Talk:site

site
Architecture meaning. Previously discussed, with consensus to move to rfv? --Connel MacKenzie 19:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I was surprised to see this listed here as I have often seen it used as a verb. But looking for 'cites' it seems to have a bit of a UK bias. Two recent quotes. --Dmol 18:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Fury at plan to site homeless hostel near top Capital school. Scotsman newspaper. (15Dec06)
 * The U.K. government is dusting off an alternative plan to site the center at a military outfit such as Porton Down. (A US website but quoting a Cambridge article)


 * Finally, months after first discussing it with Connel, I have finished citing all noun and verb senses to RFV standard, including a use as "website" antedating OED2+'s first cite for that usage by 8 years. --Eng in ear 22:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

sitelock or site lock
Perhaps not yet attestable per CFI. It's a software security feature that prevents a program from being run on unauthorised Web sites, used e.g. by Flash games that have been developed for one particular site. Equinox ◑ 13:32, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Websites in 1986
I wouldn't have believed such things could survive here for almost 16 years... But in Jan 2007 someone added citations for the "website" meaning in English that include 1986 (when there were no websites in the world) and 1992 (when they were pretty rare thing). One closer look, and 1992 turns out to be 1999; a bit more digging, and 1986 seems to be simply fake. I just don't know, am I missing something? Maybe it was a kind of Easter egg and I've just ruined it? ZwillinG (talk) 09:25, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * First of all, the 1986 date wasn't a hoax: the book was a modern reprint, and Google Books is full of erroroneous publication dates- the metadata in the earlier records, at least, was entered by hand. Also, a particular edition can go through multiple printings, with changes in the publisher's fine print on the first and last pages each time. The person in the edit you linked to is still active, and quite trustworthy. As for errors lasting 16 years: we're still finding things from the earliest days of the site that are pretty obviously wrong once you notice them, but we have millions of entries, and some pages get overlooked. That's why those of us who patrol new edits are pretty strict about dealing with problems as soon as we find them. In this particular case, publication dates on quotes aren't exactly the first thing dictionary editors look at when they work on a page (quotes are hidden by default), and people tend to specialize in particular aspects of the entries. Chuck Entz (talk) 10:12, 20 November 2022 (UTC)