Talk:Schrankschande
EP discussion[edit]
I'm a newbie. So I'm not sure that how I am doing this is correct, and I am grateful for any assistance. I am reposting the below here to help fix the entry for "schrankschande". I have done so already, but some amendments have been reversed. Details below. — This unsigned comment was added by 91.10.170.202 (talk) at 18 April 2009.
All the example sentences you added use the word in an English sentence, but this is a German word. The examples should show the word used in a German context. --EncycloPetey 06:23, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hi EncycloPetey. I'm a newbie to Wiktionary. So thank you for your assistance. The word is of German origin, but is used in the English language, too, such as waldsterben, blitzkrieg, angst, .... A quick Google found some references, too, e. g. <http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whispers/2008/12/19/bushs-christmas-present-to-obama.html>. So I find the English examples helpful. The German entry has German examples. Would you mind readding the original (or improved) examples in English usage? Thanks. — This unsigned comment was added by 91.10.170.202 (talk) at 18 April 2009.
- One more comment: A schrankschande is not the same as a white elephant. Both are useless, yes. But a white elephant is typically a very costly and precious thing. A schrankschande is often cheap. Hence the reference to "kitsch" which I found you have also removed. Are you familiar with the term schrankschande in the English language that you have edited the entry as you have? Either you have used the term in different ways than I have seen it used, or your "corrections" are just based on the previous entry in Wiktionary, which in my opinion is wrong. A better definition is found here: <http://www.123exp-comm.com/t/23391071629/>. But I tried to help Wiktionary outshine this ;-) before you have reversed significant parts of the changes. — This unsigned comment was added by 91.10.170.202 (talk) at 18 April 2009.
- Then I notice that it is listed under "German". Should this not be English. Schrankschande is similar to strudel, rucksack, bratwurst, ... all with German (or more generally non-English) origin, but used in the English language, hence listed as English. The non-English usage should be listed in a separate section or a non-English part of Wiktionary, as is the case for a German and, it appears, Russian, entry for Schrankschande. — This unsigned comment was added by 91.10.170.202 (talk) at 18 April 2009.
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Language unclear, German?, English? In addition, de:Schrankschande and w:de:Schrankschande were deleted. --84.58.246.235 13:23, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
- It certainly looks like a dictionary-only word. German Wikipedia has an entry for Schrank der Schande though. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
- This needs to go to rfv: no hits on Google Books or Google Groups, and not in Duden online. The linked website on the talk page doesn't have it- I'm guessing it was in a comment that's no longer shown. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
- RFV, and as I look at it now, it's clearly marked as English throughout. Treat it as such at RFV. Renard Migrant (talk) 18:55, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
- As an English word, it should be written schrankschande, which was deleted in 2008. RFV has been in the article since 2008, however, as is the case with the corresponding German articles noted above, has been removed afterwards by IP contributors. I might add that the English and German articles and discussion pages of these articles (we now try to delete a new one, wikt:de:schrankschande) are full of anonymous contributions, typically even without signatures. --84.58.246.235 08:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
- I think common sense says this is a previously deleted entry, even though the capitalization is different. It is the same as schrankschande. On the other hand RFV rules were pretty different back in 2008; I seem no harm in another RFV. What will 30 days matter? And the RFV header warns users that the entry is unverified. Renard Migrant (talk) 14:02, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
- As an English word, it should be written schrankschande, which was deleted in 2008. RFV has been in the article since 2008, however, as is the case with the corresponding German articles noted above, has been removed afterwards by IP contributors. I might add that the English and German articles and discussion pages of these articles (we now try to delete a new one, wikt:de:schrankschande) are full of anonymous contributions, typically even without signatures. --84.58.246.235 08:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
- RFV, and as I look at it now, it's clearly marked as English throughout. Treat it as such at RFV. Renard Migrant (talk) 18:55, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
- RFD closed: WT:RFV#Schrankschande opened instead. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:16, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
Is this attested? We currently have it as an English entry with the definition "An item of possession that embarrasses the owner and cannot be easily discarded. Schrankschanden are often of inferior quality"; is this attested in use per WT:ATTEST in any language at all? See also lowercase schrankschande and the RFV of it at Talk:schrankschande. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
- Failed. — Ungoliant (falai) 18:31, 10 October 2015 (UTC)