Talk:authorization

is it more close to being uninformed or unidentified or unofficial or illegal/— This unsigned comment was added by 74.83.214.120 (talk) at 18:16, 18 December 2009.

Is what closer?​—msh210℠ 18:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

• The characterization (countable, uncountable) is incorrect. It should be concrete vs. abstract - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noun. Authorization two definitions: 1) an instrument that authorizes (the concrete noun), and 2) the act of authorizing (an activity, the abstract noun).
• The third definition listed ("the power to give orders") should be deleted because it is just one special case out of an unbounded list of domain-specific permissions: the power to 1) give orders, 2) sign company checks, 3) purchase goods at a commissary, 4) read secret documents, ...

Parcheesy 18:25, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

We use countable/uncountable. Concrete/abstract is an entirely different idea. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Nonetheless, "the act of authorizing" is not an uncountable concrete noun, it is an abstract noun. Reverting without consideration/discussion of technical correctness is pretty lame. Parcheesy 19:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Where do you see "concrete"? Mglovesfun (talk) 19:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Umm, in the wiktionary entry for "concrete noun"? Somthing tangible that can be counted (like bricks) or that can't be counted (like air). Antonym "abstract noun" that refers to intangible things like ideas (freedom) or actions (oxidation, the process of oxidizing, as opposed to oxidation (rust), the result of oxidizing, which is concrete and uncountable). Authorization is both a process (abstract noun - the act of authorizing) and a result (concrete noun - a user has an authorization as a result of having been authorized). If you are going to ask questions, please be a little more specific than "where do you see concrete?", and please look up terms yourself that are already well documented. Parcheesy 14:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Request for cleanup

1. fix incorrect classification of definition 1 as uncountable
2. delete definition 3, which is a special case of definition 2

1. The first definition, "1. (uncountable) The act of authorizing" should not be classified as uncountable. Both definition 1 (the act of authorizing) and definition 2 (formal sanction, permission, or warrant) should be classified as countable.

Rationale: authorization is both an action/process (definition 1) and the result of that process (definition 2). As a result of having been authorized, a user has an authorization.

• The process can occur many discrete times ("BigBank NA performs 3.4 million credit authorizations per day") and thus definition 1 is countable.
• The result can occur many discrete times ("Jim has authorizations to fly an airplane, drive a commercial truck, and ride a motorcycle") and thus definition 2 is also countable.

2. Definition 3, "the power or right to give orders", should be deleted because it is a special case of the more general definition 2, "formal sanction, permission or warrant".

Rationale: The "power or right to give orders" is just one example out of millions of formal permissions, such as "power or right to sign company purchase requests", "power or right to drive an automobile on public highways", "power or right to purchase alcohol", etc. This one special case example is not sufficiently different from all other possible examples of formal permissions to merit it's own definition. Parcheesy2 16:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

RFD discussion

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

The word authorization has 3 (or most recently, 4) definitions. Definition 3, "the power or right to give orders", should be deleted because it is a special case of the more general definition 2, "formal sanction, permission or warrant".

The "power or right to give orders" is just one example out of millions of formal permissions, such as "power or right to sign company purchase requests", "power or right to drive an automobile on public highways", "power or right to purchase alcohol", etc. This one special case example is not sufficiently different from all other possible examples of formal permissions to merit it's own definition. Parcheesy2 16:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

delete sense. I think the last three senses need reorganising. It seems to mean "permission" and "a document/item giving proof of having this" (currently both senses are in #2 which is confusing). There is also some (possibly proscribed) use to mean "authentication" (that may be computing specific). I don't see the current #4 as being computer specific. Conrad.Irwin 16:25, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I totally agree with the last person. BedfordLibrary 15:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Deleted definition. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

RFV discussion

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.

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

---

Rfv-sense

1. (uncountable) Permission.

   I've got authorization. Call the office and you'll see.

2. (Can we verify(+) this sense?) (countable) An act of authorizing.

I'm having trouble finding any contemporary usage of sense 2 that is not better interpreted as sense 1, but the second sense is in many dictionaries. — This unsigned comment was added by DCDuring (talk • contribs) at November 28 2010.

If you're saying that the two senses are the same, then obviously if one is attestable, so is the other. You should probably be bold and update the page yourself. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think DCDuring is saying the two senses are the same; rather, he's saying that he looked for cites for the latter, and only found cites that he thinks are really the former. —Ruakh_TALK 00:38, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Take a look at google books:"his authorization of", which gets a few thousand hits. "his permission of", though also well attested, is not nearly so common, and IMHO is very awkward. (Though it's possible that this should be addressed by rewording and/or expanding sense 1, rather than by maintaining two separate senses). —Ruakh_TALK 00:38, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I needed that. DCDuring TALK 01:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I think I have 3 good cites. DCDuring TALK 02:00, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

RFV passed.​—msh210℠ (talk) 18:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

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

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

authorization

remove "uncountable" categorization from first definition The term Authorization has multiple defintions. The first definition, "1. (uncountable) The act of authorizing" should not be classified as uncountable. Both definition 1 (the act of authorizing) and definition 2 (formal sanction, permission, or warrant) should be classified as countable.

Rationale: authorization is both an action/process (definition 1) and the result of that process (definition 2). As a result of having been authorized, a user has an authorization.

• The process can occur many discrete times ("BigBank NA performs 3.4 million credit authorizations per day") and thus definition 1 is countable.
• The result can occur many discrete times ("Jim has authorizations to fly an airplane, drive a commercial truck, and ride a motorcycle") and thus definition 2 is also countable.

Parcheesy2 16:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe that both senses are primarily uncountable. Consider these examples:

Even for a simple procedure, authorization frequently takes days.

Even for simple procedures, authorization frequently takes days.

He planned to participate, whether or not he received authorization.

They planned to participate, whether or not they all received authorization.

In all of the above, a countable formulation ("an authorization" or "authorizations", depending) is possible, but I think it's a bit awkward (and doesn't mean quite the same thing).

—Ruakh_TALK 18:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

A Google search for authorizations brings up hit #4, which deals with education, saying "... allowed the Commission to issue Subject Matter Authorizations as another option to meet this requirement...". Hit #1, dealing with health care, also uses an article before the noun: "a prior authorization". Yahoo Store says "For each order, you can perform authorizations, sales, voids, and issue credits." The fact that there are legitimate differing categorizations for the same sense proves the point that countable/uncountable is not a useful categorization for the senses of this word.

Since light can sometimes act like a wave and sometimes as a particle, wave/particle is not a useful categorization for electromagnetic radiation -- light is both. But since both light waves and photons have no mass, matter/energy is an appropriate classification, and electromagnetic radiation is quite definitely energy, not matter.

Similarly, the process by which the Motor Vehicle Department determines that you know the rules of the road and can parallel park may or may not be countable, but the process is definitely intangible. Once they have decided that you can drive, the result is something tangible, a driver's license and a record in a database. Sense 1, the authorization process, is abstract, and sense 2, the recordation of the outcome of that process, is tangible and concrete. (The license itself is not a definitive authorization - if a police officer radios in to discover that the license is revoked, then you do not have authorization to drive even though you have a license. But both the license and the database record are concrete, sense 2 authorizations. One is just more current than the other.)

Parcheesy2 16:16, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

OK now? -- Prince Kassad 18:45, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

RFD

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

authorization

Rfd-redundant: (computing) The permission to use a specific resource; access control. Tagged but not listed. DCDuring will surely comment on this. -- Liliana • 21:12, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

1. Support We should always try to have as few senses as possible to cover the usage of a word. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 07:19, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Delete (about 1000 years after the nomination). Mglovesfun (talk) 09:18, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to Wikitiki89 for reminding us. (deprecated template usage) Access control doesn't seem like a synonym, either, more like a holonym, ie a different sense from the first part of the definition. If someone came up with some citations showing that it was used as a synonym, I would change my vote. Delete. DCDuring TALK 11:51, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 08:46, 26 July 2012 (UTC)