Talk:twitter

Tea room discussion
We have a definition of the microblogging sense of the verb. But what do you call an individual "message"? Is that also a "twitter", or maybe a "twit"? It seems to be twittata: in Italian, but I haven't added the noun sense yet. SemperBlotto 10:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe it's a "tweat". Conrad.Irwin 10:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah - we have it as tweet:. Now I'm wondering about twitterati:. SemperBlotto 10:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC


 * Why does this deserve any kinder treatment than all the entries and senses that are summarily deleted as neologisms? DCDuring TALK 11:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Huh? If they have three independent citations in durably-archived media, spanning at least a year, we certainly shouldn't be deleting them, and AFAIK we haven't.  (Possible exception: the exceedingly problematic "santorum".)-- Visviva 11:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, we welcome neologisms; it's only protologisms that get the chop. SemperBlotto 11:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

One who twits
Webster 1913 has a separate noun: "One who twits, or reproaches; an upbraider." I haven't been able to hunt this down among the more common senses. Equinox ◑ 23:18, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Also in Chambers 1908. Equinox ◑ 12:45, 9 September 2018 (UTC)