Talk:userbox

userbox
"A simple, standardised box placed on a webpage to indicate the user's proficiencies or preferences." Nothing on Books, and nothing among the English-language Usenet hits that are among first fifty hits at. &#x200b;—msh210℠ 17:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, it's got three citations now. Equinox ◑ 17:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * None of them count. See Votes/pl-2008-04/WMF jargon, where the decision was "Citations in the context of Wikimedia projects do not count for the purposes of CFI.", and where the vote clearly indicated its purview "include[s] citations from non-WMF material which derive from or are about WMF". &#x200b;—msh210℠ 18:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * But see Votes/pl-2010-06/WMF jargon accepted when it meets CFI. DCDuring TALK 15:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a shame. I didn't realise that. I think stuff that's widespread enough to get into published material not published by WMF should count for citation purposes. It's a bit crazy that we're trying to cite something without referring to it directly. I was gonna post a similar message about Tsolyáni which failed in part because the citations actually referred to what the word meant, instead of a 'generic' or 'figurative' meaning. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:07, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The uses are "dependent" if you want more specific jargon - while it would fit into a glossary about Wikipedia, if it's not used outside the one community, we aren't interested in it (according to CFI which requires "independent"). We should have lots more appendices for different organisation's jargons and a way of linking to them nicely, I do agree. Conrad.Irwin 11:03, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you could argue the same about flush and straight and their poker meanings. Finding citations for these two would be ridiculously easy. Now if you want to find citations that support the senses but without referring to poker, it's impossible, right? See WT:VOTE. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Providing we can accept these citations, this is a pass. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:53, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Votes/pl-2010-06/WMF jargon accepted when it meets CFI seems to settle the matter. DCDuring TALK 15:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Passed. Striking. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 16:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)