Talk:jobber

Requests for verification - failed
Failed. See archived discussion of August 2008. 06:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense: One who engages in Job production. Claimed source of other senses. DCDuring TALK 11:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)


 * RFV failed, sense removed. —Ruakh TALK 00:21, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Third RFV

 * 1)   An entity that jobs stuff

This was tagged a while ago and I can't see a listing for it. - 00:32, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Make something out of it, or delete. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:36, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Failed, and looked like nonsense too. Equinox ◑ 00:53, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Fourth RFV
Rfv-sense: A person or corporation that engages in job production.

Maybe there is a definition that fits what the contributor is thinking, connected with job shop, but at most it is used in special contexts or was only formerly in use. DCDuring TALK 22:36, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If you look at the talk page, this sense was deleted because it failed rfv. To be fair, though, it failed because no one responded- even to say they couldn't find anything. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:43, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If I had (more carefully) looked at the talk page, I would have noticed that you were the one who rfved it last time... Chuck Entz (talk) 01:26, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If I would want to, I could have simply deleted it as it had failed RfV and been restored without citations. I looked around for some citations and/or dictionary mentions, not exhaustively because of all the other senses, without success. To be fair to users, I feel compelled to challenge the sense yet again. There are many plausible-seeming senses that are not attestable. We do not want to introduce outright errors into our much-copied dictionary. Some mistaken English definitions and non-words have lived for centuries, copied from one dictionary to another because they "fill a gap" or are a convenient if imaginary translation. And then there are the fans of antiquarianisms seem to mine old dictionaries to find something to contribute here.
 * A fundamental problem is that we have few business people, engineers, doctors, etc who contribute here, so that we have trouble getting terms from their bailiwicks cited, especially specialized senses of terms of much wider use, like this one. DCDuring TALK 01:33, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * There seem to be enough copyright-expired examples searching on jobber+"job shop" to at the very least cite this as obsolete. I'll see what else I can find. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:39, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * There is evidence that there have been:
 * job/occupational titles called "jobber", but these would differ by industry, if not individual factory.
 * various machines called jobbers
 * rack jobbers
 * in addition to the 3 existing finance and apparel industry senses.
 * The closest I found to the challenged sense were some hints in the woodworking business.
 * We might be able to extend the apparel-industry sense of marketing intermediary to cover the same kind of function in other industries. DCDuring TALK 02:07, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * There are a lot more hits in Google Groups with the same search, but with the quotes on jobber rather than job shop: . Chuck Entz (talk) 03:43, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * There are six hits after restricting to only Usenet and excluding "jobber drill". I am having trouble getting a single sense out of these. I like the sense for miscellaneous thing. I had a girlfriend from Atlanta who referred to many mechanical things as dealy-jobbers. DCDuring TALK  04:20, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * See Category:English placeholder terms. DCDuring TALK 04:31, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I was familiar with the concept, but not the category. I've also heard dealy-jobber, not to mention dealy-bobber/dealybopper, and thingamawhatsit (just to start with). Chuck Entz (talk) 04:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: ~50 edits and 4 RFVs?! Should this cursed entry be protected? — Ungoliant (Falai) 05:28, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, previously failed RFV, it does say do not re-enter without valid citations . Mglovesfun (talk) 13:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)


 * RFV-failed as uncited. - -sche (discuss) 22:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

RFC discussion: January 2018–April 2022
English. RFC sense ‘One who works by the job and recruit other people’. Between the vagueness and the grammar problems I don’t know what this is supposed to mean. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 05:58, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * A jobber is one who's job is to recruit others to work for a company or some other entity, i.e. someone who recruits nurses to work for a travel nursing agency.
 * Thanks for the useful information anon, but please add them as your own on a new line and not inside somebody else's comment. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  11:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Maybe RFV is a better forum for this. OED doesn't support the specificity with which we define this sense. This, that and the other (talk) 10:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * WT:RFVE This, that and the other (talk) 14:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

RFV discussion: April–May 2022
Rfv-sense: One who works by the job (i.e. paid per individual piece of work) and recruits other people. An IP at WT:RFC was convinced this last part is a necessary condition, but I'm not so sure. This, that and the other (talk) 10:52, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Did the IP offer any support?
 * Nope. However, the IP was presumably not the same user who added that wording to the entry in 2014 (how likely is it that someone without a watchlist would watch the page so closely over such a long period of time?), so it seems plausible for it to be accurate. This, that and the other (talk) 01:22, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I always consult other dictionaries using and . I didn't see a definition that had the "recruiter" condition. DCDuring (talk) 04:02, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

cited, but I see no support for the recruitment part of the definition. Kiwima (talk) 02:47, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 02:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)