646:--hardly a dicdef. On the other hand, -stan and especially (at least the current contents) -ware have a bit of a "what doesn't belong in this set" flavor to them. If you check the histories, -ism, -ology, and -phobia have had contributions from dozens of Wikipedians, and the rest average almost eight different contributors. Also, the 17 articles in this series were started by at least 8 or 9 different Wikipedians. Finally, at least two have inter-wiki links from other language Wikipedias. Wholesale transfer to Wiktionary doesn't seem appropriate to me. Some of the articles are certainly less developed than others, but that can be said about most any category of articles on Knowledge (XXG).
98:
848:
425:
Perhaps we should think more
Wikimedia-wide: if an entry has value but is in the wrong project, move it, do not just delete it. (And do not break links.) But also within Knowledge (XXG), contents of a dictionary-like entry can often fit in a related article. The original title becomes a redirect (as
666:
If you move them to
Wiktionary and redirect them back, all the links would be the same color. Most encyclopedias don't have "List of gay waitresses who shot mailmen" either, but I think these articles, as links, fit in with the precedents of Knowledge (XXG). (personally I think just about all lists
654:
Even so, if the entry is still looking like a definition, it can moved to the
Wiktionary then redirected back to the Knowledge (XXG). As it stands, a lot of the features in the Wiktionary don't exist like the features in Knowledge (XXG) -- just because the Wiktionary is new. Perhaps using a basic
272:
these adjectives as prefixes to words to make phrases - which has not just a linguistic but a political element. Read the entries. There are semantics associated with adding such prefixes that simply aren't in
Wiktionary's mandate - and the number of cross-links would be extreme. A stripped-down
901:
I think we might be better served by just scrapping this page altogether. Its seldom used. And its not very useful, as dicdefs listed here are either tagged concurrently, and then transwikied regardless of comments, or not tagged, and then never trasnwikied even if they are dicdefs. This page just
417:
Many of these have been listed since at least July. As I said, Wiktionary clearly does not want them and I would expect the
Wiktionarians to be somewhat annoyed if someone who knew nothing about the way they set out their pages came and dumped the above rubbish into their dictionary, so suggesting
323:
I read the global article ... could the applicable parts be incorporated into the globalization article? I still need to read the globalization article. Also ... couldn't this article be rewritten for a computer science perspective (as global related to variables)? I'm not sure if there is other
402:
This is ridiculous. With a few exceptions, those are all valid encyclopaedia topics. If they currently contain only a definition, that's no reason to delete them. It just means they're stubs waiting to be expanded. It's perfectly normal that an encyclopaedia article begins with a definition.
918:
section and let the category do the work, for the very reasons that you state. I've been working on clearing it for some time, now, with that very goal in mind. The old listings that remain need detailed attention, though. Perhaps we should rename the section to
930:
I've been bold and implemented the change. You may want to revise the wording if you can put it better. It seems to me like most of the old ones have been transwikied. Do you mean we need to resolve what happens to them after transwikiing (as in merging, etc.)?
608:
They do provide useful lists of words that use the suffixes though, and those are pretty much
Knowledge (XXG) material. The lists at least should be left. (perhaps each moved to some better name). I agreee that the definitions parts are Wiktionary material.
135:
I suppose because you have two separate books as well, a dictionary (one volume, definitions only) and an encyclopedia (many volumes, contains articles spanning several pages). It is however a little hard to know what to put where from time to time...
147:
I'm not sure that the same reasoning that indicates why it makes sense to make a split into encyclopedia and dictionary in the book world can also be applied to a project like
Knowledge (XXG). What's the actual *use* of keeping the sites separate? --
885:
It says if you want to expand it you have to make an "encyclopedia article". That certainly discouraged me from touching them. Articles in Vfd are expanded precisely because they are under threat, but only a commited wikipedia would do that.
655:
definition in
Wiktionary would be useful then putting a "See also" to point to the Knowledge (XXG) for any words on that list. Normally, suffixes are in a dictionary, as opposed to a encyclopedia. It just seems so... out of place to me. --
956:
109:
641:
and -ism). If we're going to have a list anyway, I think some prose at the top to set context is reasonable. As for the articles they link to, I think they would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis--take a look at
808:
might have have been a dicdef when it was listed (although any knowledgeable person should have been aware that it could easily be a lengthy article - what's there now is still incomplete), but it grew beyond that later.
717:
While verbs, adverbs and adjectives can be hard to write about, I'd say that nearly every tangible noun could (in theory) have an article about it. In practice, this won't always happen, as very mundane things (e.g.
692:
If we're going to transwiki, it should be an all-or-nothing deal. Anyway, I'm inclined to agree with
Niteowlneils that the lists are at least somewhat encyclopedic, so I'm suggesting we keep the suffix series.
39:
444:
Keep them (all of them). If specific articles are listed for deletion with a reason, that's fine, but just posting a huge list only means that no real discussion can be had about the individual articles. --
397:
On
October 11, Angela listed all the articles that on the Things to be moved to Wiktionary page on VfD. The following comments were made before she got sick of the complaints and removed them from VfD.
418:
someone from Knowledge (XXG) does this is ridiculous. Knowledge (XXG) is not a dictionary. We can not just keep them on the off-chance some other project might want them at some point in the future.
829:". It seems to me to say "This is going to be deleted from wikipedia, don't improve it unless you can make a whole (new) article". I believe this interpretation is shared by many people, especially
324:
implication for global than for CS. It's be a more abstract meaning than the one that the author of the current global article wanted to convey, but could be applicable ... mabey ... mabey not ...
792:
There does not seem to be a coherent plan of how to take items off this list. Should this page even exist now that the transwiki system exists? (Even thought it doesn't work either.) Help.
633:
I agree with Siroxo that the lists are encyclopedic and/or an almanac-like list, which is included in Knowledge (XXG)--can't get such a list from m-w.com. Of the ones I've checked,
902:
seems to confuse the process. And if many people (though it's unlikely) really do want to comment on transwiki proposals, it would be nearly as easy to just watch the category (
520:
I think the following articles should be moved to the Wiktionary, but I don't want to get anyone mad or have revision wars over the fact. Please see the following articles:
312:- basically an overly long dictionary entry. This entry will always be about the word itself, rather than about something more worthy of an encyclopedia article like
426:
Kingturtle already mentioned below) and is not deleted. Somebody who is disturbed by a dictionary entry can better do these edits, instead of listing the page here.
739:
I'd ask that before moving such "dictionary definitions" to the wiktionary, that the theoretical possibility of an article be considered, or else the next time an
166:
What's the actual procedure here? Do I just list a page and forget about it? Will wiktionary experts take it from there? (hint, I've hardly used wiktionary...)
74:
24:
667:
should move to a separate namespace as they're not articles but lists, but I'm in the minority on that opinion and it's not a big deal either way).
80:
867:
437:
For items on this particular list that get voted for deletion, maybe rather than delete them, we should redirect them to appropriate articles.
878:
expand whilst languishing in the Wiktionary queue. The idea that this is a "tag of doom" is not supported by the evidence in front of us.
273:
version of these articles should go to Wiktionary, but volumes could be written say on the use of the word "social" to mean "good" by the
783:
I'd prefer a {{wi}} tag to a redirect. Unfortunately both of these qualify as candidates for speedy deletion. 14:50, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
779:
definition). If later there is a lot of information, one can re-create a wikipedia article with a link to the dictionary definition.
729:, it has potential for types of cups used in other countries, special cups for different situations, mention of symbolic cups (e.g.
736:
It's a bit of a stupid example, and i probably know less about cups that most people, but there is potential encyclopedic content.
502:
20:
410:
If someone wants to delete a dictionary definition: please move it to Wiktionary and fix all the links to and from the entry. -
69:
202:
60:
923:
and remove the encouragement to add new listings. I think that at the moment we should keep the page as a whole, though.
854:
Concur with Grutness. It is common for articles to be expanded in reaction to a VfD, the same would apply to Transwiki.
104:
874:(in its second sentence) encourages expansion, and there's plenty of evidence on this very project page that articles
671:
733:), what people used before cups, what cups were made out of in the 1600s (for poor and the rich) stuff like that.
498:
903:
379:? That might be ok with a redirect. But the article is much more than one would see in a dictionary, even the
243:
335:
for instance, or lots of other entries with that adjective. One approach for these is to rewrite them for the
967:
690:
of course an article can and should always begin with a good definition or a clear description of the topic.
467:
371:
Two different issues. One is a noun, one an adjective. Would you combine the two with a whole section on "
668:
637:
seems to be the best example of the potential these articles have to be 'pedia-worthy (oh, even better is
50:
384:
344:
339:
for those who don't understand the implications of taggng something as "global". It might also go into
841:
I'm the opposite. I see the tag as a challenge to make the article more acceptable to Knowledge (XXG)!
65:
477:
scheme. Currently, that hasn't had quite the right effect either, but I've sugegested some changes on
97:
286:
282:
158:
They are seprate as they are two different things and Wiktionary is not anoraml dictionary. -fonzy
594:
278:
827:
Moving something to Wiktionary in no way bars the expansion and existence of the nominated article
680:
In any case, I don't think we should remove the definition but keep the list. That's just silly —
857:
274:
722:) are taken for granted as everyone knows what they are, and has a rough idea how're they made.
137:
242:
This is the same as the issue of moving things from here to , currently being discussed on the
647:
129:
46:
685:
459:
from wikipedia. Hence a proper pocedure would be via VfD, especially for words that describe
198:
Very circular indeed. Is there some voting process someone would like to point out please? --
618:
602:
561:
529:
485:
446:
149:
830:
810:
438:
191:. Could somebody familiar with the process add a step-by-step list of how to do this? --
705:
697:
656:
591:
509:
361:
317:
302:
180:
167:
478:
932:
907:
855:
842:
822:
752:
744:
464:
340:
332:
313:
939:
924:
879:
427:
411:
294:
192:
173:
793:
748:
625:
613:
610:
503:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Deletion policy#Policy proposal for dicdefs: soft redirects
482:
419:
247:
199:
938:
That, listing why they have become moot (if they have), and other things, yes.
375:" as a term meaning social interest has been considered, all in the article on
964:
887:
834:
730:
380:
325:
235:
225:
804:
Old entries should be reviewed more carefully before any transwiki attempts.
743:
dealer discovers wikipedia, and wants to contribute their vast knowledge of
694:
643:
506:
474:
221:
188:
860:
740:
634:
545:
404:
331:
Obviously it's more than just CS that the term "Global" is used in. See
128:
Why are there two seperate sites? Why not have it all on the same site?
805:
573:
569:
376:
357:
298:
775:
I suggest instead of remove, include a #REDIRECT ] (for the concrete
638:
577:
557:
553:
525:
481:
which might make the proecess of moving and deletion a bit smoother.
372:
353:
309:
265:
261:
847:
281:. And they should be written, perhaps under different names (like
183:
here - I'd be happy to do the move-to-Wiktionary thing myself, but
585:
565:
521:
290:
581:
549:
541:
537:
455:
This page seems to have low traffic. Moving to wiktionary means
336:
726:
719:
533:
92:
15:
231:
How are edit histories merged if a temp article is started?
473:
This page was deprecated quite a while ago in favor of the
185:
I can't make heads or tails of the instructions or example
356:- glorified dictionary entry. We already have a page on
215:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Things to be moved to Wiktionary
704:
Not all of the entries have lists, just to note. --
751:crockery, they might feel they're not wanted. :-)
684:of our articles start out with a definition.
501:, then add your comments to this discussion:
383:. If I'm wrong about that, move it *there*.
8:
868:Knowledge (XXG):Votes for deletion/Counsel
343:but that is already a quite long article.
959:closed on 5 June 2006. The result was
601:Look like Wiktionary articles to me. --
393:From Knowledge (XXG):Votes for deletion
220:How does one go about moving pages to
7:
906:) for recent additions. Thoughts? --
257:Incorrect listing: global and social
172:Like "take a penny, leave a penny".
23:for discussing improvements to the
14:
45:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
955:This page was the subject of an
914:I'd certainly like to scrap the
846:
788:This does not seem to be useable
96:
40:Click here to start a new topic.
25:Things to be moved to Wiktionary
516:Suffixes in the Knowledge (XXG)
337:Simple English Knowledge (XXG)
161:
1:
725:But even with things such as
590:Found while stub sorting. --
499:Knowledge (XXG):Soft redirect
37:Put new text under old text.
103:This page was nominated for
904:Category:Copy to Wiktionary
268:are about the phenomena of
203:00:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
983:
630:00:22, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)
463:, especially rare things.
422:18:34, Oct 11, 2003 (UTC)
414:13:18, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)"
407:13:52, Oct 11, 2003 (UTC)
289:) to deal with stuff like
935:07:24, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
927:12:32, 2005 Jun 24 (UTC)
910:03:41, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
882:06:22, 2005 Mar 21 (UTC)
863:11:01, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
837:15:24, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
796:09:21, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
755:03:15, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
650:21:17, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
597:00:11, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
512:11:06, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
488:17:18, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
195:13:32, 2005 Apr 24 (UTC)
75:Be welcoming to newcomers
968:03:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
942:10:45, 2005 Jun 25 (UTC)
890:11:12, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
872:the actual notice itself
851:23:52, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
813:07:51, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
700:05:30, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
674:14:40, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
659:11:21, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
468:04:15, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
449:20:49, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)
441:19:10, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)
430:21:13, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)
320:03:34, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
238:12:03 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)
228:? Manual cut and paste?
176:02:16 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)
115:Keep and mark historical
866:As I pointed before in
708:07:36, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
493:Suggested policy change
364:03:34, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)
328:20:02, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC)
152:15:42 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)
140:19:33 20 Jun 2003 (UTC)
817:Wiktionary tag of doom
70:avoid personal attacks
821:I was surprised when
162:What's the procedure?
208:Moving and merging
179:I'm going to echo
81:dispute resolution
42:
951:MfD Result Notice
497:Please read over
277:and "bad" by the
121:
120:
107:. The result of
91:
90:
61:Assume good faith
38:
974:
850:
772:
771:
767:
628:
623:
616:
479:m:talk:transwiki
100:
93:
16:
982:
981:
977:
976:
975:
973:
972:
971:
953:
899:
819:
802:
790:
773:
769:
765:
763:
762:
715:
626:
619:
614:
518:
495:
395:
287:prefix 'social'
283:prefix 'global'
259:
210:
164:
126:
87:
86:
56:
12:
11:
5:
980:
978:
957:MfD discussion
952:
949:
948:
947:
946:
945:
944:
943:
898:
895:
894:
893:
892:
891:
864:
852:
818:
815:
801:
798:
789:
786:
785:
784:
761:
758:
757:
714:
711:
710:
709:
678:
677:
676:
675:
661:
660:
606:
605:
517:
514:
494:
491:
490:
489:
453:
452:
451:
450:
442:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
394:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
366:
365:
350:
349:
348:
347:
329:
303:social justice
258:
255:
253:
251:
250:
209:
206:
163:
160:
156:
155:
154:
153:
142:
141:
125:
124:Why two sites?
122:
119:
118:
110:the discussion
101:
89:
88:
85:
84:
77:
72:
63:
57:
55:
54:
43:
34:
33:
30:
29:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
979:
970:
969:
966:
962:
958:
950:
941:
937:
936:
934:
929:
928:
926:
922:
917:
913:
912:
911:
909:
905:
896:
889:
884:
883:
881:
877:
873:
869:
865:
862:
859:
856:
853:
849:
844:
840:
839:
838:
836:
832:
828:
824:
816:
814:
812:
807:
799:
797:
795:
787:
782:
781:
780:
778:
768:
759:
756:
754:
750:
746:
742:
737:
734:
732:
728:
723:
721:
712:
707:
703:
702:
701:
699:
696:
691:
687:
683:
673:
672:(see warning)
670:
665:
664:
663:
662:
658:
653:
652:
651:
649:
645:
640:
636:
631:
629:
624:
622:
617:
611:
604:
600:
599:
598:
596:
593:
588:
587:
583:
579:
575:
571:
567:
563:
559:
555:
551:
547:
543:
539:
535:
531:
527:
523:
515:
513:
511:
508:
504:
500:
492:
487:
484:
480:
476:
472:
471:
470:
469:
466:
462:
458:
448:
443:
440:
436:
429:
424:
423:
421:
416:
415:
413:
409:
408:
406:
401:
400:
399:
392:
386:
382:
378:
374:
370:
369:
368:
367:
363:
359:
355:
352:
351:
346:
342:
341:globalization
338:
334:
333:Global Greens
330:
327:
322:
321:
319:
315:
314:globalization
311:
308:
307:
306:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
280:
276:
271:
267:
263:
256:
254:
249:
245:
241:
240:
239:
237:
232:
229:
227:
223:
218:
217:
216:
207:
205:
204:
201:
196:
194:
190:
186:
182:
177:
175:
170:
169:
159:
151:
146:
145:
144:
143:
139:
134:
133:
132:
131:
123:
116:
112:
111:
106:
102:
99:
95:
94:
82:
78:
76:
73:
71:
67:
64:
62:
59:
58:
52:
48:
47:Learn to edit
44:
41:
36:
35:
32:
31:
26:
22:
18:
17:
960:
954:
921:Old Requests
920:
916:New Requests
915:
900:
875:
871:
826:
820:
803:
791:
776:
774:
738:
735:
724:
716:
689:
681:
679:
648:Niteowlneils
632:
620:
607:
589:
519:
496:
460:
456:
454:
396:
295:global trade
269:
260:
252:
244:village pump
233:
230:
219:
214:
212:
211:
197:
184:
178:
171:
165:
157:
130:Pizza Puzzle
127:
114:
108:
19:This is the
800:Old entries
760:#REDIRECT ]
749:Elizabethan
713:Imagination
603:Tagishsimon
475:m:transwiki
731:Holy Grail
505:. Thanks,
439:Kingturtle
381:Wiktionary
226:Wiktionary
825:told me "
823:Courtland
745:Victorian
706:Allyunion
657:Allyunion
644:biography
592:AllyUnion
362:Chadloder
318:Chadloder
222:Wikiquote
189:transwiki
83:if needed
66:Be polite
21:talk page
933:Dmcdevit
908:Dmcdevit
897:Question
843:Grutness
833:voters.
753:Tristanb
741:antiques
635:-ography
546:-ography
465:Mikkalai
457:deletion
213:move to
105:deletion
51:get help
940:Uncle G
925:Uncle G
880:Uncle G
858:Radiant
806:Topsail
764:]": -->
686:WP:WWIN
669:anthony
574:-phobia
570:-philia
428:Patrick
412:Patrick
377:society
358:society
299:justice
193:Dcfleck
174:Ellmist
794:JesseW
695:• Benc
639:-ology
595:(talk)
578:-scope
562:-onomy
558:-omics
554:-ology
530:-cracy
526:-cycle
507:• Benc
483:Angela
461:things
447:Schnee
420:Angela
373:social
354:social
310:global
270:adding
266:social
262:Global
248:Angela
200:Herzog
181:Martin
168:Martin
150:Schnee
965:Xoloz
888:Kappa
835:Kappa
586:-ware
582:-stan
566:-onym
522:-cide
326:reddi
291:trade
279:right
236:Jiang
138:Wzzrd
79:Seek
27:page.
961:Keep
811:Stan
777:word
766:edit
747:and
615:siro
550:-oid
542:-ist
538:-ism
385:EofT
345:EofT
301:vs.
297:and
293:vs.
285:and
275:left
264:and
113:was
68:and
831:Vfd
727:cup
720:cup
682:all
534:-ic
405:Wik
224:or
187:at
963:.
931:--
876:do
870:,
861:_*
845:|
688::
584:,
580:,
576:,
572:,
568:,
564:,
560:,
556:,
552:,
548:,
544:,
540:,
536:,
532:,
528:,
524:,
403:--
360:.
316:.
305:.
246:.
234:--
49:;
770:]
698:•
627:o
621:χ
612:—
510:•
486:.
117:.
53:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
