Talk:condescending
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Recursive Definition[edit]
I just noticed that condescending is defined according to 'patronizing', and 'patronizing' is defined according to 'condescending'. Perhaps someone could correct this? 85.12.64.149 12:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, our definition for (deprecated template usage) recursive is “1. Recursive”, so I don’t see the problem. (^.-)
- A good point, thanks! In the intervening years someone’s fixed this to use “inferior/superior”, so it should be fixed.
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 20:49, 3 July 2010 (UTC)