Talk:association

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Legal requirements?[edit]

What (if any) legal requirements are there for a company to operate as an "association", for-profit or otherwise? Granted, this stage is not a substitute for legal counsel... but I wonder if anyone knows.

Thanks!

—This unsigned comment was added by 66.219.200.235 (talk) at 07:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC).

RFV discussion[edit]

TK archive icon.svg

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, though feel free to discuss its conclusions.


Two first senses are defined as:

  1. The act of associating.
  2. The state of being associated.

Aren't these a bit too general? Do they apply with every sense of "to associate"? Should they be divided into several, more specific senses? --Hekaheka 06:16, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Most dictionaries at OneLook handle it as we do, more or less. This is a general aspect of such terms. I would not want to define each and every derived term of a polysemous word with each sense of the polysemous word. Sometimes efforts along those line may be necessary.
Do you doubt that we could find 3 uses for each of these? It seems you would like the definition improved. Perhaps {{rfc-def}} or {{rft}} or {{defn}} or {{rfdef}} would fit you request better. DCDuring TALK 15:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I raised the question because we sometimes separate the senses with split-hair precision, whereas this entry in its current form takes a more wholesale approach. It's perhaps only my problem, but as there's no one word in Finnish that would cover all the senses of "to associate", I needed about a dozen words to cover each of the two senses that I tagged. There's no doubt about it being possible to find three quotes for each. I just wanted to verify that the definitions are clear and specific enough. If everybody else is happy with them, I'm happy. --Hekaheka 17:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Striking. I don't have a strong opinion about whether we should split these senses up, but regardless, {{rfv-sense}} isn't going to accomplish that. :-/   —RuakhTALK 21:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

RFD discussion[edit]

Keep tidy.svg

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.


Rfd-redundant. "A connection to or an affiliation with something" redundant to "The state of being associated". If these aren't intended to be the same, it's just the wording. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:16, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

  • I can see no difference worthy of a separate sense. They should be combined into a single sense, separated by a colon. There's nothing wrong with a single definition line laying out two ways of describing the sense. bd2412 T 13:20, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Sounds fine. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Merged the redundant sense.--Jusjih 18:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)