Talk:biotic

RFV discussion: July–August 2021
Rfv-sense "misspelling of ". Added by ; I think the relationship between these words is exactly the opposite, and have added a definition to that effect at the latter entry. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 03:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Blotto stopped being reliable a few years ago. There was a famous cryptic-crossword compiler who started producing crosswords that didn't make any sense. (It's quite hard to spot these because cryptic crosswords are kinda designed to look like nonsense.) Erm. Well I won't finish the story, but I can spot a pattern. Equinox ◑ 06:03, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

I am not a biologist, so I am not at all sure, but I think I may have cited this one. Kiwima (talk) 00:17, 12 July 2021 (UTC)


 * If this is a misspelling the threshold is not three but rather enough to make the misspelling not rare. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 22:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The thing is, is a relatively rare term, so even if biotic is a common misspelling, it still does not occur that often. I don't feel I can make this judgement call on my own. Kiwima (talk) 23:12, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

I am going to call this RFV-passed. If you want to delete it as a rare misspelling, let that decision be made at RFD. Kiwima (talk) 22:36, 7 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Well, the etymology should be split then, I assume? Equinox ◑ 17:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Derived terms, vs. -biotic
It seems some of these should be (and already are) at. Equinox ◑ 17:10, 23 November 2022 (UTC)