Talk:kaumagrapher

RFV discussion: February 2018
Equinox ◑ 13:44, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The correct spelling is kaumographer, which explains why you're having trouble finding cites. Khemehekis (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Right you are! I have moved the entry. A google books search now gives sufficient cites, although none of them seem interesting enough to add to the entry, as they are almost all job listings. Still, I am calling this cited Kiwima (talk) 22:45, 9 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Sweet and smooth. Thank you, Wiktionarians. xx Equinox ◑ 08:58, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You say "cited", but where are the citations? PseudoSkull (talk) 23:41, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As I said,, I didn't transcribe them because they were all boring job listings and similar. However, If if you want to see them, then look at this, and this, and this, and this. Kiwima (talk) 00:23, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't mean to be rude, being the devil's advocate here, because I do indeed appreciate all the work you've done here at RFV, don't get me wrong... But don't single mentions in lists fail to adhere to the use-mention distinction rules? There have been past entries, for instance, for terms that only appeared as definitions in other dictionaries. Wouldn't Wiktionary need more than just lists, i.e. sentences, or sentence fragments at the very least, for a term to suffice? PseudoSkull (talk) 03:45, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * There always seem to be differences of opinion about the use/mention distinction. My take is: a dictionary or a list of words with examples of how they could be used, or an article about the new words that have become current, are all mentions. So a list of phobias, for example, is a mention. Same with those delightful books of venery terms. Even a sentence that uses a word can be a mention, if it is only an example sentence such as you find in a grammar book. A list of things found in a census, however, I would consider a use - it is being used to describe what was found in a census, not just to list possible words. Similarly, a list of job openings, I would consider a use. I'm sure there are people who will disagree with me on this, but for me, the distinction is between a word that is being described (here is a word, here is it's meaning, here is an example of how it could be used), and a word that is being used to convey information (here are the types of flowers I saw today, here are the jobs of people we counted, here are the job openings we have). Kiwima (talk) 05:01, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Those cites are more than enough to verify the existence of the word, since they use it without defining it, and therefore rely on the word being already in people's vocabularies. If there were a question as to the definition, they only show that it's a job (though the last one does support most of the definition by virtue of its context, and would be worth including on the citation page- you would need to include the whole snippet, so it would be too long for the entry). Chuck Entz (talk) 15:44, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

RFV-resolved Kiwima (talk) 20:16, 18 February 2018 (UTC)