Talk:candy

Isn't defining it as 'a piece of candy' pointless? Can we not find a better definition? Maybe something closer to the dictionary.com definition of "any of a variety of confections made with sugar, syrup, etc., often combined with chocolate, fruit, nuts, etc."? 86.144.17.239 16:23, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Repeating the entire definition from the previous line is what would be would be pointless. The "a piece of" part is the significant difference between the two senses, not the "candy" part. I suppose one could say "the previous" or "the above" instead of "candy", but this way works, too. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:25, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Just saying "a piece of candy" sounds stupid and not really defining it though. 86.144.17.239 17:48, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Changed to "a piece of confectionery of this kind". Equinox ◑ 18:05, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Dravidian?
I was going to add but the attribution to the Sanskrit verbal root is not even consistent with the etymology given at  which states that a Dravidian origin is most likely. I suppose I'll add the template anyway. 70.172.194.25 06:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)