Wiktionary talk:Semantic relations
This is a very interesting addition. Why was WS:ELE changed to reference it? There does not seem to be consensus that anyone will use the extra breakdowns even if they are correct. On the other hand, synonyms and antonyms are touted in the very first sentence of Main Page.
While the academic value of this page is not questioned, the value of trying to force additional headings onto the community accepted layout format is. --Connel MacKenzie T C 07:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- These new headings are not expected to be widely use. They are more here for completeness and for people that wish to be more specific. Since there are AFAIK no consenus on how to be more specific I saw no real harm in adding the page as well as the link to WS:ELE.
- The reasons that I didn't discussed it first are:
- I don't see this as really controverial. People that disagee with details are welcome to make changes as well as discussing it after the fact.
- It is one thing to go against consenus, it is quite another to decide on your own to fill in the holes. Wiki* projects are primarily about doing and only secondarily about discussing.
- That said I'm very happy that I finally got some reaction. Good or bad. --Patrik Stridvall 09:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Level of "Semantic relations" header
Examples contain level 3 and level 4 headers:
But, in really, level is 4 or 5 are used. Level 5 is used in case of several etymologies (see e.g. Synonyms in lead).
So, examples should be corrected. -- Andrew Krizhanovsky 08:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)