User talk:Fark

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

FYI: I squished your vote when I entered the correct redirect for Wiktionary:500000 Pool - please re-enter it.

BTW, here is the standard welcome template (even though you've been here a while.) --Connel MacKenzie T C 23:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:


I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the beer parlour or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

pools[edit]

You do realize that Wiktionary as we know it will be closed to edits, long before it reaches any of the milestones that you are entering are reached, right?

Furthermore, it is very bad form to enter future pools while one is in progress. --Connel MacKenzie T C 23:59, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, Wikipedia wasn't closed for edits before it reached a million articles. Fark 00:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
If you don't mind me butting in... closed to edits? How so? Paul Willocx 00:07, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't understand either. How the heck will Wiktionary be closed to edits before it reaches a million entries. Fark 01:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, after a few years the vandalism to contributor ratio may invert. Or, the dictionary concept may be rolled back into Wikipedia. Or WiktionaryZ will work and all contributors will move there. Or WMF will switch to CC-by instead of GFDL, restarting all projects. Or disk space technology will no longer be able to keep pace with the tremendous data being added to Wikipedia. Or someone will sue WMF for copyvios, or any of about a million other reasons.
Perhaps most of those scenarios are too pesimistic, but I have learned that nothing in life lasts forever. There is always a "next big thing," especially on the internet. As great as I think the wiki concept is, eventually something better will come along, or evolve from it. I can't see the future; the possibilties are endless. For now, this is still a fun endeavour. But the chances it will stay that way forever are rather slim. --Connel MacKenzie T C 02:00, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Is this an essay on policy or philosophy? What other pools are open? Davilla 18:10, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Slippery-slope argument[edit]

Hi,

I notice that you've suggested that snowball fight and mathematics in the sense of "ability to do mathematics" should be deleted on the ground that allowing them would mean that we would have to allow many other similar terms. Just so you know, the criteria for inclusion say that the slippery-slope argument is not grounds for considering whether or not to include a term.

That's not to put you off nominating terms you feel don't belong here, but "if we include A, we'll have to include B, C, D, ... as well" cannot be accepted as a good reason for deleting a term. — Paul G 09:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Fark, for multiple-word entries you may be interested in reading about the Pawley list and subsequent discussion. This is not accepted policy, but a lot of us feel that it carries some weight. Davilla 18:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Rule of thumb[edit]

The rule of thumb here on Wiktionary is: no redirects. (In some cases, they are OK, but not where translations can be different: especially something like hundred vs. one hundred.) --Connel MacKenzie 02:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)