing, like "the Eiffel Tower" (towers). Haven't read Petey's page yet but I will take a proper look at it another day. Equinox 21:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

proper nounEdit

If Alice chess is a proper noun, then is chess a proper noun too? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:22, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Haha, that's a very good point! But then why is "Eiffel Tower" a proper noun, when "tower" is a common one? Equinox 22:26, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Let's see if I can answer it: The Eiffel Tower is a specific tower in a specific location; I believe the name was given to differentiate it from other towers. A "tower" is any tower.
If I'm not mistaken, "traditional" games and sports are common nouns, including chess, go and basketball, while games which are brand names like Monopoly and Cluedo and any video games are proper nouns. Regardless of whether this distinction actually makes any sense, I believe this is accurate as the tradition in English.
We could make the case that all games and sports should be treated as proper nouns, because by the logic above (again, if I'm not mistaken) then if chess did not exist yet and someone invented it today, it would be a proper noun. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:08, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Wanna check this quotation?Edit

Quotation from John Aubrey, which contains some obsolete spellings. [1]. DonnanZ (talk) 16:10, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


What do you think of this? I'm not too happy with the page title, btw. --Barytonesis (talk) 09:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Nice list but should probably try to split the topics of wasting time and remaining idly in a particular place. Equinox 09:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


I was talking to one, and noticed that a lot of the words used by American hoboes (by which I mean the traditional kind who engaged in freight hopping - should that have an entry?) are missing here. Just a good source of vocabulary if you're interested. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:49, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

I agree, but do you know any good written sources? Equinox 00:05, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
google books:gondola hobo turns up quite a few books. (I chose gondola more or less at random as one of the words hoboes use, though the appropriate context label is rail transportation in this case.) —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:18, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

fight it outEdit

Should we move it to fight out? --Barytonesis (talk) 20:43, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

I think this is a fixed phrase. I'm not sure that you can "fight out" something specifically named. Equinox 20:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Indeed. But I also see this on Google books: fight out the decision, fight the thing out, fight this thing out, fight out this thing. I'm aware that the last three sentences are more or less equivalent with "fight it out" though. --Barytonesis (talk) 21:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


We seem to be entering an edit war over Skite. The word is used in New Zealand only in the sense of boasting/boaster. I'm not a youngster having fun over this. I'm nearly 70 yrs old, have lived in NZ my entire life, and have NEVER heard the word being used in any other sense. This matter came to my attention because an editor is citing the Skite article in an attempt to add the other meanings to "skite" in the New Zealand English article. It's possible that skite is used in Australia in the other senses ascribed to it, but I don't know about that. What I do know is that Australians tend to regard New Zealand as one of their possessions and there seems to be an ongoing battle by Australians at the NZ English article to remove differences and make NZE the same as Australian English.

There is no reference citing the alleged NZ usages of Skite, only what appear to be British references probably added by a Briton who may have assumed that all Commonwealth people talk the same. They don't. The "Skite" article is obscure, and it looks like there has never been any oversight by New Zealanders, otherwise I'm sure they would have disputed the alleged meanings. Akld guy (talk) 00:35, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


You can have a single ground (speck) of coffee (a single piece of coffee-ground [[2]]) Leasnam (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

I see. It needs a singular sense at ground then. Equinox 16:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


This term should be added, because it never refers to a time when a player uses just any tool, but more-so refers to using tools which help to make a demonstration of theoretically perfect gameplay using an emulator. A video that plays the game on a console and uses cheat codes and turbo buttons on controllers could also be considered "tool-assisted" in technicality, but the gaming community would not call this a tool-assisted demo because it does not specifically use an emulator, and especially because it does not use slowdowns, savestates, etc., and because cheat codes are against the rules unless the category specifically states that such codes shall be used. PseudoSkull (talk) 17:33, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

And, in the SOP sense of tool-assisted, every single gameplay is technically "tool-assisted", because the controller is a tool used to play the game, and the game and console themselves are tools used to entertain humans. PseudoSkull (talk) 17:35, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

it's an ill wind that blows nobody any goodEdit

The two renderings differ significantly in emphasis. The first invites the hearer to think that the event or occurrence in question is purely negative, doing no good to anyone. In essence "this is an ill wind and it does nobody any good." The second invites the hearer to think that the event is not purely negative. In essence "this would be an ill wind indeed if it did nobody any good, but it (probably) does some good to somebody somewhere (and we may in fact be able to see where, without too much trouble)." They are of course closely related in meaning, but not synonymous. The proverb is used in both senses. I believe I have more often heard it with the latter sense.

Hmm. Any chance of finding two real-world examples (Google Books is a good place to look) that clearly distinguish the two senses? Equinox 21:33, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


I renamed (archaic) to (mythology).

Nobody ever uses the word worm for a "dragon" today in everyday/common speech, only in Medieval or Shakespearean England.

Notice that I use the term "dragon" because people called any reptiles that were monstrous/gigantic enough such as snakes and lizards dragons.—This unsigned comment was added by Gyrkin (talkcontribs).

But that's what "archaic" is for: archaic terms, by definition, aren't used in everyday language, but they're recognized. For instance, nobody says "forsooth" in conversation these days, but if I say "forsooth", people will know that I'm trying to sound like someone from an earlier time- so forsooth is archaic. That's not the same as "mythological". Both "dragon" and "worm" are mythological, since dragons are part of mythology. The other possibility would be "obsolete", but that's for terms like "snod" that are so long out of use that nobody knows what they mean. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:22, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

machinator etymologyEdit

You added [3], but the OED says it comes from the Latin machinator. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:33, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Fried rice syndromeEdit

w:Fried rice syndrome wasn't even a redirect until a moment ago when I created it. The redirect was from the capitalized w:Fried Rice Syndrome, which our {{wikipedia}} template didn't link to. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:02, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I usually check these in a case-insensitive way. Curses. Equinox 21:37, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
When I edit or create a link, I almost always preview my edit and right-click, control-click or command-click on the link to open the link in a new tab. That allows me to make sure I'm linking to what I think I'm linking to before I finalize my edit. This is especially useful with taxonomic names, where misspellings and obsolete names are very common. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:24, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Have you tried middle-click? --WikiTiki89 22:27, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm naughtily doing quite a lot of editing outside the browser in a custom tool, because it lets me do the etymologies at about five times the speed. (My computer is getting old, and all the JS on Wiktionary takes a while to load.) It does mean I sometimes slip up for want of a preview. Equinox 22:28, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you!Edit

Just wanted to thank you for tidying up my newly created page on khey. Thanks man!

New Madrid CountyEdit

One of some mass deletions you did a few days ago, but I'm re-creating it as it's on my to-do list. DonnanZ (talk) 18:36, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I deleted it because the content was "I have pooped there"! Equinox 22:46, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
Fair enough. DonnanZ (talk) 09:22, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Strategy-related pages to improveEdit

As you wrote, you dislike some pages. It's perfectly understandable and I'm going to improve at least FAQ, maybe other pages as well. Could you please link to the pages that in your opinion should be improved in the first place? Thanks! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 16:29, 25 June 2017 (UTC)


I wish I was better with words not to mention Wiktionary ins and outs. I apologize for the mess I may have made in my ignorance and best intentions. Suicided could be a verb and a noun, if I'm not mistaken. For example, The Corbett Report has done a whole series called "Requiem For The Suicided", most recently this episode (part two next week): I look forward to seeing what you think. Please let me know here or wherever. Thanks, ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 03:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Related termsEdit

OK, thanks for the tip; though I have to say the heading was already there when I arrived. Moonraker12 (talk) 22:41, 7 July 2017 (UTC)


I've added some quotations there. The text that now seems to be attributed to Pope was previously thought to be written by Swift. Is that the cite you were thinking of when you added the template? Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 10:52, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Appendix:The MatrixEdit

Where is the archived discussion about this deletion? PseudoSkull (talk) 17:42, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Dunno, check RFDO page history for that date period. I believe we had very many such appendices, and one deletion debate killed them all; so it may be a different talk page that has the archive. Equinox 17:44, 8 July 2017 (UTC)


I moved the Anagrams section to lethean, as stated in my edit summary. They don't really belong on Lethean, but I'm not going to fight this battle. Pariah24 02:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't really get it: anagramming is not case-sensitive. "My dog" is an anagram of "my God!". They belong at both. Equinox 00:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)


Do you think this is admissible? I dont see anything on Google books, unfortunately. Barytonesis (talk) 23:14, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

What's it supposed to mean? Noun, verb? I can see one possible Usenet hit! Equinox 19:45, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank youEdit


Thank you for starting the page on whataboutism.

I've added some quotations with sources.

Thanks again,

Sagecandor (talk) 05:29, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

TDIH a noun?Edit

The only definition of "this" that is a noun is "(philosophy) Something being indicated that is here; one of these." I don't think that this in "this day in history" refers to that meaning. Could you possibly give quotations to prove that "TDIH" is a noun rather than just a phrase? PseudoSkull (talk) 00:22, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

The entire phrase "this day in history" is a noun phrase. The head of that NP is the noun "day". Please make totally sure you're familiar with the idea of heads in grammar before you dig a big hole. love, Equinox 00:23, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Ohhhhhh. Silly me. That makes sense. Thanks, Equinox. PseudoSkull (talk) 00:24, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
It seems particularly silly to me that we allow "phrase" as a PoS header when we don't otherwise distinguish between (say) a noun and NP, or verb and VP; and then we have the Category:English sentences, which seems to suggest some important distinction between a sentence and a phrase that IMO isn't borne out in our content. Thinking about it, probably the silliest PoS header is "proverb", which says absolutely zip about grammar, but is more of a contextual cue about how/when a sentence can be used. Boo hiss. Equinox 01:04, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I agree. Let's trash the proverb "POS" altogether. Can you, Equinox, start a vote to get rid of the proverb POS and replace it with something else? I'll support this motion. I had made an information desk or tea room or beer parlour discussion about it sometime but I can't remember when. PseudoSkull (talk) 02:10, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Bit hasty. The fact that an entry is a proverb is actually useful to users (unlike most of the category wank that we waste time on) so we'd need think about how to replace it. At the moment I have other fish to fry. Equinox 02:17, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I think "proverb" should be used in Template:lb, possibly showing as "proverbial" as well. It should not be used as the name of a POS. I would be fine with them being called "phrases" or "noun/verb/interjection phrases" or whatever else. PseudoSkull (talk) 02:19, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Proverb-as-gloss sounds reasonable. So, have a look here: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2017/July#.22Proverb.22_ain.27t_a_part_of_speech. Equinox 09:00, 23 July 2017 (UTC)


Yes, I am. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:46, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

🐎 👍 Equinox 10:52, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Equinox".