The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.
Failure to be verified may either mean that this information is fabricated, or is merely beyond our resources to confirm. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
This is a little bit about etymology and a little bit about how this case should be handled as far as formatting goes.
The noun badger referring to the animal has an etymology, which also has the verb form within it. The verb form, however, appears to have come from the sport of badger baiting rather than directly from the name of the animal. My question is, how do we handle derivative etymologies when they are for the same word? Should this be an additional etymology section? Should there be some etymological note because the two etymologies are so closely related? I am not an etymology pro so I have no opinion. - [The]DaveRoss 19:36, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- IMO put them under one etymology with an additional sentence or paragraph indicating the etymology of the verb:
- —msh210℠ (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2011 (UTC)