Talk:soviet

soviet
Adjective sense: "pertaining to a soviet." Seems like just attributive use of the noun? -- Visviva 01:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have provided 3 citations of the comparative use of soviet, some capitalized. They support a different sense. If there is enough evidence for a different sense of the uncapitalized form that truly forms a comparative, then it might be kind to users to keep the attributive sense, both for the distinction and for a kind of etymology. DCDuring TALK 14:18, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have provided 4 quotations with adjectival use that does not seen like attributive use of the uncapitalized form and moved the cites of the capitalized form to Soviet. I think they make a case for keeping the RfD's sense and for some other sense(s). I have added one, but it doesn't reflect all usage. It is tedious to cite because Google's basic search doesn't separate cap from non-cap forms and there are vastly more uses of the capitalized form, used as a noun, used atributively in the same sense as the noun, and used in adjectival senses more distantly derived from the noun or from "Soviet-style". DCDuring TALK 14:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. To me, the citations you added seem like an alternative capitalization of Soviet (and as such worthy of retention).  But I would still argue that the tagged sense be deleted, inasmuch as it is not an adjective.  If this is noted, and it probably should be, it should be as a usage note under the noun.  -- Visviva 00:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't have very strong feelings on the point. My thinking is that, if we have one sense that merits entry (meets CFI), then we may serve our users best by including senses that would not otherwise meet CFI but might confuse the user. If the sense that meets CFI is only an alternative spelling, I don't know. But I have been thinking that we need to include gloss-like entries where possible for links that are targets of alt sp, past of, pre part, etc., unless doing so would be misleading or excessively lengthy. Save'em the clicks, I say. DCDuring TALK 01:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree in principle -- that information should be available on the page -- but think we need to be fairly strict about what actually qualifies as a distinct sense. -- Visviva 01:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


 * We don't yet have enough citations, either. I'll have to try something besides b.g.c. It may just be an alternative spelling, I'm not really sure that it is all that common, although I limited my search to use in comparatives or adverbially modified without quotation marks. DCDuring TALK 03:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete rfd'd sense. No evidence of use except as attributive use of noun. DCDuring TALK 18:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Kept without comment by Stephen G. Brown. —Ruakh TALK 21:00, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Use as a nationality (English)
What about the use as a nationality? Both as a noun and an adjective:
 * "A Soviet scientist has denied being the brains behind Iran's nuclear program, despite U.S. media reports that he helped put Tehran on the..."
 * "“I'm sure that there were Soviets – at least during various points in the Cold War, maybe in later stages – in the Pentagon,” said Dan Goure,..."83.227.185.251 14:52, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That definition is under "Soviet", with a capital S, since it is a proper noun.