Appendix talk:English collective nouns

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

I think this article is deeply misguided - does anyone need to be told that one says 'a team of football players'. Conversely, there are some things which are not proper collective nouns - 'a freakshow of emos' for example. I vote this article should be pruned right down. 82.110.248.146 17:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Totally and utterly mostly unrelated.[edit]

This is funny:[1]

 "A swarm of nanites"
 "A basement of vampires"
 "An itself of Yahwehs"
 "The Borg"

Is it citable? probably not. But funny. Hmm, yes, it's funny.

Authoritative sources[edit]

Whether this article is legitimate or not, authoritative sources must be cited. The website, "dictionary.reference.com" is in no way a standard reference for any language, much less for English. Some small effort was made, I am happy to see, to make use of Oxford, Merriam-Webster, and other legitimate sources. Perhaps references could be found in actual literature -- you know, "books"?

As to the legitimacy of this article, I have to ask why an "appendix", as such, would need to exist in this media? If this is merely a list of fanciful collective nouns, then label it such; if it contains alternative, deprecated, obscure, obsolete or otherwise supplementary entries, those entries should be included (and labelled) in corresponding articles. Articles exist, like these:

What can be done to fix this situation? (Miimno 20:01, 29 December 2010 (UTC))

Move to Wiktionary[edit]

The scope of this article exceeds the purpose of Wiktionary (see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:WIN). This article should be moved to Wikipedia. (Miimno 20:52, 29 December 2010 (UTC))


An article listing all types of collective nouns is now on Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_collective_nouns. You may now wish to consider deleting the Wiktionary article. 122.108.201.251 15:48, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

thirst of Irish[edit]

Looks like it might be legit, but it's not on the dictionary page, so I scratched it. DAVilla 03:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

WT:RFM discussion[edit]

TK archive icon.svg

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for moves, mergers and splits.

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.


I have adding this page to RFM as a means of representing a request for moving this page to Wikipedia and deleting it from Wiktionary. The page was tagged for moving to Wikipedia in this edit, on 29 December 2010.

I oppose deleting the page from Wiktionary. As an appendix, the page hosts a list of words, which seems to fit well into a lexicographical work. --Dan Polansky 11:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Also oppose, per Dan.​—msh210 (talk) 14:44, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Oppose. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:15, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Not moved. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:55, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Do we have provision for "copying to other MW projects" or specifically to WP? DCDuring TALK 12:07, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Apparently Wikipedia can't transwiki from us, I have absolutely no idea why. In this case, so they already transwikied it to us, so if they want it they can just restore their own version of it. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:45, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


The Appendix: Glossary of Collective nouns are a whole lot better and a lot neater. It's words are in a sort of dictionaryish version. The words are in alphabetical order so I advise that you go there. The words are in one column unlike this jumble of confusion.