Your recent additions have been deleted because they are not appropriate for Wiktionary. Below is the standard welcome message, which includes links you may find helpful.
Welcome!
Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.
If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:
You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.
Again, welcome! —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:27, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Stop patronising me. Why don't you get acquainted with our policies before getting on your high horse? Per utramque cavernam 20:30, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Boris Johnson said something about women in burkas looking like letterboxes- he was referring to literal letterboxes in that comment. If he said "that hat makes you look stupid" to a certain person, that wouldn't justify adding an entry to stupid with the person's name. Aside from that, you need to show that the word has entered the language as a term independent of reference to Boris Johnson's quote with one or more specific meanings. It may happen, but I don't believe it's happened yet.
Our Criteria for inclusion page says you need to show the term being used to convey meaning in three durably-archived sources spanning at least a year. Normally we would tag if with {{rfv|en}}
and go through the process, but your wording shows that your entry is based solely on a fundamental misunderstanding that invalidates the whole thing, so speedy deletion seems appropriate. Also, your definition is poorly written- even after 19 edits, all of them full of errors. Please try to learn more about how dictionaries work before adding more entries. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:12, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
{{rfd}}
tag- removing any kind of deletion template (including {{rfv}}
) by the person whose edits are nominated for removal is generally perceived as a clear demonstration of bad faith and is a blockable offense (it doesn't help that it was added by a veteran admin). I don't know if you're really editing in bad faith or just acting like it due to not thinking things through, but you're building a fairly strong circumstantial case for bad faith or irresponsibility on your part that could be used by any admin who wants to block you for disruptive edits. Please be more careful and thoughtful in the future. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:04, 3 September 2018 (UTC)I am sorry. I was acting in good faith for this page entry. CrayonS (talk) 17:27, 23 September 2018 (UTC)