Talk:quejar

aquejar
To clarify, I think sense 1 of quejar: might be an "alternative form" or some such of aquejar:; the DRAE 2001 entry for the relevant sense of quejar just points the reader to the entry for aquejar rather than giving a definition. If someone knows what's up and can confirm that "alternative form" is indeed what's going on, then (s)he is more than welcome to replace the sense line with # . But I don't think it's acceptable to remove information and replace it with. —Ruakh TALK 22:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * This entry had no definition, so I added a cleanup tag. you removed that cleanup tag without adding a definition.  I don't think it's acceptable to remove cleanup tags requesting a definition and replacing it with something that isn't a definition.  Please do not remove the cleanup tag until a definition has been added. --EncycloPetey 23:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I really think that =[[aquejar]] is a fairly decent definition, even for an English dictionary; that's not to say it can't be improved, but seems like overkill. But O.K., the tag is now restored, together with the accurate, useful, and appropriate information that you keep removing. Please stop removing it, until such time as you've got something better to add instead. (Honestly, if it were an anon doing this, I'd have suspected vandalism!) —Ruakh TALK 01:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You're right. If I had seen an anon removing cleanup tags, I might have termed it vandalism.  "Defining" a non-English word with another non-English word is not acceptable on the English Wiktionary. --EncycloPetey 01:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the DRAE does not make clear the meaning of quejar, nor does it inform us whether the "prnl." meanings are restricted to the reflexive form of the verb. The verb aquejar: means "to cause to suffer, afflict", but quejarse: means "to moan, wail, cry out". Does quejar mean one of these, or both? We can't tell from the minimalist way that the DRAE has written its definitions, and to simply point our users at those other entries in apish fashion doesn't help either. --EncycloPetey 02:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, it does inform us whether the "prnl." meanings are restricted to the reflexive form of the verb: they are. (The DRAE uses other notations when the word is used both ways. Specifically, it labels it "intransitive", and ends with "also used as reflexive".) —Ruakh TALK 03:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * In that's the case, then our second definition is flatly wrong. --EncycloPetey 04:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * —Ruakh TALK 04:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * But each time I've made a change, you've undone it. Templating me to fix something myself, when you haven't been allowing me to make changes is kinda silly. --EncycloPetey 08:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, you're right; neither one of us has been so good with the discussing-rather-than-reverting when it comes to this entry.
 * I don't see how our second sense line can possibly be wrong, because all it does is tell our readers to see quejarse:, which is good advice. (Many dictionaries are like the DRAE, not listing reflexive verbs at all, but rather listing reflexive senses of non-reflexive verbs. I think our approach — having an entry for quejarse: — makes more sense than theirs, since quejar: by itself, without the pronoun, doesn't have the various meanings of quejarse:. But we can't assume that all of our readers will understand that, when we bury quejarse: in the "related terms", since in a lot of readers' experience, dictionaries treat quejarse: as the exact same term. And by "dictionaries" I mean even the English Wiktionary's coverage of some languages; About French mandates the DRAE's approach.)
 * You say that our second sense line is wrong; I don't see how. So you'll have to either explain why, or fix it yourself. If you take the latter approach, I promise to restrain myself from wholesale reversion.
 * —Ruakh TALK 13:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Requests for deletion - kept
Kept. See archived discussion of January 2009. 20:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)