Talk:egyptology
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
RFV discussion[edit]
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Uncapitalized version appears to be extremely rare or just plain incorrect. —Michael Z. 2009-06-11 13:14 z
- What "authority" is saying any of these are incorrect. Why should we believe them? Isn't there a more constructive approach, like a "rare" or "uncommon" tag? I thought that Wiktionary was descriptive. Why are we wasting time on prescriptivism? DCDuring TALK 13:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? We are a descriptive dictionary, so I've requested that if someone thinks that this is worthy of inclusion they bother to find a quotation or two that we can use to describe this term and its usage. If this is a valid term, then citing it is not prescriptivism, and it is not a waste of time. —Michael Z. 2009-06-12 00:25 z
- Already done. DCDuring TALK 00:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
- It was a poor choice or target and a poor choice of remedy. DCDuring TALK 01:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
The major need here was to reverse the erroneous move by a conversion script 4 years ago that moved Egyptology and Egyptologist to the lower case. DCDuring TALK 15:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
- RFV passed. Thanks for the cites and other work, DCDuring. —RuakhTALK 01:45, 17 December 2009 (UTC)