Talk:cafe'

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

RFV[edit]

Green check.svg

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

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.


It has three cites, but one of them is non-durable and another one is a pseudo-mention talking about the use of cafe' in Dutch. That leaves only one 1 legitimate cite, IMO. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:23, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Delete. Just think of all the junk to which this would open the door! --Hekaheka (talk) 06:29, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Google does not distinguish "cafe'" from "cafe" or "café", which makes searching very tedious. I waded through four hundred hits to find the two citations in the entry. There are, however, four million Usenet hits of those three spellings, which makes me confident this one can be cited. (Even if only one hit in four hundred is valid, there'll be ten thousand valid hits.) If anyone is going to propose it be deleted, I request that they do that first, before anyone goes to the trouble of citing it. - -sche (discuss) 08:41, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I would much rather it be cited, because IMO we only have one legitimate cite for it. Granted, I don't know how that could be achieved. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:47, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Cited. Two of the citations are by Jeremy Henty (2004-05-11 and 2004-06-08) and two are by David Carrigan (2004-06-07 and 2012-05-26), so they only count as 2 total rather than 4, but then there's a citation by LeAnne (2004-08-18), which makes 3, and they span more than a year (because David Carrigan's latest one is 2012, while the rest are 2004). - -sche (discuss) 00:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Amazing! Thank you --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:37, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Why don't we have a {{rare mis-spellings}} template, or a {{lazy, deliberate mis-spellings}} template? Dbfirs 08:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Ohmigod, what's next? Find citations for attache'? No doubt somebody has used that too, somewhere. --Hekaheka (talk) 14:50, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
I tried to cite Citations:caffe' and found only one citation, so I doubt many apostrophic terms are sufficiently well attested to be included. I don't see why you fear that slippery slope, anyway. Unlike misspellings, these alternative spellings are not made by mistake but are consciously chosen (several of the citations, like Citations:caffe''s, make that clear); why should we exclude them? We include eatin' and 'alf, which also use apostrophes (in those cases, to represent omitted letters rather than accents). Anyway, that's a discussion for RFD, not RFV. - -sche (discuss) 21:10, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I've no objection to use of the "eye-dialect" template. Perhaps we should really create a template for "silly deliberate mis-spelling of" if we are going to have lots of these. Dbfirs 09:17, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Does it make any difference that all the citations seem to be for places with Café in their name? Siuenti (talk) 16:34, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, they are all citation for Cafe' or Cafe`, and only the Dutch one (that I don't understand) is for cafe'. Dbfirs 09:26, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
We do not have entries for Restaurant#English or Café#English but instead handle proper names like "Podunk Greek Restaurant" in restaurant#English. The citations of specific capitalized Cafe's are likewise still citations of cafe'... unless you think we should create Restaurant#English, Café#English, etc. - -sche (discuss) 07:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Isn't this spelling just use of the word without knowledge of how to place the proper é -- like someone who writes café in a text message on a cell phone? If I am too busy typing to look up the proper letter code, I will often insert a ' after a letter or word to indicate a special case. I might or might not get back to it to correct it later. And I know I'm not the only one who does this.--Jacecar (talk) 01:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Passed. As Equinox said about an entry or two when he was WT:RFV's principal tender: yep, I supplied the citations for this entry, but I'm also apparently the only person who tends WT:RFV. - -sche (discuss) 21:00, 14 October 2012 (UTC)