Talk:miasmic
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Ruakh in topic RFV discussion
RFV discussion
[edit]![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d5/TK_archive_icon.svg/55px-TK_archive_icon.svg.png)
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.
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 creator of the entry gave only the definition "miasmal", which entry says "Having a noxious atmosphere". However, this does not tally with the quotation I have found and added to the entry. --EncycloPetey 21:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- That's how the OED defines it, too; however, its entry for miasmal, adj. is defined more broadly, as "Of, relating to, or consisting of miasma; producing or containing noxious vapour or effluvia. Freq. fig.". Also compare its definition of the better-formed miasmatic, viz. "Relating to, containing, or of the nature of a miasma; caused by noxious or infectious vapour. Also fig." Would you say they cover the usage you cited? BTW, please include a page reference or equivalent when citing; if you don't, how could a user be expected to verify the quotation's accuracy and/or existence? — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 11:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- My search source did not include page numbers, or I would have cited a page number. I can only cite what my source includes. --EncycloPetey 19:54, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
- I do think that the information you've quoted from the OED covers more than one sense, and our entry should reflect that. A "miasmic forest" and a "miasmic apparition" are not using the word in the same way. I can find quotations for both combinations. --EncycloPetey 02:09, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sure; do what you think. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 11:21, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Striking: entry was de-tagged by nominator. —RuakhTALK 03:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)