Talk:facade

Usage notes

It seems like the "usage note" is more information about fa[cç]ades (and therefore suited to an encyclopedia) than information about the usage of the word (deprecated template usage) fa[cç]ade (which would be suited to a dictionary)? —Ruakh_TALK 22:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. It seems a bit random to have it there. (Furthermore, it would apply to both spellings of the word, if it were included.) † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 14:25, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge with façade

Shouldn't this be merged with façade? Danilo.Piazzalunga 10:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

No, WT:REDIR, also WT:RFM (the introduction) and finally, what would happen to the Danish section? We can't redirect o façade and speedy delete the Danish.--Mglovesfun (talk) 10:55, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

But if you mean strip away the meanings and replace with {{alternative form of|façade}}, in my view, yes, as otherwise the definitions will get more and more different. --Mglovesfun (talk) 10:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Due to unfortunate events

I heard someone actually verbalise [fəˈkeɪd]. Im sorry. — Knyȝt (talk) 22:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Huh? Sorry what are you trying to say? Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 22:33, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

I think they're trying to say that they're very depressed about what they heard. But, well, nevermind. Kolmiel (talk)