Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:userbox. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:userbox, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:userbox in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:userbox you have here. The definition of the word Talk:userbox will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:userbox, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Latest comment: 14 years ago10 comments5 people in discussion
"A simple, standardised box placed on a webpage to indicate the user's proficiencies or preferences." Nothing on Books, and nothing among the English-language Usenet hits that are among first fifty hits at google groups:+userbox.—msh210℠17:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
None of them count. See Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2008-04/WMF jargon, where the decision was "Citations in the context of Wikimedia projects do not count for the purposes of CFI.", and where the vote clearly indicated its purview "include citations from non-WMF material which derive from or are about WMF".—msh210℠18:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
That's a shame. I didn't realise that. I think stuff that's widespread enough to get into published material not published by WMF should count for citation purposes. It's a bit crazy that we're trying to cite something without referring to it directly. I was gonna post a similar message about Tsolyáni which failed in part because the citations actually referred to what the word meant, instead of a 'generic' or 'figurative' meaning. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:07, 27 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
The uses are "dependent" if you want more specific jargon - while it would fit into a glossary about Wikipedia, if it's not used outside the one community, we aren't interested in it (according to CFI which requires "independent"). We should have lots more appendices for different organisation's jargons and a way of linking to them nicely, I do agree. Conrad.Irwin11:03, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply
I think you could argue the same about flush and straight and their poker meanings. Finding citations for these two would be ridiculously easy. Now if you want to find citations that support the senses but without referring to poker, it's impossible, right? See WT:VOTE. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
