Talk:colloquy

Why rfv?
The rfv template ominously threatens that this entry may not belong in Wiktionary and that it may be deleted. My question is, why??? Why would the word colloquy not meet Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion??? — Lumbercutter 19:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

colloquy
The present definition is “A formal conversation or conference”. I agree that this word exists, but I’m unsure about the way it is defined. Dictionary.com and the American Heritage Dictionary suggest that there are three distinct senses to this word. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 05:48, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * So add the def.'s, old boy. Then you can become bold boy!  :) -- Thisis0 15:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Done. I’ll leave this for others to cite — I’m off! †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 09:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Moved from hereinafter: Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary states “Colloquy: 1. a conversational exchage; dialogue. 2. a conference.” Admittedly, this is only 2 distinct definitions, but supports the hypothesis that there is more than one. Good work! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ansylhein (talk • contribs) 20:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Found in Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary (1996)
 * I can attest to widespread use of the legal sense. bd2412 T 02:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)