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

So there was an RfV discussion a while ago that I missed about a definition of "do" as to be in jail; I think what that person meant is to spend in jail, as in "I did two years in Folsom." I've added that definition. Pstinchcombe 22:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I really think this interlaced homonyms format is unhelpful. The verb "do" has a different etymology from the spelling of the musical note. In other articles which cover multiple homonyms we have separate subarticles for each with only the language heading being shared. The current format weaves all homonyms together with a subsection for each mixed together and labeled in the same section. If it's difficult to understand my description that's a pretty good indicator that it's also difficult to undersand the article. Especially when not all sections for all homonyms even exist yet. — Hippietrail 22:11, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

From RFV[edit]

Keep tidy.svg

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.


For these senses:

  • To be exhausted: Is this only ever used as the past participle "done"? If so, move to "done"; if not, give examples that use the present tense as well.
  • To be in jail: This is "do time" and should be moved there. — Paul G 14:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
    Concur with both assessments. --EncycloPetey 15:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
    Cross-referenced by appropriate "See also"s at do, of course. --Enginear 20:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

RFV failed. Senses (re)moved. —RuakhTALK 04:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

On second thought, more accurate would be fixed; it seems that the contributor put the right info at the wrong place. —RuakhTALK 18:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Green check.svg

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.

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


3 rfv-senses tagged since July 2007. May never have been at RfV. Worth a look, but hard to cite. How will we ever cite this kind of polysemic entry without our own corpora and a system for annotating it? DCDuring TALK 19:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

In areas like this, IMO humility is the best policy. If a (verifiable) sense is recognized as distinct in respected dictionaries, it behooves us to keep it. If not, it should only be kept if it is clearly not covered by an existing sense (and verifiable).
In this regard I note that the attack, travel, and cook senses are all recognized as separate senses in Longman's DCE, as well as being fairly easy to cite. IMO that should be good enough, barring any strong counterarguments; or at the very least they should be on RFD instead. ("Attack" is actually given by the DCE as a specifically British sense; I'm not sure what to make of that.)
On the other hand, the "be well/take care of" sense is absent from the dictionaries I have on hand. Also, the examples that were given clearly didn't fit that sense (I've moved them to more suitable locations.) It could very well be legitimate, although I'm having a hard time imagining how it could ever be used to mean "take care of" in contemporary English without causing horrific misunderstanding. -- Visviva 15:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I was just the messenger, but think that RfV tags inserted in an entry are worthy of some kind of consideration. I'd like to be able to cite these things. I usually lack the Sitzfleisch.
My MW3 has the travel and cook senses (and several more that we don't have, though my working memory is not capacious enough to really tell for sure in an efficient way).
MW3 does not have the attack sense.
MW3 actually has a sense "provide", saying that is used with "well". Their usage example is from w:Arnold Bennett speaking of "lunchers doing themselves ... well" at a restaurant. DCDuring TALK 16:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Definitely; I didn't mean to be dismissive of the tags. I do suspect, however, that the tagger really meant to tag these as {{rfd-redundant}} rather than {{rfv-sense}}. There is not much question that all of these (with the possible exception of the "take care of" sense) are in clearly widespread use. Three cites can certainly be given for each, but that seems like a bit of overkill.
Still, to bring the spirit of verification to this issue, I've started a general data page at User:Visviva/do. It's interesting to compare the treatments given in various sources. Thinking of moving it to Appendix:Dictionary treatments of do or something like that (though that table needs some cleanup first). -- Visviva 15:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Requested entry[edit]

Requested entry: do the dishes. In this sense, "do" means "wash" or "clean." This is an unusual idiomatic usage that should be covered. 07:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

The sense in "I think I can do with some extra sleep" doesn't seem to be covered. \Mike 20:23, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. It needs to be covered in some way. I will make an entry at do with and insert it as a "derived term". We can then figure out how else to treat it here. DCDuring TALK 22:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Please take a look at do with. DCDuring TALK 22:37, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Dictionary notes[edit]

See Appendix:Dictionary notes/do. DCDuring TALK 15:11, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Latin dô entry[edit]

The conjugation table for the Latin dô entry currently lists it as first conjugation. However, dô is a irregular verb which has a conjugation that closely resembles the first conjugation. My Pocket Oxford Latin Dictionary says: "In the present stem form of dô, the vowel after 'd' is shortened if it is 'a', except in the 2sg. indicative and imperative (i.e. dâs and dâ respectively). I will be very pleased and grateful if someone will create a {{la-conj-irr-do}} template for this entry. (I use circumflexes here instead of macrons here to denote long vowels) VNNS 08:25, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, I'm doing it myself. VNNS 08:47, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Czech diti (“to hide”) ???[edit]

In English -- Etymology 1 -- cognates (need to press "show" to be shown) I see the following

 Czech diti (to hide)

This is to be corrected or removed. I am native Czech speaker (non-linguist) and that does not make sense to me.

Related might be:

d{hooked-e}lat (dělat) -- to do

Similar but, I think, unrelated is:

d(long-i}ti (díti) -- to say (in old Czech) 23:48, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Removed. —Stephen (Talk) 15:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Do (noun) can mean shit or faeces[edit]

As in "doggy do", or "animal do", or place the word "human" or any animal species before "do". Regards JohnI (talk) 17:23, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Alternative spelling of doo? — Ungoliant (falai) 17:24, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
That was a quick response! It could be that you are correct as it does rhyme with "poo". I had always thought that "doggy do" had more to do with the "doing", but I may be incorrect in my assumption. JohnI (talk) 17:34, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

RFC discussion: January 2011–November 2017[edit]

TK archive icon.svg

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

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.

The order of the senses and those of the translation tables do not match, which makes the page very confusing. -- Prince Kassad 09:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Matched up translation tables, put some into TTBC. Reorganised translation section. Looks good now --Spreaderofwords (talk) 11:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)