Talk:binky

RFV discussion
"A high-flying hop of bunnies." Equinox ◑ 01:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * The British Rabbit Council agrees in their 1981 book Rabbits‎:
 * Jumping: An acrobatic jump with a body twist or a leg kick shows that a rabbit is feeling happy and playful. This movement is called a binky.
 * But I'm uncertain whether this qualifies as a use, rather than a mention. --EncycloPetey 02:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This one's slightly better (cf. the "jib" example in CFI)
 * Most house rabbit people have seen their rabbits "binky" or dance as an expression of joy ...
 * And here's a bit better (search for "binkying")
 * There are pictures of people bring their rabbits to their college graduations, to the park and on airplanes; it shows rabbits on beds, on couches and under tables; on desks and in laps; on couches and under tables; there are photos of rabbits in gardens, on desks and in laps; with dogs, with hamsters and with Santa; and yawning, snoozing, flopping, binkying and eating.
 * This one has binkied, but evidently in a somewhat different sense. --dmh 03:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Cited IMHO. As implies, this is also citable as a verb. (But is it just me, or could the definition use work? I initially took "hop of bunnies" to be like "parliament of owls" or "murder of crows".) —Ruakh TALK 19:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

RFV passed. —Ruakh TALK 21:25, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * (Struck my trigger-happy comment.) Okay, there were some mentions, but all quotes have at least one use. I got rid of the mentions in trimming the citations not because they aren't useful but so as to avoid possible copyright issues for quotations that long. DAVilla 12:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think there's any copyright issue there. Even quoting a full-length paragraph is fine, as long as the work that's being quoted from is big enough. These quotations were from full-length books, so there's no problem quoting half a dozen normal-length sentences. Note that Google Snippet View shows much larger sections of books than that. (If you change your mind and decide that they should be trimmed for not being useful, that's a separate question; but copyright alone is not a problem here.) —Ruakh TALK 17:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That said, the 2003 quotation might work better split into two: page 81 (mention-only) can be a reference and page 94 (use) can be a quotation. We can point readers to the reference for a more comprehensive description than is suited to a dictionary definition. What do you think? —Ruakh TALK 17:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)]


 * Can anyone find the original 1948 patent? The furthest back we seem to be able to search in the patent office reports the 1977 patent. Just noting it here that there is likely to be an earlier patent though a direct URL is not yet forthcoming. [[User:118.209.235.73] Feb 2012