Talk:social networking site

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

Deletion debate[edit]

Keep tidy.svg

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.


social networking site[edit]

Just social networking + site. Could also be social networking website, social networking service, etc. Equinox 11:37, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Delete. No harm in redirecting, I suppose, but in this case I really don't see the point. Deletion summary should point to the the subphrase to aid future visitors.​—msh210 15:02, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Delete. --Yair rand (talk) 15:06, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Delete, and put 'see social networking and site separately' in the deletion summary. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep set phrase, yes you could say "social networking website", but people rarely do. Ƿidsiþ 10:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
This is why we don't keep set phrases when they're not idiomatic. The definition might as well be [[social networking]] [[site]]. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
I think we should. The meaning is obvious, but the fact that we express the idea in this way is not. To me, "social networking website" is obviously unidiomatic, whereas "social networking site" is idiomatic. Ƿidsiþ 10:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
That reasoning could apply to another 10,000 phrases which don't meet our CFI. Let's talk about changing it, but let's not just throw in this one example ad hoc. DeleteMichael Z. 2010-06-03 19:16 z
Not true, CFI says: ‘Compounds are generally idiomatic, even when the meaning can be clearly expressed in terms of the parts. The reason is that the parts often have several possible senses, but the compound is often restricted to only some combinations of them.’ I think this is a stupid rule, but it certainly passes ‘social networking site’, on the grounds that it's sense 5 of site, and never 1-4. Ƿidsiþ 05:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Delete. It's a website like any other. What makes this one different? JamesjiaoTC 00:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
A dog is an animal like any other. That is not a linguistic argument. This is an idiomatic term per CFI as quoted above. Ƿidsiþ 05:21, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleted a few weeks ago by Opiaterein. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)