Trivia and anagrams

Jump to: navigation, search

Random idea of the day: Do anagrams seem like trivia (lexicographical trivia at least)? Does anyone feel we could put them under the trivia header? For reference here are the entries that currently have both.

One wrinkle is that anagrams are always L3, but trivia is often L4/5. Thoughts are appreciated.

Bequw τ20:03, 17 July 2010

I completely disagree. Anagrams have various useful functions, e.g. for scrabble and crosswords, and they are always going to be L3 as they are independent of any one part of speech.

Most of the trivia sections should just be deleted, e.g. the ones about winning words in spelling bees are just cruft that should be in an encyclopaedia article about that competition (although it's probably too trivial to be in Wikipedia article).

Of the ones that do actually contain dictionaric information, this is about a particular sense of the word or about the pronunciation, and so should be tied to the relevant sense, POS or pronunciation. Thryduulf (talk) 22:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Thryduulf (talk)22:07, 17 July 2010

I don't think anagram's uses in games raises it above "trivia" (nor does anything else at w:Anagram#Applications for that matter). I don't imagine we'd have much trivia at all so a single L3 with qualifiers referencing specific PoS's or senses could work if desired. We should have a BP discussion about acceptable material in the trivia header.

Bequw τ04:39, 18 July 2010

Go ahead and start it then. I disagree that anagrams use for (two of?) the most popular linguistic games makes them trivial, although many of the other things listed in that section are indeed trivial. Thryduulf (talk) 08:56, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Thryduulf (talk)08:56, 18 July 2010