Talk:frozen cow juice

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

From RFV[edit]

Link to the relevant discussion at RFV from page history. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2014 (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.

English synonym for "ice cream". There are currently two citations, one of which is a mention. —Mr. Granger (talkcontribs) 01:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

If this is verified, I'm RFDing. Just thought I'd put that out there. --WikiTiki89 01:28, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
We have a reasonable entry for cow juice ("milk"). But ice cream is not frozen + milk. So attestation of frozen cow juice with the unambiguous meaning-in-use of "ice cream" would seem to settle the matter. The entry may be silly, useless, etc, but it seems to meet our criteria for inclusion once attested. DCDuring TALK 01:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
I'll make a solid argument when/if it's verified. --WikiTiki89 02:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
A gbooks search just comes up with three usable cites. SpinningSpark 02:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
...and one news result. SpinningSpark 02:54, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Just barely, then. And nothing on UseNet. The News cite from 1937, no less. They look good to me. DCDuring TALK 04:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
The 1937 cite is not the oldest, that would be the cite from Puck in 1880. SpinningSpark 10:08, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
I saw one on Usenet [1] by the way, but that might count as a just a mention. SpinningSpark 09:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
One more from Campaign [2]. The link is to an online site so you can read it, but I originally retrieved it from a scanned copy in InfoTrac thus verifying that it appeared in the print publication (p.40, 26 May 2000). That makes five cites covering 133 years, a little more than "just barely" meeting CFI. SpinningSpark 09:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 ? frozen cow juice has no cites, and Citations:frozen cow juice has only two. If five are to be considered for CFI, they surely should be listed in the entry.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I have read the CFI quite carefully but: 1) nowhere does it say the cites have to be in the entry, merely that they exist, and 2) nowhere at all does it mention my name, let alone say that it is me who should do the work of entering them on the page. I'm sure you are quite capable of counting the cites I have provided above and totalling them to five. SpinningSpark 00:10, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Don't you get all legalistic, too. It has long been our practice to put the citations in the entry (or citations page). Citations are in entries because they show users that there is an empirical basis for some of our more surprising entries and their definitions. It is no accident that the high-quality print dictionaries: OED, MW, Century have citations in their entries. Even Wordnik has found it useful to have real usage examples for the words they carry. DCDuring TALK 00:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I'm not disputing it's a good thing. Where I get all pissy is when people start telling me it's my job to do it. You are shooting the messenger. This page is asking for citations and the messenger has brought you some. Nobody has any right to tell volunteers that they ought to do more or get upset with them if they don't. I might do it if I feel like it, but you can't demand it, and in this case I don't feel like it because if WikiTiki89 gets his way it will be deleted anyway. SpinningSpark 01:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
It's never been in my job description either. I just do it anyway. Nothing is in anyone's job description. It's just a question of one's sense of responsibility. There are lots of places where I drop the ball, possibly of more consequence, so I can't even take some moral high ground, as much as I'd like to. It's really just a question of, if not the person collecting the citations, who will take the trouble to insert them in the entry? Cut-and-paste combined with the citations templates makes it fairly easy. The entry being as good a place for them to support the RfV discussions as a link inserted on this page. DCDuring TALK 01:33, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I never mentioned your name, but generally the person making an argument holds the responsibility of supporting their argument, not just waving links around. I am not shooting the messenger; I'm not blaming you for any problem you told us about. But yes, if a messenger decides to pick up the message and then fails to deliver it to the place it's supposed to go, then it's a problem. You can't demand that I recognize any cite not in the entry. The above is not useful at all for trying to figure out at a glance whether they actually all support the senses and are uses, and it would take me a lot longer to add those cites then it would have taken you when you found them.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:10, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, you are shooting the messenger. You are implying that I will be punished by the entry being deleted for not properly presenting the citations. If Wiktionary wants to delete the entry for not being cited when it knows perfectly well that cites exist, well, I don't give a flying fuck, it's no punishment on me, I didn't create the entry. I probably still wouldn't care much even if I did. I am not "demanding" that you recognise the cites, I am simply giving you the information. Pretending that you haven't seen it is just perverse and I can't see how that helps to build the dictionary. You say it would take you (or someone else) a lot longer to add the cites. I don't see why when I have provided links to them. SpinningSpark 08:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand how deleting the entry is punishing you. --WikiTiki89 13:55, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm not going to delete it. I doubt that whoever closes this will either. I'm just trying to guilt you into doing the right thing (by my lights). Obviously that attempt will fail.
If instead of highlighting the link and inserting that on this page, you highlighted the text and copied that to the entry, you would have a head start on leaving users a citation. Using {{quote-book}} and its relatives speeds the formatting process as one need do little except type things like "|year=" in the appropriate places and optionally delete some excess strings. DCDuring TALK 14:50, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
  • 1880, "The 1002nd Night", in Puck, Volume 7, no. 175, page 338:
    'Madam,' said the Prince, who was of a lively wit: 'I perceive that you are dry; come with me to the shop of the merchant we both wot of, and we will eat frozen cow-juice, flavored with strawberry or vernilleh.'
  • 1992, Susan White, Bad Baby-Sitter's Handbook, page 20:
    Laurette says he is a really sick person to care more about some globs of frozen cow juice than a young girl's self-esteem.
  • 2011, R. T. Budd, The Deepest Wounds of War, page 163:
    “I just figured you wouldn't know what to do with frozen cow juice.” Cindi would guide his hand over to her playful lips, skillfully working some sensual magic on his vanilla cone.

Now in the entry and the citations page. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

As others have now made a start, just to show I can be a team player, I have added two more to the citation page:

  • 1937, "12 Guides guests at novel dinner", St Petersburg Times, page 46, 16 May 1937.
    ...frozen cow juice on Ross fruit pie...
  • 2000, Peter Souter, "Private view", Campaign, p. 40, 26 May 2000.
    The ads point out that there are some things you shouldn’t share, such as a middle-aged man’s liking for ladies tights, and there are some things you should, such as Carte d’Or frozen cow juice.

SpinningSpark 18:44, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

    • Unless there is an objection to the quality of the citations, this discussion can be closed as verified. Cheers! bd2412 T 14:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Passed. DAVilla 10:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Green check.svg

The following information passed a request for deletion.

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.

frozen cow juice[edit]

I forget what the word for this is, but this is just a case of referring to something by its description. "frozen milk" can probably also be cited as referring specifically to ice cream, just like "spoiled grape juice" can be cited as referring to wine, or "magic metal box" to a computer, or "little green man" to an alien. --WikiTiki89 00:36, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Try putting some mile in your freezer, even with sugar and flavoring. The result is not ice cream. By the misnomer principle, therefore, this is an idiom, perhaps a lame and transparent one, but that hasn't stopped us before. DCDuring TALK 00:45, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Nor can you make wine by spoiling grape juice or a computer by magic-ifying a metal box. --WikiTiki89 00:46, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
But we have an entry for little green man and also for cow juice which is equally humorously descriptive. I would also point out that this could be parsed as "cow juice" = "cow blood". Unlikely perhaps, but cow blood is the major ingredient of black pudding after all, so I could legitimately, but incorrectly, interpret this as "frozen black pudding". —This unsigned comment was added by Spinningspark (talkcontribs).
So should we add heated dead cow for "steak", box on wheels for "Honda Element", round spotted sphere for "soccer ball", chopped frozen water for "ice cubes", fried unborn chicken for "fried eggs", big yellow disk for "sun", slide on two planks for "to ski"? --WikiTiki89 01:58, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Do any of those have currency? Several of them are more transparent then "frozen cow juice" and some are less. I'd have to analyze based on context and usage in each case.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:25, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Does "frozen cow juice" have much currency? I don't think so, as it's pretty rare. Nevertheless an English speaker who has never heard the phrase before usually gets what it refers to. --WikiTiki89 13:49, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
The cites pass CFI. The point is, I'd have to analyze all your cases in the light of the cites at hand.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:19, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
For the purposes of this argument, you can assume they're all citeable. --WikiTiki89 20:41, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
That doesn't answer the question; I would have to look at them in the context at hand, whether they were being used as descriptive or as actual names and whether they actually applied exclusively to the other object. If, for example, there were cites for "magic metal box" such that it was actually being used to mean computer, not merely an analogy, I'd be all for it.--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:35, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
For spoiled grape juice: [3] [4] [5] [6]. You want me to do the others? --WikiTiki89 19:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Aside from the second one (which appears to literally reference grape juice that has become spoiled, the other three are legitimate evidence that the phrase "spoiled grape juice" is a slang term for wine, and that we should have an entry on it. Cheers! bd2412 T 19:56, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
So what you're saying is that if all of those terms are citeable with comparable cites, then we should add all of them? --WikiTiki89 20:00, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Only if they are not transparent. Since our definition of "spoiled" is "deteriorated to the point of no longer being usable or edible", and the citations support use of this phrase with respect to something that is generally considered usable and edible, what we've got here is an idiom. By contrast, "chopped frozen water" and "round spotted sphere" offer nothing idiomatic (and it is probably no coincidence that they do not appear to be citable anyway). bd2412 T 20:37, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I remember a place in w:Apia when I was there 25 years ago that sold sweetened, frozen cream as "ice cream"- I can indeed verify that it's not the same thing at all... Chuck Entz (talk) 05:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
How ice cream is made is completely irrelevant to the points I'm making. --WikiTiki89 13:49, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Keep. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Keep, per Mglovesfun. bd2412 T 14:23, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Keep, SpinningSpark 17:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Keep. Ice cream is not simply frozen cow juice.--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:35, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Keep: misnomer => idiomatic AKA not sum of parts. No CFI-relevant reason for deletion has been provided. As pointed out by DCDuring. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Weak keep, per precedent: the "fried egg" test. "Frozen milk" = "ice cream" is near the line between idiomatic phrases and unidiomatic, transparent-even-if-not-entirely-accurate descriptive phrases. But if "fried egg" is idiomatic (and note the arguments made on Talk:fried egg that resulted in its being kept, e.g. "scrambled eggs are fried eggs, literally, but if someone asks for fried eggs and I give them scrambled, they're likely to be disappointed"), then "frozen milk" must be idiomatic, too. And "cow juice" = "milk" is clearly idiomatic, in my view, so "frozen cow juice" is even less transparent and more idiomatic than "frozen milk". - -sche (discuss) 21:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Note that my nomination is not based on it being SOP, but based on it being metonymous, and no one has yet said anything to contradict that. --WikiTiki89 21:39, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
metonymous - of, or relating to, a word or phrase that names an object from a single characteristic of it or of a closely related object. For this to be metonymous you would have to argue that cow juice is a single aspect of cream: which I think is a dubious argument to start off with. But even if it is not, I don't see metonyms excluded by any section of the CFI. SpinningSpark 00:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Only that's not a complete definition of metonymy and certainly not the way we use it in RFD. --WikiTiki89 01:12, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Where has metonymy been the decisive argument for deletion? It is not a criterion in WT:CFI. DCDuring TALK 01:59, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Well that's the problem, I've been trying to remember specific examples, but none have yet come to mind, even though I remember there being examples. --WikiTiki89 02:38, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Kept. DAVilla 10:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)