User talk:John Vandenberg

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


Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the beer parlour or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

RuakhTALK 18:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


It's probably as good as it will get, and is nicely formatted.

The first two cites count as "mention" rather than "use", so strictly speaking there is only one cite of use for the first definition. And of course, it may be that most of the sources are not reliably archived, so the 2nd sense may not strictly meet CFI either.

However, because the formatting is to a high standard, and there are five cites for the 2nd definition rather than the minimum of three, I reckon it's in with a good chance of being kept. Well done. --Enginear 13:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


I've deleted double dutch, as we do not generally use redirects on Wiktionary. —RuakhTALK 02:39, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

donkey punch citations[edit]

You deleted two book quotations from donkey punch to "remove self-published works". Although it is part of the Wikimedia project, Wiktionary is not Wikipedia and its rules and policies do not apply to Wiktionary. Quotations for words here serve as real-life examples of usage, not sourcing of facts. We do not have a 'self-published works' policy for them. Edits removing multiple citations from entries look like vandalism and could result in warning or banning. ~ Robin 18:43, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

I removed self-published citations as better citations already existed on the donkey punch page.
Surely the reader should be given high quality citations in the first instance?
If the reader wants more, there is an exhaustive collection at Citations:donkey punch.
If I have erred, I am sorry. John Vandenberg 15:04, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I see. That’s okay then. Between your edit summary “remove self-published works” and Cirt’s “NOTE: Self-published works are acceptable on Wiktionary. Thanks.”, I got an impression you deleted quotations altogether just because they were self-published. Glad that was just a misunderstanding. ~ Robin 15:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


WT:ELE says only English entries may have translations, thank you. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for informing me and fixing those two pages. John Vandenberg (talk) 02:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


Is there any reason why this should be capitalized? JamesjiaoTC 04:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I just moved it to aspro. If you disagree with this decision, please let me know. JamesjiaoTC 04:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
G'day James. Sorry I didnt see this earlier.
It is a title, like Prof. It is always capitalised. John Vandenberg (talk) 23:18, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Just because a word can be used as a title, doesn't mean it should have a capitalized entry. comrade for example, is also used as a title, but it is a common noun. You can add articles in front of aspro as well as pluralizing it. For example, you could say: "We are looking for a new aspro for the Department of Science." or "There are a number of aspros in this university who supported this proposal.". You could theoretically include two entries for this: one for the title in capital and another for the common version. Wiktionary's practice on this hasn't been very consistent as we have Doctor and doctor, but not Professor (only German in this entry) and professor. Maybe we could bring this up in the Tearoom and see what other people think of this. JamesjiaoTC 00:01, 24 February 2013 (UTC)