Wiktionary:Requests for verification archive/August 2006

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




Original rfv was by User:Παρατηρητής. Added cites. Jeffqyzt 13:02, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

RfV removed. SemperBlotto 16:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

walls of jericho[edit]

A wrestling hold. Any takers? Should Jericho be caps? SemperBlotto 16:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

  • By odd coincidence, I just added professional wrestling - but I wouldn't support having definitions of the signature moves of specific wrestlers (which is what the "Walls of Jericho" is, akin to the Rock's "People's Elbow" and the Undertaker's "Chokeslam"). bd2412 T 16:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
  • OK, I'll give it a half nelson. SemperBlotto 16:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


An employee of some US cable company. Protologism? SemperBlotto 16:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Google "cockclown": 94 results.
Google "cockclown comcast": 1 result, in which the terms are not linked.
The term may have limited usage as an insult, but I don't see a whole lot to link it to that particular company. (0 Google books hits, BTW.) --Dajagr 23:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Probably added by a person who had a bad experience with the company - Delete Παρατηρητής
The page has been extensively cited, but the cites all link to various gripes about comcast. To rfd. Andrew massyn 18:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


Is this spamvertising? There is a company of that name. SemperBlotto 07:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

There is a Wikipedia entry, so I guess it’s okay. —Stephen 12:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
The only books.google hit [1] is for the company. It's also apparently a column in "Bitwise" magazine [2], but it's only used as the title of the column. A groups.google search, with some removals for the company's products and an ISP name, also returns no valid hits for this sense [3] (all the results there are the name of an ISP, a user account name, or references to the column, with one exception, and that is in reference to a computer ghost [4] .) A quick web search on Google returns lots of hits, but the first few pages are again either the column or the company; I didn't go beyond the first few pages. My guess is the wikipedia article was put there by a supporter of the company or the column; I see no evidence that the word is in current use (you'd expect at least the USENET hits for this.) Jeffqyzt 13:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Additionally, the Wikipedia entry was created six minutes after the Wiktionary entry, by someone whose only contribution is that one entry, and it contains almost exactly the same text as the Wiktionary entry. It's subtle for spamvertising (no links going off anywhere) and might simply be a protologism. --Dajagr 16:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Did finally find one entry that actually showed this usage ([5], sixth paragraph), but it took a lot of digging to get to it. And even there, the author had to put it in quotes, suggesting a less-than-legitimate usage. --Dajagr 22:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Delete Παρατηρητής

There are a couple of entries, for example http://news.com.com/2010-1071-947327.html Data curmudgeons feel like that about their personal information flowing into the "Bytegeist" of the burgeoning Internet. Maybe a growing word? Actually the magazine seems to have coined it's name from the meaning of the word, see "Bitwise Magazine and writes the popular (and often controversial) Bytegeist column. " http://www.darkneon.co.uk/copy/about/writing.html To find the entries you've just got to skip by all the company references. -- 06:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The first link is the identical article to the one previously cited (David Holtzman, both cases); the second one mentions the "Bytegeist" column but doesn't seem to provide any other usage or etymological information about the term. It strikes me as more of a nonce word than anything that's in widespread usage. --Dajagr 20:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

To WT:LOP & Deleted. Andrew massyn 18:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

gall redux[edit]

There still remains the issue that the human medical sense is obsolete, while the veterinary sense, for horses, is alive and well. A gall is a saddle sore. I restored this noun sense.--Allamakee Democrat 21:16, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I still fail to see the difference. A gall is a gall is a gall. Also, are they really limited to horses? I am prepared to leave it, but would like input from others just for interest. Andrew massyn 21:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Huh. Actually, I always thought a gall was the sore on the human caused by the saddle; but I seem to be incorrect. WordNet (scroll down) specifies the horse sense, and there's a plenty of cites for "saddle gall" -- I tell you what, maybe we should move that definition to saddle gall, and have one at gall saying "short for saddle gall" - eh? Beobach972 05:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


Questionable sense:

  1. Slang word for distasteful or disgusting.

Rod (A. Smith) 05:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 19:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


Deletion from Wikipedia (w:Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Penkyamp) prompted an anon to request deletion on Talk:penkyamp ([6]). Rod (A. Smith) 06:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Rfvfailed See discussion from Wikipedia. Andrew massyn 19:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Brownie point[edit]

The etymology entered seems very dubious; does such a publication exist? --Connel MacKenzie 18:28, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Brownie points is used by the Girl Scout Brownies, but the usage is apparently older than that and the railroad reference. I think the most likely source is the way you earned prizes in Kodak's Brownie Camera Club, starting in 1900; but I can't find any reference that uses the word "point"; I earned points circa 1972, but that could have been derived from some other source. And I never did get enough for a new film roll. Robert Ullmann 21:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The work cited (The Browne and Other Systems of Railway Discipline) is used as a reference in an article in BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC HISTORY, Volume Twenty-eight, no. 2, Fall 1999 [7] (see page 11 of the PDF). However, the article doesn't mention anything about Brownie points, and I so far haven't been able to find any transcript of the original work. A search on "Brownie point" + "Railway Gazette" turns up 0 hits; a search on "Brownie Point" + "London" + "browne" + "railway" turns up less than 10. One of the links in the latter search points to a site at etymologie.info, which, after a couple of clicks, manages to run to the American Heritage dictionary at Bartleby.com, which provides the etymology that the "railway discipline" one replaced. On a hunch, I did a search on "Browne point" to see if the term had mutated from that (with people purposely pronouncing the final "e" in a sort of mocking tone). I ended up filting out "Browne's" (there are a few "Browne's Points" out there, apparently) and "point out" (people named Browne apparently point things out occasionally) and got 85 results. Although there apparently is a "Browne point" in Gaelic football, or, at least, some sport that the GAA is associated with, the only instance of a "Browne point" being used in the sense of "Brownie point" is here in 2004, which would look more like a typo than a linguistic precursor. So, um, no support for this that I've found so far... --Dajagr 23:41, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Found a reference to the cited etymology, although I'm not entirely sure how reliable the source in question is. --Dajagr 00:15, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Taken from Wikipedia:Andrew massyn 20:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

  1. "The Oxford English Dictionary conjectures that this expression could also have derived from U.S. military slang for sycophants, "brownnosers", while mentioning the less-likely but popular etymology that derives it from the awards system of the Brownies Girl Guides/Girl Scouts. "Brownie" itself in the sense of "brown-noser" was in use in the 1940s.

The OED reports its first appearance in print as 1963, though the origins of the phrase predate this. Its frequent appearance in newspapers in the 1950s date back to the earliest known usage in 1951, where a man in the Los Angeles Times speaks of earning favor with his wife in terms of brownie points."

The best book on Brown is by a Browne (KJ Norman). Browne's The Brown and Other Systems of Railway Discipline, London, Railway Gazette, 1923, is a classic. ... [8]

I have moved the definition to the talk page along with this discussion. Andrew massyn 05:41, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


A member of a fraternity or sorority. Seems reasonable but I can't find Google hits. SemperBlotto 21:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Yea ... all I find are individuals with the name "Fratter" (well, one possible mention). Beobach972 05:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Silly - Delete Παρατηρητής

Rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 05:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

take it up the Cadbury Canal[edit]

Verifiable cites please. Andrew massyn 21:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

All I can find is that (Google's number one return for just "Cadbury Canal"). I don't know about the whole phrase. (Random sites that may or may not (probably not, since they're all fora/blogs) count as cites : [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] There seems to be a "popular" (insomuchas it can be, under the circumstances of having no cites :-p !) variant "Cadbury's Canal", by the way.) Beobach972 05:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Silly - Delete Παρατηρητής

RFVfailed. The cites are for cadbury canal, not the phrase. Andrew massyn 05:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Arte Mecco and Hyglyx[edit]

These articles seems to have been written by the inventor of this so-called art. The Wikipedia links are dead. SemperBlotto 06:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

See severel down a bit. Παρατηρητής


4 google hits, 0 google books hits. —scs 13:34, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It also claims that μνεύμος is Greek for lung, which is nonsense. Greek for lung is πνεύμων or πνεύμονας. —Stephen 13:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Only 8 hits in google.groups [15] all of which are either making a portmanteau pun between mnemonic/memory and pneumonia, or are questioning the Greek derivation. No supporting cites of actual usage. Jeffqyzt 16:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Not in OED or Websters. Deleted. SemperBlotto 17:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

sister - a pest?[edit]

2. an annoying pest that enjoys tantalizing others
(sometimes applied to animals as well as humans)

Is that somebody's barb at his or her sister, or a real sense of the word? (I make no guess ...) Beobach972 00:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Showed up in March from an anon IP that also introduced a grammatical error that was erased shortly thereafter [16]. Note that the parenthetical comment now included with the "pest" definition originally referred to definition 1 (female sibling). The IP in question has only ever contributed the one definition. I suspect this is a joke definition rather than anything real. --Dajagr 01:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
He is being silly - Delete Παρατηρητής

Clear vandalism. However, perhaps a bit of it can be salvaged... done. :-) —scs 12:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Heh! I like it. :p Beobach972 22:29, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Definitely vandalism. Jooge 19:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The words: Arte Mecco[edit]

Arte Mecco can be referenced to my article in Wikipedia called: w:The History of Arte Mecco. This is my own work. I hope this may assist in the verification:

One thing which you can do to assist other Wikipedia editors is, if you already maintain a personal website, please ensure that any information that you want in your Wikipedia article is already on your own website. As long as it's not involving grandiose claims like, "I was the first to create this widget," or "My book was the biggest seller that year," a personal website can be used as a reference for general biographical information. As the Wikipedia Verifiability policy states: Self-published sources and other published sources of dubious reliability may be used as sources in articles about themselves . . . so long as the information is notable, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by other published sources.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autobiography"Hugeaux 00:45, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

See next - Παρατηρητής
Note: edits like this will probably get him blocked on Wikipedia. He doesn't seem insincere; anyone have an idea how to help him get a clue? --Connel MacKenzie 13:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Since the tag was again removed here, I've blocked this user for a couple days. --Connel MacKenzie 13:28, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

To WT:LOP & Deleted. Andrew massyn 06:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

The word: Hyglyx[edit]

Hyglyx can be referenced to my article in Wikipedia called: The History of Arte Mecco. This is my own work. I hope this may assist in the verification:

One thing which you can do to assist other Wikipedia editors is, if you already maintain a personal website, please ensure that any information that you want in your Wikipedia article is already on your own website. As long as it's not involving grandiose claims like, "I was the first to create this widget," or "My book was the biggest seller that year," a personal website can be used as a reference for general biographical information. As the Wikipedia Verifiability policy states: Self-published sources and other published sources of dubious reliability may be used as sources in articles about themselves . . . so long as the information is notable, not unduly self-aggrandizing, and not contradicted by other published sources.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autobiography"Hugeaux 00:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the references you've provided. However, please be aware that Wiktionary has some different criteria for inclusion than Wikipedia does. In particular, words included in Wiktionary should see widespread use or several uses in permanently recorded media. If you have some other references to these terms, please cite them so that they can be included with the entries in question! --Dajagr 01:06, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
A word that the author says he invented. Can we all do that? Παρατηρητής
Sure, we can all do that, provided we also convince enough other people to do so, and keep doing so. :-) FWIW, I don't think there has been attestation of these words per Wiktionary guidelines yet. Protologisms, sure. Jeffqyzt 18:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

To WT:LOP & Deleted. Andrew massyn 06:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

red cap again[edit]

Although no definition at all is given, books.google shows "mythical creatures" encyclopedia entry. Does it exist in running text? --Connel MacKenzie T C 05:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I put in two citations at redcap and the one Harry Potter citation here. All these instances, however, captitalize "Redcap" or "Red Cap"; I didn't look into any of the encylopedic texts, though. There is a wikipedia entry on w:Redcap with a redirect from Red Cap. Don't know where that source material comes from though. Jeffqyzt 15:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Red Cap A rare member of the English class, these are characterized by having a large rose comb. They are one of the few breeds with red earlobes that lay white-shelled eggs. Content: Chicken Breeds and Varieties (A2880), John L. Skinner, University of Wisconsin-Madison www.ansi.okstate.edu/poultry/chickens/redcap/ Redcap - A malevolent goblin easily distinguishable by their namesake red cap, fiery red eyes, claws and iron boots. They often appear as little old men, but can run very fast despite the boots. They reside in castles and watchtowers along the English-Scottish border, but will move their residence to avoid detection. They have sharp eagle’s talons which they use for weapons, but can easily be repelled simply by reading holy verse. www.vf11.com/legendsofvalhal/legendsofvalhal-post-814.html

"Lord Foulis sat within his tower, And beside him old Red Cap sly; 'Now tell me thou sprite who art mickle of might, The death that I shall die.'" Minstrelsy of the Border

"Here is an ancient description of the dress of the fairies: 'They wear a red conical cap; a mantle of green cloth inlaid with wild flowers; green pantaloons, buttoned with bobs of silk, and silver shoon. They carry quivers of arrow-slough, and bows made of the ribs of a man buried where "three lairds" lands meet; their arrows are made of bog-reed tipped with white flints and dipped in the dew of hemlock; they ride on steeds whose hoofs would not "dash the dew from the cup of a harebell."'"-Anonymous. Preller assumes, quite as a matter of course, that the red-caps and other minor deities, or house-goblins of a frolicsome brownie character, belong rather to Teutonic and Celtic mythologies than to the Italian. www.sacred-texts.com/pag/err/err12.htm - 66k

I personally think that the article should be moved to redcap. What is the consensus? moving discussion to August for decision in September. I have put in various cites on this page (above) for consolodation later, once a decision is made. Andrew massyn 08:28, 5 August 2006 (UTC) P.S. :Red Cap is also breed of poultry.
Main article at redcap with "alternate spelling" pointing back agrees with me just fine, as there doesn't seem to be a preponderance of usage in either direction. However, I think the Harry Potter reference (which splits it) is likely to produce more inquiries for the short term. We should probably also add in red-cap while we're at it. Jeffqyzt 01:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


Looks like linkspam. The entry when added had a link to www.moviedesi.com, which I have already removed. —scs 20:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

  • That's what I thought as well - Deleted. SemperBlotto 20:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Arte Mecco[edit]

--Connel MacKenzie 20:08, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

see #The_words:_Arte_Mecco above.


--Connel MacKenzie 20:13, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

see #The_word:_Hyglyx above


Third sense: sequence of poker cards? --Connel MacKenzie 22:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks like this is a term that refers to a communal series of cards dealt in certain poker variants. I added references to the sense and clarified it a little bit. --Dajagr 07:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Wonderful! Thank you. --Connel MacKenzie 07:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

last burst of fire[edit]

Is this idiomatic? Needs formatting. SemperBlotto 10:39, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

It is not very common, but I tried to find a few attestations; and format the entry. Beobach972 16:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Cited. rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 20:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


Is this actually an archaic spelling of height or a missprint in the referenced book?--Williamsayers79 14:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Dunno about the Catcher reference, but I added three cites. Jeffqyzt 15:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh yes, it is a variant. WSU.EDU : “Width” has a TH at the end, so why doesn’t “height”? In fact it used to [...]. Even more informative, WWW.ORG : [Q] The words width and length are correct, what about the word heighth? Was it ever used in the past? [A] It was. In fact, until the end of the seventeenth century, highth or heighth were its standard spellings. The word was formed in Old English from high, plus -th, the exact analogue of width, breadth, and length. [...] Because of its odd history, we can hardly argue that highth is truly an error, more an archaism. Though nearly everyone now spells it height, it’s not that uncommon to hear it said as among educated people in North America, and some authorities there consider it to be a permissible variant on the usual way of saying it. Beobach972 16:04, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm. Isn't this spelling used currently in the phrase/idiom "heighth of fashion"? I suppose that still qualifies as "archaic"-sounding. --Connel MacKenzie 13:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

rfvpassed. - Andrew massyn 20:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

net slicker[edit]

Any takers? SemperBlotto 18:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Deleted. DAVilla 15:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


Any takers? (needs formatting) SemperBlotto 18:57, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

While it might well be pronounced "chowdah" by the resident New Englanders, the term would certainly be "chowder-head", yes? Unless it's *always* spelled this way...
Here's a (blog?) quote of someone calling the "can you hear me now" guy a Chowder Head [17]
There's a footnote in this work, describing a chowder-head as a muddle brain [18]
There seem to be plenty of google.books hits (even after ruling out the place-names; 59 total including places) [19]
Don't have time to put these in the article right now, but if someone wants to...but perhaps it should be at chowderhead or chowder-head? The "chowdah" variant gets google hits (zero on google.books, though, and no news hits), but everyone seems to be emphasizing the accent of the speaker. Jeffqyzt 20:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I created chowderhead (which seems slightly more common, per google hits) and chowder-head; the later as an alternate spelling entry pointing back to chowderhead. I added two cites at chowderhead and will add another if someone doesn't beat me to it. Not sure what to do with chowdah-head though... Jeffqyzt 23:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 21:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

pearl harbor[edit]

Any takers? Capitalisation? SemperBlotto 06:54, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Just under 20 sources on Google Books for "Pearl Harbored," most of which are capitalized. 3840 hits on a general web search. The earliest publication citation in the search is 1978, which is two years earlier than Gorilla Monsoon's stint as a wrestling commentator, however, so the etymology comes across as perhaps a bit suspect. --Dajagr 07:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I think it is embarrassing that we've gone this long without an entry for Pearl Harbor; the name itself is idiomatic. I've heard pearl harbor used attributively as a noun but the verb sense seems a little unlikely. --Connel MacKenzie 07:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps it would work better as a idiomatic verb, since I can see it being used as a synonym for "sneak attack." [[ 22:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)]]
If it were to be used as a verb, it would still be capitalized, and it should also be hyphenated and enclosed in quotation marks: to "Pearl-Harbor" someone. I don’t think it merits inclusion as a verb. In the rare cases where it is used, anyone can easily get the meaning just by looking up the definition of the noun Pearl Harbor. —Stephen 23:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Verbal sense failed. Removed part of etymology and to Rfc - Andrew massyn 21:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


By extension from quartile - any takers? SemperBlotto 20:22, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems legit. [20] lists several examples in a 30+ page document, including "77 years in period records devided into five groups (pentiles) based on annual...". There were several others, mostly PDF documents that can't be cut-and-pasted, so rather than list them all , see narrowed down Google search at... http://www.google.com/search?as_q=pentile&num=10&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=&as_oq=percentile&as_eq=dictionary+matrix+pixel+rgbw&lr=lang_en&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_rights=&safe=images --Dmol 15:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)



Is this for real? SemperBlotto 07:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

And other dodgy entries from the same person. SemperBlotto 07:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Apart from the anonymous user who added the silly stuff, the original definition given by Chaoyun is basically correct. However, I believe this to be a non-standard rendering. Several dictionaries list the phrase as 邪門歪道邪门歪道:

The google results also favor this over 邪魔歪道:

However, I do think it has enough hits to keep it as a valid entry. A {{rfc}} tag might be in order. A-cai 13:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

From what I can tell, 邪门歪道 is the proper version (but my knowledge is limited to simplified Mandarin). bd2412 T 01:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

rfvpassed. To rfc. Andrew massyn 18:48, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


Any takers? (needs formatting) SemperBlotto 07:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not in very common usage, it seems. There's a small smattering of hits at Google Books, but a sizeable portion of them are foreign (Dutch and Russian being the most notable ones). Of the remaining hits, about a half-dozen use this sense (all but one in a hyphenated form: home-makery, music-makery, etc., and the exception being an excerpt from a 1953 Congressional hearing); a few refer to Orson Scott Card's books, where the term seems to have a specialized meaning; a couple seem to refer to a 19th-century Chinese pidgin; a couple use the term in the sense of "a place where things are made" [a trunk and saddle makery, makery (like brewery)]; two appear to be OCR errors; and a last few are parts of proper nouns (St. Makery, Makery Clogher, Richard Makery). I'm not sure if this qualifies as more of a nonce word from the application of the suffix -ery or consistent enough usage for inclusion, especially given its more common appearance in hyphenated form. --Dajagr 16:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
If it can't be cited as an independent word then it should by moved to -makery as a combining form. DAVilla 15:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with DAVilla. Rfvfailed.


Gnarly is one of those slang terms that can be used to mean either good or bad, but I'm a little suspicious of how widespread some of the more specific uses listed are—in particular, "modern or current" and "cantankerous." It might be more of a candidate for RFC, admittedly. --Dajagr 20:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, please move to RFC instead. I've heard those uses colloquially (and therefore guess that citations for them are very numerous.) Def 8 actually should have the word "intricate" in there somewhere. --Connel MacKenzie 00:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. Will get that done. --Dajagr 18:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems to have been cleaned, tidied and fixed. The rfv tag has been removed. There is a request for pronunciation. I will add this to the talk page, but am not transferring to rfc. Andrew massyn 19:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

scream like Rain Man[edit]

To WT:RFD#scream like Rain Man. DAVilla 15:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)::

Link updated. --Connel MacKenzie 16:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

anachronism - several things are wrong[edit]

Do we really need this many definitions, when Word of the Day gives just one? "# A person who seems to belong to another time" and "A person who seems to belong to another age" are identical, aren't they?

The etymology looks wrong too. I don't think "ana" means "up" in Greek. Other dictionaries disagree with this etymology (for example, dictionary.com).

The Word of the Day definition is imprecise too - an anachronism applies to any given time, not necessarily the present day. Digital watches are not an anachronism in the present day, but they are if the actors in a film about Victorian times are seen wearing them. — Paul G 14:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Technical notes: please use only the wikified word in the section heading. Also, I think this should be moved to WT:RFC/{{rfc}} instead. --Connel MacKenzie 16:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Corrected the etymology. —Stephen 13:44, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks all cleaned up to me. the rfv tag has been removed. I am re-submitting because of sense 8 Anachronism = Neglect; falsification. Looks like rubbish to me. Andrew massyn 19:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Bible basher[edit]

This one has been back and forwards for over a year. As mentioned in my notes at the time, I could not find any use of the term to indicate someone opposed to the bible, rather than its common meaning of a pro-religious person. (Actually, the original def was a person calling to homes to promote religion). The UK / US thing does not work either. Of the 5 examples listed in the talk page, numbers 1, 2, and 5 are US examples of a pro-religious use. Only number 3 is specifically UK. Ironically, you are now using the arguement I suggested at the time, namely that it varies by region. Cites for an anti-religious use are required. --Dmol 21:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Which "you" are you referring to? I'd say this has been lost/under the radar for over a year. --Connel MacKenzie 02:38, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Being from the US, I've only heard the second def., the one for which verification is requested. DAVilla 15:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

But the following quotes show the term used in a pro-religious sense in the USA.

  1. From Sex God to Doorstep Bible Basher
    (Cult expert) Rick Ross website headline.
  2. Science and education are under threat from the bible-bashing right in the US...
    Skepdic.com website news article.
  3. Bible-basher (British & Australian, informal, mainly American, informal) an insulting way of describing someone who tries very hard to persuade other people to believe in Christianity

Still waiting for any cite (from any place) showing it means a person criticising the bible. It might exist, and it won't negate the other usage, but examples are needed.--Dmol 11:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, I think the idiomatic sense is generally always "pro-Bible", whereas the non-idiomatic sense (one who bashes, i.e. harshly criticizes, the Bible) is always "anti-Bible". Here are some quotes of the "anti" sense; it's a judgment call as to whether they are functioning as a unit (but at least some are hyphenated, so I guess that argues for them being a unit.) Note that the idiomatic "pro-Bible" sense far outweighs this sense.Jeffqyzt 20:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • 2002: Everett Hickey, Biblical in alt.astronomy [21]
    I'm no bible-basher looking to discredit everything I hear, but there is one point that might be interesting to argue...If the bible is the Word of God, which version or language is the official Word, as the meanings change subtley from one to another?
  • 2003: Jeff Shirton, Conference... in alt.religion.mormon [22]
    There *are* no "Biblical contradictions". Years ago, I...addressed many, many, many alleged "contradictions". It's a very sad state of affairs, most Bible bashers who claim "contradictions" prefer quantity over quality, and no matter how many *ridiculous* claims they came up with and I demolished, they would continue with others...
  • 2006: veralein, How to protect yourself against false Christian teachers in alt.christnet.christianlife [23]
    I think you are just a Bible basher for what reasons ever. Maybe you are just an atheist who has pleasure in trolling Christians and recruiting them.

I put this question on a newsgroup I use to see what comments were made. Some interesting points I noticed...
The disputed sense, (criticising the bible) seems to be only used in the USA, but NOT at the expense of the other meaning, ie, a preacher or religious zealot. The term apparently has both meanings, although I strongly suggest that the preacher/zealot meaning is more common. (It was certainly easier to find examples). One interesting thing I noticed is that among people who had not heard the term, most assumed it meant criticising the bible.
Other things noted, in the UK and Australia it only seems to mean preaching or being keen on religion.
Another one someone mentioned was the term Bible bashing to mean studying the Bible or being in a religious class at school. I have a vague memory of these classes in Australia, (too long ago) In fairness, the disputed sense should be kept, but perhaps a usage note added pointing out these items.
See the full discussion at...
--Dmol 19:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Fascinating stuff. I have put the quotes on the article page and a usage note saying that the anti sense is chiefly US usage. 03:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


Verb.- To constitute or form a frontier; to have a frontier; -- with on.? Andrew massyn 11:18, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

No cites. No comments. Verb sense deleted. Andrew massyn 03:32, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


I have heard Aryan used by (neo-)National Socialists, but I have never heard the term used as a synonym for one. Can someone verify the given sense : (used by Neo-Nazis) A Neo-Nazi? In my experience, when someone (NS or not) says 'John is an Aryan', he means 'John has blond hair and blue eyes', not 'John [regardless of his race] is politically a National Socialist'. (I altered the second sense to that effect -- ie, both Hitler-era and modern National Socialists use the term to refer to that mythical 'master race'.) Similarly, on the adjective senses -- I have heard it used in N. S. propaganda to refer to the 'master-race' (and I have added that sense), but I have never heard it used to mean 'National Socialist propaganda'; or (as with the above noun sense) to mean 'National Socialist'. Can anyone verify these senses? Beobach972 03:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Moved from above. I am not qualified to answer this one. Will someone else have a go? Thanks 16:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Dunno. What is a National Socialist? A neo-Nazi in America seems to have a rather different meaning (but I'll guess it has all the same connotaions?) I've often heard the terms Aryan, neo-Nazi and white supremacist used interchangably on TV news. Perhaps if you could identify what country your term has that meaning, it might clarify things a little. --Connel MacKenzie 23:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Nowhere; neither in Britain nor America nor Germany (where the term is often a blanket insult) have I heard the term 'Aryan' used to mean 'Nazi'. Aryan is an ethnic classification, not a political one. (And, as has been twice said now but as I'll repeat because of the exemplary nature of the statement - Hitler was not Aryan.) Beobach972 22:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
From the description of usage that Connel MacKenzie has given, it seems to me that the tag on those senses should be altered from 'used by Neo-Nazis' (since it does not, from his description, seem to be the Neo-Nazis that are using the term in that manner, rather the media); however, I still cannot find attestations of use in that manner. Beobach972 22:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Hitler was a Nazi, he was not however an Aryan, and while most Neo Nazi's probably are Aryans, the two are not the same. Floatingtrem 06:51, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
If you remove the discussion tags again, while this sensitive entry is being discussed, you will be blocked. --Connel MacKenzie 07:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Exactly; I think the person that added those definitions (about 'Aryan' meaning 'Nazi') simply confused the two words due to the belief that most National Socialists are Aryans (and possibly also the mistaken belief that the reverse is true). Beobach972 22:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Aryan was never used to mean National Socialist (Nazi for short). They used it to represent what they thought of as the "supreme" image: blonde hair, blue eyes. Ironically, as Connel said earlier, Hitler was not aryan.
Aryan also refers to a civilization from around the time of the Vedas (I think that's right. I'm trying to remember back to my world history class). Foxjwill 20:37, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Right, but within American English, the "technically correct" meaning of "Aryan" should be labelled as {{obsolete}}{{archaic}} as it is only used in rare textbooks now. It seems as if the wrong definitions were tagged with "rfv" here. --Connel MacKenzie 21:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC) (edit)
I disagree that it is archaic; the word is used in many books in the context of the Vedas, etc, as Foxjwill said. I do not intend to get into a hunt for that sense too; but after a little research, I can cite you usage in the Vedic sense in at least one widespread American school textbook : →ISBN. Beobach972 22:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for proving my point. Outside of textbooks, the colloquial American English meaning for 1) The Iranian Vedas and 2) The Nazi blonde/blue-eyed "Master Race" genetic ideal are {{archaic}} or {{obsolete}}.
I had a hard drive crash yesterday, just as I had about a dozen tabs open for citations of the common American meaning...the white supremacist/Aryan Brotherhood (or Nation)/Neo-Nazi/KKK/Aryan synonymous usage. Weeding through the predominantly European texts on the subject was proving to be quite tiresome. But as I understand that a flamewar errupted between de.wikipedia and en.wikipedia as the result of bizarre translations, I will get these citations entered soon. Hopefully WMF's Euorepan contributors will have an opportunity to learn something about their misconceptions about the English language in the process. --Connel MacKenzie 13:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for defining National Socialist. I had no idea that it meant that. --Connel MacKenzie 21:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Back to the point, boys and girls. We've dealt with the noun. Can it be used as an adjective for Nazi propoganda? —This unsigned comment was added by Andrew massyn (talkcontribs). as of 20:40, August 13, 2006

What is your rush? Do you want us to get this right or not? --Connel MacKenzie 13:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe some of these senses come from activities of the fairly well known international anti-Semitic white nationalist group Aryan Nations? --Versageek 03:18, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Noun sense: # (used by Neo-Nazis) A Neo-Nazi.

I have deleted this sense. Andrew massyn 03:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC) - Please look at the adjective sense retained and see if the quotes perhaps need to go to this deleted noun sense. If so, please do the necessary. Andrew massyn

Adjective: Pertaining to Nazi propaganda and racialist theories: I have deleted this sense as it is a mere duplication of the previous sense on the article page. Andrew massyn 04:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Adjective: Pertaining to Neo-Nazi movements, people, etc. I have retained this sense and cited. Please keep spelling as it comes from the citation. Andrew massyn 05:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

    • "The year is 2025, White people HAVE become a MINORITY in America. On our streets hang Aryan men who refused to accept the "New Way," or perhaps they just looked too White."[[24]

I don't think that quote demonstrates clearly the specific definition of the word to which it is attatched : it could be interpreted as 'on our streets hang blond-haired, blue-eyed men' (especially with the context of 'they just looked too White') or as 'on our streets hang Nazi men', it therefore does not help clarify. Does anyone object to the removal of that quote, due to its equivocal nature? Beobach972 03:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I will remove the quote. Andrew massyn 13:23, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

cold read[edit]

Had been nominated ages ago, but never listed here (and therefore fell through the cracks, until now.) --Connel MacKenzie 23:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

This is in use.
Examples for the first definition.
"..., we meet someone and want to find out a little more about him/her ..., so, completely without conscious thought, we begin to cold read. [25]
Why sceptics do not cold read? (Article heading) [26]
Examples for the second def.
Learning to Cold Read (Article heading on acting website) [27]
There were several other uses of the term as a noun, or as an adjective, ie, cold read trick. --Dmol 19:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


A spectacular ZERO google books hits. Not in other dictionaries. --Connel MacKenzie 04:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

shuicide bomber[edit]

0 b.g.c hits. --Connel MacKenzie 05:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added some quotes for the spelling "shoeicide". I can't find any for "shuicide", but it's said to exist. --Ptcamn 06:00, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Ah, OK. I'll move it and remove the RFV. --Connel MacKenzie 06:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


Noun sense nonsense. --Connel MacKenzie 06:43, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe thinking of Druze? --Versageek 03:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

No cites, references and the def is not that for Druze. Noun sense fails. Andrew massyn 06:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)



  1. In porn, where a man ejaculates into his partner's anus or vagina, and the semen comes out on screen.

Don't ask me how I know this, but that is exactly the meaning it has in porn. [28] --Dmol 20:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Added more cites. Ick. Jeffqyzt 23:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed RfV. DAVilla 22:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


German. Defined both as an infinitive and a participle. SemperBlotto 15:00, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

It’s a past participle, not an infinitive. Removed the infinitive reference. —Stephen 12:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

chipmunk voice[edit]

It sounds plausible, but I've never heard it used. Foxjwill 20:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

9200 google hits rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 20:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)


Questionable sense:

  1. A statement that deceives by being part of the whole truth, a form of half-truth that is true in its own dimension, but only part of the entire truth.

Rod (A. Smith) 02:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

How can you verify a word that has been created to represent a concept that was never in the dictionary...a truth that lies...?

I suggested this word to Oxford Dictionary back in ~ 1995

--Caesarjbsquitti 04:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

In English Wiktionary, merely suggested words are called "protologisms". Such words do not satisfy the criteria for inclusion, so if they are defined here at all, they appear only in Appendix:List of protologisms. Rod (A. Smith) 04:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • This is rubbish. But so are all the other edits by the same person. They all need rolling back. Παρατηρητής
No citations given. To WT:LOP & Deleted. Andrew massyn 20:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

(én passant: the whole series of quark definitions need to be looked at. They are meaningless to me. Andrew massyn 20:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC))


Any takers? (needs formatting) SemperBlotto 10:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Also canemail blues (ditto) SemperBlotto 10:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Deleted the blues. DAVilla 15:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

No cites. Rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 20:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

sulphur-headed cauliflower[edit]

No hits anywhere. --Ptcamn 10:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I did try both spellings, in quotation marks. Your hits are just nearby occurences of those three words, not the phrase itself. --Ptcamn 12:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • OED gives an 1848 reference to "Suburban Horticulture No 626" but no hint of a definition. I'm not going to the British Library to look that up, so I shall delete it, but leave the red link under sulfur. SemperBlotto 14:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

nar nar[edit]

I see it, but I don't believe it... lots of Google and Google Books hits, but they don't seem to add up to the definitions offered (except one UrbanDictionary def). bd2412 T 16:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Oops. Deleted as 'nonsense.' --Connel MacKenzie 16:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

could care less[edit]

Surely not. Jooge 20:20, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but not exactly - to say "I could care less" implies that I could, but not by much, making it effectively a synonym of "I could not care less." bd2412 T 20:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Redefined to avoid being loopy. Pardon my pun. bd2412 T 20:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • This is very hard to find citations of use for; the first couple pages of books.google.com all point to usage guides prescribing against using this form of the cliché (while at the same time acknowledging that it is very common.) In informal writing and speech in America, the other synonymous cliché "couln't care less" is rare. Apparently, in formal writing, it is about a 50/50 split...accoding to some of the usage guides I peeked at. (Note to self: next time I need a quick, broad list of usage guides, repeat this search.) --Connel MacKenzie 08:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I had always assumed it was New York Jewish influenced, and originally had a question mark - "I could care less?" SemperBlotto 08:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Added cites. Jeffqyzt 00:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I'd say we can call this "verified" now... bd2412 T 01:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Pinker talks about this one in The Language Instinct, IIRC, but my copy isn't handy. —scs 12:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed RfV. DAVilla 23:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


Is this only used by the referenced company (i.e. spamvertising) ? SemperBlotto 11:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


Previously tagged but not listed. Seems to be wrong script...the spelling looks wrong, even for a transliteration. --Connel MacKenzie 17:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

  • There are quite a few Google hits for the word in contexts that seem OK. SemperBlotto 21:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
There is a Wikipedia page, w:Advaita Vedanta. User:Taxman seems to have cleaned it up adequately. —Stephen 12:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed RfV tag. DAVilla 22:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


Tagged May 2006. — Vildricianus 19:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Appears to exist, albeit rarely, in works to do with biblical exposition and linguistics, along with others I barely understand. Have cited it (and AM has already marked it as "rfv passed") --Enginear 19:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


From WT:RFC — Vildricianus 20:17, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

In Asian I'd like to see some verification for the meaning "(slang, uncountable) Analingus. ", and for "anilingus" as a synonym for "Asian" in anilingus.

Otherwise I'd like to see that meaning/synonym removed, as it is probably used just as a general derogatory term that can be applied to anyone ?--Richardb 13:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I think this might be one of various terms for nationalities that are slang synonyms for types of sex, as commonly used by prostitutes and their clients. Others are French and Swedish (although I couldn't possibly tell you what any of these are). — Paul G 10:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
And Greek. Never heard of "Asian" in this sense, tho. bd2412 T 21:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Removed disputed sense. Andrew massyn 06:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


At the very least a usage citation is obligatory. --Allamakee Democrat 22:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


This definition seems to be taken from Wikipedia, which says:

A rough translation in English could be "humanity towards others," or "I am because we are," or "A person 'becomes human' through other persons," or also, "A person is a person because of other persons." Another translation could be: "The belief in a universal bond of sharing that connects all humanity."

The dictionary at isiZulu.net, however, simply says it means "humanity". This seems a bit more likely to me, considering that it's simply the root -ntu "person" with an abstract noun prefix.

Can anyone show that it does actually have this ideological meaning in Zulu and Xhosa? --Ptcamn 05:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The simple meaning is humanity, but ubuntu has a much richer meaning than the English word. It means humanity (all of mankind), humanity in the sense of human nature, humanity in the sense of the quality of being human and humane, humanity in the sense of education (especially a classical, philosophical education), humanity in the sense of civility and socialization, and humanity in the sense of humaneness, decency and human dignity. So, the "rough" translations really are not too far afield. —Stephen 13:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
The word is well understood in S.A. to mean humanity to others. Probably a more precse definition would be humanism. It is My ward is Xhosa and I will find out the root meanings from him, but as far as I know, 'u' is the singular prefix and 'aba' / 'ama' is the plural. Hence umuntu person abantu people. Ubuntu would therefore denote oneness of people. Andrew massyn 05:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

He confirmed the basic premise, but he is 16 and more interested in girls, so I checked out the internet.

There are several interesting philosophical articles confirming this approach. See for e.g. :[29] and "Ubuntu is actually two words in one. It consists of the prefix ubu and the stem ntu. Ubu evokes the idea of being in general. It is enfolded being before it manifests itself in the concrete form or mode of exstence of a particular entity. In this sense ubu is always oriented towards ntu. At the ontological level there is no strict separation between ubu and ntu. 3 Ubu and ntu are mutually founding in the sense that they are two aspects of being as a oneness and an indivisible whole-ness [30]

I will add these cites to the article page.

Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 05:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)}}


Second def. --Connel MacKenzie 14:38, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

References added. --Dajagr 17:10, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed RfV. Not sure about "unblemished" though. Is it correct? DAVilla 22:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Not sure about "intoxicated, drunk" either. I've only heard "pie-eyed" in that context in UK. Is it pie-faced in US? Enginear 09:11, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I only know pie-eyed as well. I have removed that sense. Andrew massyn 06:45, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


This contributor's first contribution was an email address, so maybe that's made me unnecessarily suspicious, but I can't find this in any dictionaries or on Google Books. Anyone seen it in use? Widsith 16:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

  • The word may well exist (after a fashion) but it doesn't mean this. Deleted for the time being. SemperBlotto 16:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps we should have a policy/general recommendation about e-mail addresses. They seem to be getting added more frequently, only as a hostile form of retribution against someone they don't like (i.e. post someone's e-mail address and wait for the spam-harvesters to add them to thousands of spam lists.) Actually, that discussion belongs on the beer parlour, I suppose. --Connel MacKenzie 18:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


--Connel MacKenzie 17:51, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Does not seem to be a real word. Deleted. However, there are lots of medical hits for dyssynergy. SemperBlotto 19:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Nihilartikel and nihilartikel[edit]

This neologism originated as a hoax on the German Wikipedia. It has never been observed before and can be found only in mirrors and copies of, and references to the Wikipedia articles, with only a few non-notable exceptions. The English Wikipedia entry for Nihilartikel has been changed accordigly, most content of the old article has been moved to Fictitious entry. See the discussion on w:en:Talk:Fictitious entry. Cacycle 02:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you. This reminds me of Wonderfool’s antics. Delete Nihilartikel and also nihilartikel. Or at least mark them as hoaxes and neologisms. —Stephen 02:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
But it is wonderfully self-referential! Can we keep it? (Please, I found a kitten, can I keep it?) Robert Ullmann 23:44, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Only as Wiktionary jargon, at best, and I doubt that includes the German... unless it has independent citations like any other word. DAVilla 22:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I cant comment on the German. Would native German speakers make a decision.

The English nihilartikel is also up for rfv. I would like to keep it. It has been formatted to reflect a neologism and Wiktionary jargon. It seems to be gaining acceptance as a word, and I think it is one that should be accepted (Be bold remember). However, I am moving this discussion to RFD for consensus. Andrew massyn 06:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

pill [edit]

Original rfv was by user:Connel MacKenzie 2006-06-09T12:00:08.

RFV is for sense 4 --> (colloquial) A ball. Perhaps this should be merged with sense 6 (ball again, but specific to baseball?) I can't seem to dig up any hits that aren't baseball related. Jeffqyzt 05:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC) I have changed the definition to a US slang: A baseball. Do we not think that the pill should have its own entry? Andrew massyn 07:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

exit stage left[edit]

This is a stage direction. Etymology is tosh. But is it a proper definition? SemperBlotto 19:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

it might have an idiomatic meaning, unrelated to the meaning that was entered today.. I remember hearing this phrase used in old Warner Brothers cartoons (Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, etc.. ) when I was a kid, usually when one of the characters had caused something bad to happen to another character and wanted to leave before he got whacked by his victim. --Versageek 19:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Ditto that. Exit, stage left: Damon just latest talent to depart city; Israel: Peres—Exit Stage Left "But like the career paths of so many Israeli politicians, his exit stage left was really a prelude to entering stage right...; Mike and Carrie, March 17, 1998 "Austin better exit stage left soon, and give Carrie and Mike a chance for love."; On Gaien Higashi Dori: The Bells "Bears are at their most dangerous when taken by surprise... If you do happen to come across one, you should exit stage left at normal pace (you won't outrun a bear) and without your picnic basket.". bd2412 T 21:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Oh, you see things like this in every Shakespeare play. It is telling the actors how to leave the stage when they have finished their speaking or acting. e.g. exeunt stage right = they all leave together to stage right. If we have one, we should have them all (perhaps not the one from Winters Tale). Παρατηρητής
I think its the coolest stage direction ever. "Exit, persued by a bear." Andrew massyn 11:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I added BD2412's cites as well as a couple more, split out into noun and verb senses, and replaced the tosh etymology with a reference to the stage direction. Changed the "log out" to an rfv-sense (as I didn't find any support for this usage.) Jeffqyzt 01:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Deleted the "log out" sense. rfvresult. Andrew massyn 11:19, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

just ducky[edit]

Really? SemperBlotto 20:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

definition given is: Often heard in the sentence "Well that's just ducky" meaning "That's just great" but sarcastically. - I use this term all the time and it's always sarcastic.. however, since detecting sarcasm in writing is difficult, finding something to cite to verify the sarcastic sense is another matter entirely. --Versageek 01:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Not so hard to find. --Connel MacKenzie 02:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, ducky is an adjective meaning "great"; personally, I associate it with the 1920's, but I'm not sure if it was current before then. An equivalent might be swell. Like many faddish superlatives, once it's past its prime, it tends to be used in a mocking or ironic sense. I'm not sure it should be written up that way, though, unless it's irrevocably become the primary sense. Perhaps a usage note? Also, it should definitely have the modifier removed. Compare just great or really swell or totally rad. Jeffqyzt 02:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I think those last three examples would meedmeet CFI, easily. --Connel MacKenzie 02:19, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Connel, by "meed", did you mean "meet" or "need"? I can't tell whether you're for or against...and if so, whether it's for or against inclusion of this phrase, or the current CFI.
In any case, surely this would lead to massive proliferation of entries if we added (only to take the case of ducky) just ducky, not so ducky, pretty much ducky, always ducky, etc. In the specific case of "just ducky" (which can be used either ironically or not), surely just is only being used in its standard adverbial sense, and is no differerent than in the phrases just awful, just peachy, just great, just fine, etc. In other words, I am arguing that the phrase is not idiomatically distinct from the combination of just + ducky. Jeffqyzt 13:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
"Meet", meaning that those three should probably be here. The 'thin-edge of the wedge' argument is quite invalid. Wiktionary relies on citations to determine if certain combinations are used a certain way. So "pretty much ducky" and "always ducky" would not only meet tremendous opposition on the grounds of common sense, they'd also be mostly unverifiable. Your examples "just awful" and "just fine" clearly are not idiomatic, while the other two most certainly are. --Connel MacKenzie 08:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Not sure when is the appropriate time to move this over to the Tea Room...anyway, here's some examples that seem to me analagous to "just ducky" (in its ironic sense.) Note that some of these are sarcastic/ironic, and others are "straight."
Q: "How are things today?"
A: "Just fine. I blew a tire on the way to work, and I've been stuck in meetings since I arrived."
A: "Pretty much ducky. ..."
A: "Just awful. ..."
A: "Really really swell. ..."
A: "Absolutely catastrophic. ..."
Also, here are some cites of "pretty much ducky":
  • 1995: Walter Olson, Juries on Trial [31]
    Indeed, The Wall Street Journal's news coverage of the law...subscribe[s] to the view of the world that sees the great majority of court cases as being resolved rationally at modest expense...and, in general, everything about contemporary American litigation as pretty much ducky (except that maybe there isn't enough of it).
  • 2005: Lauren, this hat will eat your soul on atypically.knit [32]
    I'm knitting a triple strand at the same ~2.5 sts/in that the Shannon knits at, and everything is pretty much ducky so far.
  • 2006: animate_mush on animate_mush's journal [33]
    Good fun. And tomorrow I'm flying up to SF to see my other favorite guy, so things are pretty much ducky.
I'm not really proposing the "wedge" argument. I'm merely proposing that just is being used in its standard adverbial sense, and the phrase is merely the sum of its parts without additional idiomatic implication. Or are you arguing that the phrase "just ducky" is always sarcastic? If it's the latter, here are some cites of non-sarcastic use:
  • 1994: David Reid, Sex, Death and God in L.A. [34]
    I'd love to say that in Santa Barbara Max and I went to a motel and things were just ducky because that's my idea, really, of how things should turn out.
  • 2000: Barbara Weltman, The Complete Idiot's Guide to Starting a Home-Based Business [35]
    This all sounds just ducky: built-in concept, built-in products, advertising, and systems.
  • 2003: Kim Grant, Lonely Planet Florida [36]
    For a brief period after a hurricane, as if to add insult to injury, conditions become just ducky for a tornado.
If anything, I'd say that it's the adverb just that has the preponderance of usage in ironic situations, irregardless of what adjective it's paired with. So...I'm basically wondering what your rationale for specifying that this particular combination of adverb + adjective should be defined as a term is, verses any other combination. Or should they all? (P.S. if this is becoming irrelevant to the question of RFV, please send me a message and I'll shut up or move my discussion to the appropriate venue. Jeffqyzt 19:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Does it matter that it has not been given a definition - or even formatted? Παρατηρητής
Not really. Why go to the effort of reformatting it if it may be deleted? Now that it is more likely to stay, it will need attention. --Connel MacKenzie 08:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Specifically, I don't think this meets WT:CFI#Idiomaticity. Jeffqyzt 17:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I would support its deletion, but the argument would have to be transferred to WT:RFD. DAVilla 21:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Does it need to complete RFV first? Or can I create an entry in RFD at the same time? Or does an admin need to do it, since it's currently still under RFV? Jeffqyzt 23:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I think it has idiomatic meaning, but only from context I agree that just is a modifier, but it is not a set phrase. Take the following sentences and compare them. Four different meanings, each derived from context.

  • I have a duck in my pond and a ducky in my bath.
  • 'Ello ducky. Arn't you looking beautiful.
  • Thieves broke in. Life is peachy. Everything is ducky!!! HA!
  • Look Johnny. See the duckies.

To Rfd then. Andrew massyn 11:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


Already deleted from Wikipedia. Should be uncapitalized if it really exists. Second definition should then be fauxtograph. SemperBlotto 20:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Included here because it was deleted from Wikipedia and belongs here (since it's a word). Already a commonly used term with 1.22 million hits in Google as of 8/17/2006. Certainly not an uncommon term. Will change to uncapitalized version.
While the second definition 'should be' spelled differently, there is not the common usage yet. If in the future people start using the term fauxtograph, one could break out the definition and assign it to the new word when and if it develops. --Jrshaw 20:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC) revised Jrshaw 15:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Zero Google Books hits. There's several hits in USENET [37], but most seem to be discussing the same article (which used it in the title) or presenting a definition of the term, and all are from August of this year (once you screen out a business name.) Only found one clear indication of actual use (as opposed to a definition or a "clever" title) as follows:
  • 2006: Ariadne, Lebanese rescuer 'Green Helmet' injured in uk.politics.misc [38]
    He's a faker abusing corpses of children for the fauxtographers of Hezbollywood.
There are currently lots of blog hits that seem to be discussing this same incident. I would suggest that this does not yet meet criteria for inclusion, as it has not been in widespread active use for a span of at least a year, but perhaps someone could find some older cites that would push it back a bit further with some more digging. Jeffqyzt 01:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I will grant that this appears to not meet the 1 year criterion (without further research). There is by the way more than one incident. One incident started this, but now people are searching high and low to apply this word to many other venues and contexts. It's use is expanding and growing. The question is: do we sit on the sidelines and have people poke fun at Wiktionary because it is behind the times (by not including it)? The dynamism and currentness of the web is what makes it valuable. You will have to wait years for Merriam to add blog to their dictionary. Wiktionary has an opportunity here to truly be cutting edge and up-to date unlike the dinosaur paper media which will follow in Wiktionary's footsteps. I can understand the need to avoid flash-in-the-pan words. This word is in it for the long haul. My personal interest? I have been using a word with shares the same faux- prefix for 35 years. It is fascinating to watch the same thing happen with a new word on the web. --Jrshaw 15:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Your interest in the word notwithstanding, it is generally impossible to predict which words will stand the test of time. This word in particular has a problem, insofar as when verbalized it would be indistinguishable from photograph from which it is in part derived, without some tedious explanation from the speaker. Its existence would seem to be limited to textual mediums (not that that necessarily invalidates it.) Be that as it may, Wiktionary does have a medium for newly coined words, the Appendix:List of protologisms. That provides a place to document new words, and they could be potentially moved into the main namespace once a sufficient span of time and evidence of use (i.e. meeting CFI) has passed. Jeffqyzt 16:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
  • An obvious protologism. The person pushing for its inclusion does not seem to have added any other words here. Παρατηρητής
One has to start somewhere. Someone has to be first. I'll add some more words over time...
For the time being the Appendix:List of protologisms area makes sense as the best place to park it for the next 4 months until it reaches its 1 year birthday, though I am still researching older occurances. Will Campbell used the term 8 months ago in January 2006 when he created the fauxtography Flickr group. I did not know that the protologisms area existed. Thanks for the helpful suggestion. Back to the research... --Jrshaw 21:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Delete. Add to LoP. —Stephen 18:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

How is this word useful anyway? It's pronounce exactly the same as the word photography. Jooge 19:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It describes a subset of photography with unique characteristics that fauxtography as spelled communicates quite well. In spoken English we would call this a homophone. These two words fauxtography and photography are 2 words with the same sound, but with different meanings and spellings. --Jrshaw 21:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
It seems confusing to have a subset of photography that's pronounced exactly the same as what it's a subset of. Fark 17:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • The term is at least 9 years old. Since it is no longer a protologism, it should remain in Wiktionary. The rfv is satsified.
  1. 1997 A reference to digital fauxtography verified in June, 1997.
  2. 1998 A page at Bradley University c. 1998 makes reference to a "Digital Fauxtography" application.
  3. 2003 Aprilgem's Journal used the term in March 2003 under the title Fauxtography 101 and later in May, 2003 under the title Fauxtography 102.
  4. 2003-2004 Kim Horner's artistic fauxtography page copyright 2003-2004 uses the term.
  5. 2005fauxtographer.blogspot.com has been using the term at least 16 months (since March 17, 2005) --Jrshaw 04:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Hrm...but are these actually examples of general use, vs. as a nonce word? Items (1), (2) and (4) are proper nouns, as the name of a particular photography studios or a particular blog. Item (2) is unclear as to whether it's the proper name of an application suite, or actually using the term in a generally understood sense. Item (3) is perhaps the best case for using "fauxtography" as a word. However, if you actually look at the examples on the item 3 pages, they don't seem to be the same thing as defined; they're clearly illustrations and not photographs. Jeffqyzt 04:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I am undecided. The cites on the article page have three online dictionaries, and three links to other pages. Of those, one uses the word, but the images are not as defined, they are cartoons, one is a site under construction and cannot be accessed, and the tuses the word as a marker to link to a photoshop article. To rfd for decision. Andrew massyn 11:48, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


RFV sense is : A television news story that can be shown at any time there is available space since it is not time sensitive. Jeffqyzt 00:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, this is pretty common in broadcasting. Widsith 16:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Any suggestions for good google pair-words to weed cites out from the mass of pine trees? :-) Jeffqyzt 01:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I've added a cite for the adjective sense (which is more common in print, though less in conversation). Widsith 16:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


Does the pronunciation of the verb end in /z/ for all the verb senses of this word? I know that it does in the sense of "to hunt for mice", but I don't know about the other senses. I don't suppose it would for the disputed computing sense. — Paul G 09:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

No Z in *my* usage :-) How do we generally verify a pronunciation? Do we need sound clips? Jeffqyzt 16:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
No Z in mine, either. Frequently a noun in -s will change to -z as a verb (e.g., grease, to grease; house, to house), but if I were to say "to mouse", "mousing around", I would keep the S throughout. I have never heard it with a Z. —Stephen 18:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
The sOED gives both /-s/ and /-z/ as being acceptable. I can't remember now how I've heard people saying it, but /-z/ certainly wouldn't seem wrong to me. Widsith 15:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I have never heard it with a z either. I am removing the disputed pronunciation pending verification - its at the talk page. Andrew massyn 13:17, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


A person of low intelligence? Jeffqyzt 02:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Rubbish - added by anon user a long time ago. Removed. SemperBlotto 07:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Finished good[edit]

Really? Capitalized? Singular? SemperBlotto 16:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I think we should also look at "good / noun , A commodity; an item that can be traded, an item of commerce". I have never heard it used in the single sense like that. --Dmol 16:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

AmE requires the plural as well: finished goods, goods. —Stephen 18:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps there is a technical usage that allows the singular? I note that Wikipedia has the singular form, w:finished good, and the plural redirects to it. —Stephen 18:36, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I have moved the definition to fininshed goods and put a usage note on both pages. Andrew massyn 15:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

kill one[edit]

Huh? Jooge 19:24, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Should be deleted as is, but could be replaced with "killing me" as this is idiomatic and deserves a definition. --Dmol 19:46, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I think an {{idiomatic}} sense under kill would probably be most appropriate. Perhaps "to cause pain or discomfort to"? (Might need a notation that it refers to a body part.) --Dajagr 22:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. We don't list transitive verbs under eat something etc. DAVilla 21:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 15:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


Looks like another made up word. Eclecticology 03:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I think the definition is wrong. As far as I know, it is the male equivalent of lolicon - I remember seeing it when the whole lolicon debate was raging. This is the comic genre relating to underage boys. For some reason known only to inscrutable oriental minds, the main readers of these comics are Japanese women! Andrew massyn 05:41, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
The evidence is there, but I'll leave it up to someone else to dig it up. I'm not a one-man army, and this isn't my war. DAVilla 16:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I have amplified to include the above sense and inserted the definition. There are numerous hits on the word, describing it as a sexual complex. I have not seen a psychiatric definition, but think that pederasty is somewaht dated, and the word shotacon does have currency. On that basis rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 19:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

third finger[edit]

Certainly the definition given (ring finger) can't be right, right? How could it mean anything other than middle finger? --Connel MacKenzie 08:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Moving to RFC as a US/UK issue, apparently. --Connel MacKenzie 08:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


Supposedly French for good morning. Not when I was at school. SemperBlotto 15:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

rfvfailed Andrew massyn 19:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

fuck all[edit]

Sense of

  1. An expression of frustration, anger, or infuriation.

Who says "fuck all" ? You just say fuck!, or fucking hell!.
I'd like to see some verification for this useage. Was put in originally by an "amateur", and subsequently wikified.--Richardb 14:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure that the interjection meaning is just plain wrong. SemperBlotto 14:47, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I have never heard of this being used as interjection. It means "no". For example you could say "that's fuck all use to me". --Djmac 18:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

This is an expression used in the UK to mean "nothing at all" as in, question: "What have you done today?", response: "Fuck all." I think in the US, the equal response would be "Shit." ("What have you done today?" "Shit.) (Unsigned)

I agree with the unsigned comment above. It is fairly frequent in UK and, although I do not swear often, I have used it myself when frustrated and angry (close synonym jack shit which I only recall hearing as an interjection from US people). The reason why we're so sure -- this recent news story about a ridiculous on-the-spot fine: [[39]]. Although bowdlerised by the BBC, other sources, including I think the London Metro, confirmed that the answer given was Fuck all!. Unfortunately, none of those sources seem to be available online. However, I found a comment on a news message board confirming it, and have added that, and another attestation, to the entry. The fact that a policewoman who was passing overheard it, and felt that it constituted abusive or threatening behaviour, suggests that it was said in an emphatic manner, a forceful interjection, as it often is. (BTW, the police saw later saw sense and withdrew the charge, though I can't find that noted online.)

Intriguingly, I also found an MSN Search hit for a rather emphatic "FUCK-ALL!!" on a Cleveland, Ohio blog [[40]] but I could no longer find the target on the blog itself. Enginear 02:37, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't see that this is any different to the noun sense below. Any further thoughts? Andrew massyn 18:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

From a central and northeast US perspective, I've always heard it used in the noun sense as a synonym of jack shit, i.e. absolutely nothing or nothing of worth. I started going through the Google Books hits, and the first 200+ hits, until I started getting "this content is restricted" links, all used it in the noun sense, when it was an idiom instead of a part of the phrase "fuck all (some group)" or "fuck. All...". I would support removing the interjection and leaving the noun, and moving the jack shit synonym to the noun sense. Jeffqyzt 03:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd be happy with that, but this and other recent posts (eg on adjectives/participles in Latin) remind me of how unsure I am these days about parts of speech. Can anyone recommend an online source of information on this? If so, then we could perhaps note the Wikt deviations from that standard (eg noun phrase/noun), and get greater consistency. --Enginear 09:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I am deleting as an interjection, as the noun sense is the same. Andrew massyn 19:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

join issue with[edit]

Does he mean take issue with ? Needs formatting. SemperBlotto 07:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Looks like a real term. Some interesting things pop up at google.print: [41]. — Vildricianus 14:56, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Interesting - the uses attested in those sources seem to have the opposite meaning from the definition proffered (i.e., to take the same side instead of to take the opposite side). These are not legal usages, but in light of the google books results, the phrase should definitely be kept. bd2412 T 23:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Keep - I googled join issue and got this newspaper article which uses the phrase in the headline. 'Take Issue' was originally 'Join Issue', according to houghton mifflin. - Bnitin 02:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree with BD that the legal use (in the UK in my case) is probably the opposite of what is defined. I am no expert but I think that "joining someone in an issue" is to legally require them to stand alongside you against a third party in a civil case. I seem to recall that "joinder" is a related term. Any UK lawyers out there? Enginear 03:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

In South Africa (British procedure), all one does is join a party either as a a plaintiff or defendant by means of a "notice of joinder". If the plaintiff is joining as the person as a defendant, then he will be called the (Second) Defendant. If the Defendant is attempting to evade liability by suing someone else and joining him to the suit, then he is called the (First) Third Party and (Second) Defendant. Your pleadings would then look something like this.

  • Take notice that Defendant intends to join John Smith as First Third Party and Second Defendant to the above matter. Take Notice that unless objection is received within ten days, the First Third Party and Second Defendant will be deemed to be joined." Andrew massyn 19:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I think what the creator of the article is trying to say is that the parties are at issue and have commenced litigation. I agree with BD. I don't think it passes rfv. Will put on the August list for decision in September. Andrew massyn 19:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 09:54, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


I believe this to be a typo. If we keep this, it should be listed as a mispelling of 不客氣不客气.

A-cai 20:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

It is quite possibly an error on my part (although I could swear I'd seen it written that way). bd2412 T 21:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I've researched this use more thoroughly - it is indeed a spelling error, and one that is probably not so common as to merit an entry. Please feel free to delete. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Deleted. Kappa 10:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

there is no score[edit]

Yes. This is correct. But we are just a dictionary. Do you think somebody is going to say "What does 'there is no score' mean?" and look it up here? SemperBlotto 21:28, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The likelihood that someone will look up a word is not a criteria for inclusion? The phrase is attested, having made it on the "28th annual list of Banished Words from the Lake Superior State University at Sault Ste Marie, Michigan" [42], which decried "the common saying by sports commentators that there is no score (when what they mean, it was argued, is that the score is 0-0)". Which is how I happened across this one, because it was one of the "new words" discussed in one of the links Paul G provided. If that argument is correct, then it is idiomatic as well, and should be kept. bd2412 T 21:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I would have no objection to no score - meaning a score of 0-0. It's an entry for the whole sentence that I object to. SemperBlotto 21:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Point taken. So moved. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Also, I have no objection if you wish to delete the resulting redirect. bd2412 T 22:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay. DAVilla 14:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


This one just looks odd to me. It turns up about 9 Google hits (depending on what you count). Some of them pertain to the archeological site of Sarnath, and the only one that pertain to the meaning given by the user who created this entry are from MAGIC (the Gathering) sites or the Urban Dictionary. Protologism --EncycloPetey 03:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Pretty sure it's rubbish. Deleted SemperBlotto 07:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


Supposedly an adjective, but definition is of a noun. Is it a real word or (capitalized) a trademark? SemperBlotto 07:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Added cites and reworded as adjective. Jeffqyzt 14:10, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

sticks and stones[edit]

Is this Wiktionary material? If yes, then it would be better to have a definition, otherwise it's not really of much use. SemperBlotto 08:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added proper definitions and more quotes. I'm still not sure whether the first definition is idiomatic enough, but the second definitely warrants inclusion. There also seems to be a third use in philosophy that I don't know enough about to write a definition for. --Ptcamn 11:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Very nicely done Ptcamn. --Connel MacKenzie 18:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I have removed the first def, and left the second one. The third one wasn't there. Andrew massyn 10:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


Second sense: "To practice gardening, mining or archeology" seems to be covered by the first definition. Is it used as "I have a dig this afternoon" to mean you will be gardening this afternoon? --Connel MacKenzie 18:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's a verb sense, so it would be more like "I'm going to go out and dig this afternoon." meaning to go out and garden. I can definitely see this being used this way by one who is an avid gardener (i.e. "why else would I be digging?") but I'm not sure that makes it idiomatic; it wouldn't be understood by one who didn't know the individual in question. I did some looking with pairs like "go dig" + garden and "go dig" + archaeology, and didn't find any examples that seemed to represent this use (but there are tens of thousands of hits on these, and I didn't wade through them all.)
Or is this supposed to be a usage where there is activity other than actual digging that is conveyed? For example, someone saying "I'm going to go out and dig" when they really mean they'll be doing weeding or watering, etc. Or, for an archaeology example, when they would be, perhaps, chemically cleansing an artifact or staking out a site, rather than actually moving earth. I'm just hypothesizing here, but perhaps someone can jump in with a cite? Jeffqyzt 19:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I agree that it is not a seperate sense. No cites. Rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 10:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


Sleazy. Any takers? SemperBlotto 18:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Tina S, Jamie Pastor Bolnick, Living at the Edge of the World (2000) p. 114
  • At a Texaco station we met some skeezy guy who gave us a ride to the PATH train in Jersey City.
Hanne Blank, Unruly Appetites: Erotic Stories (2002)
  • I jilled while babysitting, having found a cache of skeezy porno mags hidden at the bottom of a big basket of magazines in one family's master bathroom.
Dan Lieberman, Carnegie Mellon University (2005) p. 93
  • I went to Rock Jungle twice and it was a disaster. It was filled with skeezy old men with bad cologne and gold chains trying to pick up eighteen-year-old girls.
Xichel, Delicate Relations (2005) p. 83
  • It was just what you would expect from a neighborhood joint, dank and rather skeezy, painted ruby red and black, the color of vice.
Marcus Alexander Hart, Caster's Blog: A Geek Love Story (2006)
  • First try to imagine what Christina Aguilera might look like in in an alternate universe where she was the all-American girl-next-door instead of a skeezy ho.
Irrational Dreams - a comedy soap opera (author/date not provided).
  • I mean, the idea... of you doing the nasty with some skeezy guy right here... in our home... (He shudders.) Ugh! It's just too much to take!
bd2412 T 19:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • We'll take that to be verified! SemperBlotto 21:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


Tup = top ? Andrew massyn 20:31, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Websters 1902 gives the origin of the word as regional English, possibly from top. This is probably where the disputed defs came from. I have deleted them pending verification. Andrew massyn 05:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
OED agrees on the etymology (noting "chiefly Scottish and north English") but has no English usage as "top". --Enginear 09:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

hierarchy of influence[edit]

Any takers? (needs formatting) SemperBlotto 21:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Would the plural not be Hierarchies of Influence, and not Hierarchy of Influences? Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 22:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Probably. --Connel MacKenzie 23:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
While Maslow's hierarchy of needs probably deserves an entry, I don't think this phrase (used perhaps, to describe it) does. --Connel MacKenzie 23:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

No cites, no comment. Rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 10:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


Welsh? --Connel MacKenzie 23:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks right (see [43], [44] (search on "flexible"), [45]), but definitely could used cleanup (which I've provided some of. I'm leaving {{rfv}} because I'm not a speaker and can't guarantee that the term's right). --Dajagr 00:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I am a native Welsh speaker. The definition is correct, although it is often extended to mean “supple” as well. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 20:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I have improved the entry, and removed the RFV tag. Tell me if anything else needs doing to it. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 21:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


One Google hit, and it's a myspace page. No book hits, of course. Contained a Wikipedia link, but Wikipedia has no such article. bd2412 T 01:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

serendipity machine[edit]

--Connel MacKenzie 04:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


--Connel MacKenzie 04:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

  • ... was deleted, has since been recreated (delete and protect, perhaps). bd2412 T 15:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


Cute entry for WT:LOP, but the only books.google.com hits are French. --Connel MacKenzie 04:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Hrmph! Probable Tosh. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Seems to be a neologism used in the Chicago area where there are attempts to provide better pedestrian access to the lake shore. Definition probably needs dePOVing a bit. SemperBlotto 06:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Tosh remark withdrawn - more hits come up when you search for other verb forms like "depaved" or "depaving":
      • Depaving the World, "Just to give you a sense of proportion: since 1992 I've probably depaved one acre with my various friends... I have managed to talk six or seven owners into depaving in these small spaces and have depaved the sidewalk-to-curb space-the "planting strip"-of the house I once owned... Speaking of which, depaving isn't cheap... [etc.]"
      • Depaving Paradise, "Then the town depaved part of a city street and closed another to cars."
      • Suburbanization's downside / Expert decries car culture, sprawl, "When Lundberg bought the place, it included a driveway, but he has “depaved” it, and it’s now a garden."
      • Gasoline Prices and Food: in Context, "They depaved their driveway to grow food, and they are proud to own no car, TV or refrigerator, “because these consumer items cause pollution and we save money by not possessing unnecessary stuff,” she says."
      • Miscellaneous Stuff, "This afternoon, we started depaving the driveway to make room for another garden bed."
      • Jane Holtz Kay, Asphalt Nation: How the Automobile Took Over America and How We Can Take It Back (1998), p. 356: "Hand out a bonus for building on wasted brownfields and depaving asphalt ones; penalize building on greenfields."
      • Susan Cohn, Green at Work (1995), p. 223: Environmental programs: Depaving; auto free city centers..."
    • bd2412 T 09:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted the first POV definition as essentially not distinguished in meaning from the second, moved the quotations to the page, and removed the RfV tag. DAVilla 13:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Pinyin "words" with numbers on the end[edit]

I seem to remember that we talked about such "words" as chan3 before and decided against them. Or am I mistaken? SemperBlotto 07:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I was unaware of such a conversation. With respect to verification, I would refer you to the Wikipedia article on Pinyin, which has a section on "Numbers in place of tone marks", which states:
Since most computer fonts do not contain the macron or caron accents, a common convention is to add a digit representing the tone to the end of individual syllables. For example, "tóng" (tong with the rising tone) is written "tong2".
This being the case, someone may come across a translation text referring to "ban3 quan2" and find themselves subject to a mystification which Wiktionary can dissolve. As there are fewer than 1,400 of these terms, I see no harm. I've made a template to incorporate them, so once they are done, any restructuring of the entries or categories of these terms can be done fairly instantly. Cheers! bd2412 T 07:09, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
OK. Thinking back, it was combined forms such as ban3quan2 that we objected to. SemperBlotto 07:23, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Ah, well those I would object to as well, since you'd end up with almost as many combinations as there are words in Chinese! bd2412 T 07:29, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


Is this a real entry? Seems a bit odd to me.--Williamsayers79 13:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Seems to be very restricted to the ice-skating community, not unsuprisingly, but reasonably widespread therein (found on a few different newsgroups and internet sites.) Added cites and a reference, and wikified the entry. Jeffqyzt 16:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
The etymology might need to be looked into a little, given that the first citation of the word is five years before the event cited in the etymology. (Either that, or the date of the first citation got typoed.) It was a typo; I followed the link to check it, then fixed it. Next time, maybe I should do that first. :P --Dajagr 18:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Oops. Thanks for the assist :-) Jeffqyzt 12:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 07:41, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


Found a bunch of acronyms and proper nouns, but no uses of the definition given. --Connel MacKenzie 16:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Added cites. Also, I would be inclined to strike the "Usage notes" section, as it does not pertain to the use of this term, but rather its etymology (but not enough to include there, perhaps.) Jeffqyzt 08:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Removed the usage notes (and placed in the discussion page.) Jeffqyzt 02:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 07:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


--Connel MacKenzie 18:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I've heard of "jiggy jiggy" with the same meaning and it seems to have some credible cites if you can find them under all the lyric websites.--Dmol 21:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Can you please add cites to the page. Moving to September for decision in October. Andrew massyn 07:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

swift boat[edit]

transitive verb senses

One of the senses described for swift boat, derived from infamous 2004 US presidential campaign attack advertisements[1], is not in common usage. To swift boat a person is to "put forth sensational, difficult-to-disprove allegations about a political figure as part of a public relations campaign against him/her", or (despite the contradiction) "to expose the lies, deceit and fraud of self-glorifying public officials or candidates for office who exaggerate their military service by lying about their feats of heroism and combat wounds". These are references to the events, not terms in themselves. For example, "another Bush for president" may refer to another president accused of eroding civil rights and freedoms, but it's not a term in itself deserving definition. // Pathoschild (editor / talk) 21:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for highlighting this. I think the senses need work and that only one is really necessary. The term is definitely in use:
An example: "The truth shall get you swift boated."--Halliburton Shill 17:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

67000 google hits for swift boated, at leats the first 10 used in the sense described. Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 08:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

chupacabra, chupacabras[edit]

Okay - I have done some editting of of both of these articles so that they make more sense in terms of their English usage.

I have added to chupacabras an English heading referring the etymology to the Spanish definition in the same article. The term chupacabras is used in English in cryptozoology and other fortean subject matter pertaining to this particular cryptid. It is derived from the Spanish el chupacabras (maculine singular) and not the term los chupacabras (masculine plural).

The English crytozoological term chupacabra comes from a mistaken identification of (el) chupacabras as a plural when in fact it is not. However this is heavily disputed in cytozoology circles and it is widely accepted by many that the terms chupacabra and chupacabras are now interchangable. Whether we it or not its the way in which these two terms are used.--Williamsayers79 10:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

KEEP --Williamsayers79 10:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Any further thoughts?--Williamsayers79 10:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Technically we would need three citations for chupacabra#English and chupacabras#Spanish, but I don't understand the nomination. Hippietrail admits to seeing a misanalysis of "chupacabras" as plural rather than singular, which means that (1) "chupacabra" exists in use, misanalysis or not, and (2) "chupacabras" exists, and so where would it come from if not Spanish? DAVilla 13:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The Skeptics Dictionary lists chupacabra in a singular sense, and quotes chupacabras used as a plural.--Dmol 15:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Both terms are used and I think we should keep both from sounds of this. Both are used a singular in English, only chupacabras is used as plural in English.--Williamsayers79 15:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
The plural chupacabrases seems to get plenty of Google hits as well... Widsith 15:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I only got 23 google hits, including duplicate pages, which is a minuscule number. The ones in Spanish with this spelling are all typos for "chupacabras es". I think this as an English plural is in the same class as the jocular phenonmenona. —Stephen 16:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, OK. Widsith 16:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
What are we doing then?--Williamsayers79 07:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
For Spanish, chupacabras is the singular and the plural. For English, I believe we have two singulars, chupacabras and chupacabra, and one plural form, chupacabras. —Stephen 22:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Finally I've dug out my old ForteanTimes mags:

  • ForteanTimes Magazine FT199 August 2005, editorial on page 02
  • ForteanTimes Magazine FT201 September 2005, letters page 71

These references relate to the whole Chupacabra vs Chupacabras debate and pretty much state the view that both terms are used.
Do you think we can pass both these terms now?--Williamsayers79 19:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Looks like you've already called it. RfV removed. DAVilla 15:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


Moving this to the Tea room, more appropriate place for discussion. bd2412 T 21:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

dumb rule[edit]

Entry is: "A rule that creates more problems that it solves, especially in the family circle, a school, or a workforce training center." Is this idiomatic, and is its use restricted as per the entry?

Says it's patterned after dumb law, which also seems non-idiomatic, but that one's had translations, etc., and it's indicated as being specific legal terminology. Seems unlikely, but as IANAL, I wouldn't know. Jeffqyzt 17:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

No cites, no comments, no interest. Rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 08:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


Previously listed on RFV, but indicated that it passed incorrectly. Only two books.google hits convey very different meaning than definition currently given (which has previously been indicated to be a copyright violation.)

This needs an expidited RFV (due to incorrect removal) and RFDing. --Connel MacKenzie 19:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The term "googledork" was coined by the author and originally meant "An inept or foolish person as revealed by Google." After a great deal of media attention, the term came to describe those who "troll the Internet for confidential goods." Either description is fine, really. What matters is that the term googledork conveys the concept that sensitive stuff is on the web, and Google can help you find it. The official googledorks page lists many different examples of unbelievable things that have been dug up through Google by the maintainer of the page, Johnny Long. Each listing shows the Google search required to find the information, along with a description of why the data found on each page is so interesting.[46] —This unsigned comment was added by Andrew massyn (talkcontribs).

A further discussion on the term.[[47]] Andrew massyn 18:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I can understand the assertion that this is perhaps a slang term. If it is, then certainly durably archived printed references can be found for it. For example, slang drug terms see many, many occurences in print. But something as obscure and narrow as this 1) hasn't entered the English language, 2) Is not likely to be looked up (as the term as defined can only be used in a miniscule, narrow context.)
RFV tag restored. --Connel MacKenzie 18:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I certainly think the term can be expanded. As far as I have seen, it has two or possibly three meanings: As cited; A neglegent webmaster who allows personal information to be revealed; A person who opens his computer to the world by sheer ineptitude. As for it's existence, I have no doubt that it exists and accordingly removedthe rfv. If necessary it should be moved to rfc or to the Tea Room. However in my opinion rfvpassed. I shall check google books, but will not be disapointed if I dont find it there yet It is bound to make its way into print.
More discussion.[48] Andrew massyn 18:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Two book results: one for googleDork and one for googledork. Andrew massyn 18:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Page was vandalized again today. Talk page still listed bogus references. Redirecting and protecting. --Connel MacKenzie 06:42, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Connel wants to ditch it, I want to keep it. To rfd for consensus. Andrew massyn 08:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


It's clever, but I've never headr the term before. A Google search turned up only a very few hits, but one was from the BBC and one from the Hampshire Guitar Orchestra. Legit? --EncycloPetey 05:41, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I assume it is an alternative spelling of cobweb site - though the meaning given was slightly different. SemperBlotto 07:22, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


An anon added two verb senses, which I suspect are urbandictionaryworthy... —scs 02:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Rfv sense failed. Andrew massyn 08:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


Appears in Urban Fictionary. DAVilla 17:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia's closest entry going by the definition. Nothing like wewe in pronunciation either.--Halliburton Shill 09:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Summary: Remove.
Detail: The whole definition appears to be based on a remark made on another wiki-based pedia that is actually more like a blog. Some guy states that he read it in the "Fortian Times". Of course, there is no such thing, bot there is the Fortean' Times which does specialize in ghost-type things. It has nothing about wewe or ghosts with sagging breasts. The wiki-blog was dated February 2006. The Urban definition showed up in April, and there is nothing that is independent of those that matches. The closest is a reference to an Indonesian ghost called wewe that steals children in Moon Handbooks: Indonesia 6th Ed., p. 48, Sept. 1995 by Bill Dalton. No additional details, like gender or physical characteristics.--Halliburton Shill 11:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
I don’t know anything about "Fortian Times" or sagging breasts, but wewe is correct for a Swahili pronoun. Cleaned up. —Stephen 14:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


Definition offered does not appear to match any Google Books hits - they refer to a proper name, a nonce use, or perhaps "giggly". bd2412 T 21:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

heel lift[edit]

--Connel MacKenzie 01:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

This is ok, but more used for pysical problems, rather than making you taller, adjusted def accordingly. Examples [49]
--Dmol 10:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


sense #4: Any person or thing which is Awesome

It's possible that this was intended as a statement of /precision/ about someone's skill at doing ____, however, as worded - it's unclear. --Versageek 02:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The def has been changed by an anon user to anyone who is skilled, but still no citations and no references. Rfvfailed. Andrew massyn 17:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

corkscrew - а cocktail made from vodka and orange juice[edit]

Is there such a use? The cocktail in question has always been called a screwdriver, AFAIR. Dart evader 03:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I think I've heard 'corkscrew' used figuratively for any cocktail (e.g. to get her to open up.) But I've never heard any name other than screwdriver for the specific drink of vodka+OJ. Perhaps it should have been labelled as being specific to Australia? --Connel MacKenzie 06:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The only recipe for a corkscrew that I could find was for Rum, Vermouth, Creme de Peche, and lime. I did work as a barman both here and in Australia and only ever heard vodka and orange being referred to as a screwdriver.
--Dmol 10:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed disputed sense. Andrew massyn 17:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

taker ' ta the short rows[edit]

Really? bd2412 T 03:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Probably not. "take'r ta the upper rows" would be more believable. Either way, it's slang/idiom and "taker '" needs to changed to the contraction of "take her".--Halliburton Shill 04:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I couldn't verify this. The apostrophe seems to be wrongly spaced anyway. Deleted for now. SemperBlotto 08:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


A paramour; -- in contempt. ? Andrew massyn 04:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe not nonsense, but definitely very new or obsolete if it's used at all. I could see a poet stretching the meaning that way as a form of understatement and insult. May also be the anti-swearers trying to come up with a more polite word for bitch.--Halliburton Shill 02:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Removed disputed sense. Andrew massyn 18:05, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


German - empty ? Andrew massyn 04:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

LEO has it as meaning "barren; bleak; dead (fig.); desert; stark". So something like "(of a region) empty". --Ptcamn 05:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, this one is good. Cleaned up. —Stephen 13:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 18:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


I've certainly heard of "fortean", but it would help to have references for this usage. Eclecticology 09:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I have a subscription to ForteanTimes magazine and read it each month, the word forteana is used throughout the magazine itself and other fortean litrature. It is not usually capitalised, well, unless it is at the start of a scentance ( a quick browse of ForteanTimes site will confirm this :-) --Williamsayers79 07:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Added a quote to the article and external links too. --Williamsayers79 07:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 19:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


RFV is for sense: "Something where one is required to sit." Jeffqyzt 20:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Rubbish sense removed. Other senses added. SemperBlotto 07:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
    Already deleted? Don't all stand up at once; this one's a... DAVilla 00:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I have added bed-sitter as a "see also". Andrew massyn 06:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


Says it is Sanskrit - but is in wrong alphabet. SemperBlotto 07:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I have completely reworked the article, added cites changed the language heading to English and generally fixed. Rfvpassed now. Andrew massyn 07:05, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


Also this one. Says it is an adjective! See also ALL contributions by the same person. All supposed to be Sanskrit (or similar spelling). Some may be encyclopedic. SemperBlotto 07:30, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

It is a Sanskrit word. However, it should be uncapitalized and it is a noun. It means "first guru". Sanskrit spelling is आदि गुरु. --Dijan 14:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I have redirected to uncapitalised spelling, and reworked the definition. Someone else can add the citations. Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 07:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)



There is no language heading. Or part of speech. Is it real? Παρατηρητής

See w:Dayi method. DAVilla 00:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Cleaned up. —Stephen 13:43, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed RfV. DAVilla 01:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


A German bird? It doesn't appear here, or anywhere else I could find. [50] Andrew massyn 18:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm guessing that it came from here: [51], since that duplicates the double hyphen. Other entries there have only a single hyphen, so I'm guessing that's probably a typo. Kurzschwanz translates as "short tail," and Ameisenwürger seems in general to go along with the antshrikes. From the page you cite, the species name (Megastictus margaritatus) lists "Short tail--Ameisenwürger" as the species name and then adds "Synonymously: Perlenwollrücken". "Perlen" is "pearls," and the definition given is pearly antshrike, so it looks like there's at least something going for this one. --Dajagr 21:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it just needed one hyphen removed. Moved to the correct spelling. —Stephen 13:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


Looks protologistic. - TheDaveRoss 20:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


Any takers? SemperBlotto 21:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Zero Google Books and zero Google Groups hits for smete + lidar, or smete +"image analysis", or smete +"imagery analysis". There are straight google hits, but all seem to be referring to the acronym SMETE (Science, Math, Engineering, Technology) or to a smete.org image repository (name based on the previous acronym.) No support. Jeffqyzt 17:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Not in EOD or Websters. Deleted SemperBlotto 16:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


Any takers? Format is bad. Caps? SemperBlotto 17:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Zero Google Books hits. 2 hits in groups, 3 in plain Google, none of which support the definition. For a digital image manipulation term, you'd expect some online hits. Jeffqyzt 17:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
The google hits are for a different Schneider, who is referring to himself with a different meaning. The only other is the wikipedia entry for Patrick Schneider pretending that the term is in use; it is a single contribution from a new user created 3 hours before the en.wikt entry. It is IMHO solely a personal attack, I added the speedy delete tag as well. Robert Ullmann 20:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Deleted. —Stephen 03:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


5th sense: the pot one would use if one didn't feel like going outside to the outhouse --Connel MacKenzie 00:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

The proper term for the description above is chamber pot, a full chamber pot might be considered a honey pot as described below. --Versageek 04:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

A honey pot is a collection of raw sewage or the holding tank of a porta-potty/latrine (the latter seems to be a US military term).. related to honey wagon. -Versageek 01:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I have removed honeypot and added see also honey pot. Andrew massyn 07:32, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


a few google hits, all blogs or forums.. nothing in google books --Versageek 04:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Added to the List of Protologisms and deleted. SemperBlotto 07:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


Is this an English word? Citations please. --Connel MacKenzie 17:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

It's OK. Cited now. Widsith 08:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Rfvpassed. Andrew massyn 07:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)