10 Results found for "Wiktionary_talk:Votes/2007-10".

Wiktionary talk:Votes/2007-10/Lemma entries/words

Some "fixes": The etymology is for word, not for words: is this from an OE plural, or form an OE singular with a modern plural suffix appended, or what? "Zero, multiple, or an unknown or undisclosed number of distinct units" is too wordy: how about just "Units"? The inflection line (both parts of speech) has the wrong word: word. Instead perhaps have inflection lines (better wikified than I'm writing it, but similar to): words (plural form of (deprecated template usage) word) [[category:English nouns]]; and words (third-person singular simple present form of (deprecated template usage) word) [[category:English verbs]]. (Better yet, use {{en-noun-form|plural|word}}, which will categorize. And link to the translation table on the lemma's page, or something, per my comment on Wiktionary:Votes/2007-10/Lemma entries. —msh210℠ 18:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC) I don't think form-of entries need an etymology section, unless it's somehow different than that of the root word. Synonyms, antonyms, related terms, translations, see also, et cetera are basically the same. What we want is useable information, not regurgitations of the same stuff that's in the main entry. I'm going to put 2 examples after this message. These entries really don't need that much information, but I think to just list the "form of" and nothing else is heinous :-p — [ ric | opiaterein ] — 19:22, 31 October 2007 (UTC)