Talk:Old Man Winter

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:Old Man Winter. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:Old Man Winter, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:Old Man Winter in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:Old Man Winter you have here. The definition of the word Talk:Old Man Winter will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:Old Man Winter, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.

Humanization of winter

Latest comment: 7 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion
Apart from the fact there are only two of them, that they cite the first sense (which is unchallenged) and not the second sense (which is challenged). If you define humanization as a synonym of personification then the two senses are identical, which is why I removed the second one, but you've added it back. Quite simply, what distinction are you trying to make? Renard Migrant (talk) 17:51, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Humanize is the root word for Humanization. You requested citations and I gave them to you. Humanization is a correct and accurate definition for "Old Man Winter". Do you want to combine them both into one definition? "Personification and humanization of winter". I can live with that, otherwise the +tag comes down. It is up to you. WritersCramp (talk) 17:58, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
You can't just de-tag it unilaterally without citations. Plus, when there are three citations we need to check which sense they support. Why do you think the rules do not apply to you? Have you read humanize or humanization? Renard Migrant (talk) 18:00, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
I think you will find editing at Wiktionary much more fulfilling by doing your own research and adding the third-citation, rather than just +tag spamming! WritersCramp (talk) 18:02, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
It comes back to which sense of humanize you are referring to, I note that you have so far refuse to answer this question. Renard Migrant (talk) 18:04, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Humanization: to represent as human and Personification: an imaginary person that represents a thing or idea; the practice of representing a thing or idea as a person in art, literature, etc.. Are you able to see the subtle differences between the words? WritersCramp (talk) 18:16, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
You still shouldn't de-tag your own entries when the citations are being disputed. You could read WT:RFV#Old Man Winter where they're discussing it. Renard Migrant (talk) 18:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Having "humanize" in all three citations is bad. I hope some day someone will find better ones. Equinox ◑ 18:51, 26 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

RFV discussion: November–December 2014

Latest comment: 10 years ago24 comments12 people in discussion

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

Rfv-sense: "humanization of winter". Humanization says act of humanizing. Humanize says:

To make human, to give or cause to have the fundamental properties of a human.
To convert into something human or belonging to humans.

I'm very curious for a start to know which of these definitions WritersCramp is referring to. Renard Migrant (talk) 22:56, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Neither. Winter is not something which can be turned into a person, but it can be talked about as if it were a person. personification or anthropomorphization are correct. (And I wonder if anthropomorphization is what was meant in the contested sense.) --Catsidhe (verba, facta) 23:08, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
I'd use personification. It's easier to spell and pronounce than anthropomorphization. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:31, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
To be clear, this sense is supposedly distinct from the "personification of winter" sense, which is also in the entry. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 23:39, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
And what's the difference? --WikiTiki89 23:57, 12 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
A personification is a fictional person which stands in for a non-person: The Grim Reaper is the personification of Death, Neptune is a personification of the sea, Uncle Sam is a personification of the United States of America.
An anthropomorphization is where you describe or treat a non-person as if it were a person. Describing a meteor as "punching" the ground, or a plant as "longing for sunlight". Or else ascribing human motivations: assuming that a cat is sitting on your lap "because she loves me", or a car as "it wants to go faster". In the case of Old Man Winter, I take it back: this is a personification, pure and simple. It ascribes a human persona to a phenomenon, without necessarily saying anything about motivation. --Catsidhe (verba, facta) 00:27, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
The way I learned it, the two things you describe are both personification anyway. --WikiTiki89 20:02, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
I did that and the user undid my edit. Renard Migrant (talk) 12:29, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
I didn't think RfV was for settling content disputes... Purplebackpack89 16:49, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Not quite sure what you mean. I'm disputing the existence of this sense. If you're saying it should be speedily deleted, I've already done that, if I do it again I'm in danger of edit warring. Let me put it another way; if RFV is not for disputing content, what is it for? Renard Migrant (talk) 17:15, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Attesting it. RfV answers the question, "can sources back up this being said?" Content disputes answer the question, "what should be said?" You can have a content dispute between two verifiable definitions. Just because both definitions can be verified doesn't mean both should be kept (meaning, in this case, that sourcing "humanization" will not end the content dispute, and may actually make it worse). Notice the position I've taken on this entry. My position is that "humanization" should be changed to "personification", regardless of whether or not humanization can be sourced. I am saying that on the premise that humanization and personification are enough alike that we only need a definition that deals with one of them, and prefer that of personification. Purplebackpack89 19:57, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
If you look above, my initial concern was non-existence, not redundancy to definition #1. Renard Migrant (talk) 13:35, 15 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • I think the distinction WritersCramp is trying to go for is a distinction between Old Man Winter as a metaphor and Old Man Winter as an actual character in folklore. If so, humanization is not the right word to use. I couldn't find any entries where we make this distinction (so there's no separate sense at Cupid for "Personification of the act of falling in love", no sense at Mars for "Personification of war"), although perhaps we should. Smurrayinchester (talk) 15:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
    I'm not sure how much value is added by having a distinction that most users would not grasp. But, if there are citations to support the distinction and if we can have usage examples that understandably illustrate the distinction, why not give it try? DCDuring TALK 17:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
WritersCramp has added two citations. I think they actually cite a sense of humanize that we lack, which is 'to personify', hence this would be the same as 'personification of winter', which we have and is not challenged. Renard Migrant (talk) 17:44, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Wanting something to be correct is lazy is it? Well I wish you were a bit lazier you might make some correct entries. Still not cited as the citations do not unambiguously support this definition. #3 seems like a mention not a use. Renard Migrant (talk) 18:28, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
I'd say that personification is sufficient to cover all the cites, despite the (non-standard) usage of humanisation in two of them. We don't want to add second definitions to Mother Earth, Mother Nature etc. do we? Dbfirs 14:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Is this going to RFD as redundant or are we still wanting to look for cites first? Renard Migrant (talk) 13:26, 16 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
As Canard has been informed and the three quotations at the definition support using "personification" and "humanization" are not redundant. Thank you WritersCramp (talk) 11:54, 18 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • @WritersCramp Your above post isn't grammatical, and I can't make sense of what you're trying to say.
Past that, the distinction between personification and humanization, as used in the Old Man Winter entry, is completely unclear -- the two senses look entirely redundant. Without any clear distinction, there is zero utility in having two senses listed.
I move to delete the second sense. Whether or not it's citable is entirely beside the point -- as illustrated in the entry, the "humanization" of winter and the "personification" of winter are the same thing. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:48, 19 November 2014 (UTC
To attempt to reach a happy middle ground, I have combined the two definitions into one. Just to clarify how I see it the two definitions for Humanization: to represent as human and Personification: an imaginary person that represents a thing or idea; the practice of representing a thing or idea as a person in art, literature, etc. reflect the differences between the words, which supports the inclusion of both words in the definition. Thanks WritersCramp (talk) 12:09, 20 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
I don't see the difference, using those words, between a humanization of winter and a personification of winter; they both give winter human form, and winter is inherently a thing or idea.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • RFV failed: I see no quotations attesting a "humanization" sense as distinct from a "personification" sense. As per above, avoiding the word "humanization" in the definition and using "personification" seems to be supported by Renard Migrant, Angr, Purplebackpack89, Smurrayinchester, and Dbfirs; I also support this manner of closure. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:51, 6 December 2014 (UTC)Reply


Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia