Talk:weak point

Not just "someone"
The current definition is limited to people's aspects. Can't "weak point" also refer to aspects of things or other animals? E.g.:

One of the weak points of this laptop is the quality of the built-in display.

Gennaro Prota (talk) 11:52, 18 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes, it was too narrow. I reworded it Pious Eterino (talk) 10:21, 20 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Although "something at which [...] something" doesn't sound musical :-). I'll think of an alternative (and also try to keep this in sync with the strong point entry). Gennaro Prota (talk) 09:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC)


 * After some pondering, I just went for forwarding this to weakness: . Please, let me know what you think of that. It would be nice if there were a way, from here, to state which sense of weakness we are referring to. It is currently sense 2, but, of course, the number may change, so I didn't mention it here. When the user visits the target page, the entry of the intended sense is highlighted, but I'm not sure that's enough of a visual clue to signal that only that sense is to be considered. I think the next step would be to make an analogous change to strong point, i.e. to link it to strength (sense 4, currently). Gennaro Prota (talk) 07:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * If youre expecting it to load the definition from the other page, .... no, the software doesnt work that way. All the reader would see after the edit you made is a one-word definition, "weakness". Thats why it was reverted. — Soap — 15:00, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 * How do you know why it was reverted? I asked the person who reverted it and they didn't reply. The rationale for my edit was given in the talk page (which was referred to in the edit summary), whereas they didn't spend one word to explain what they did, even after I asked. And, of course, I didn't expect what you guessed I would be expecting. Gennaro Prota (talk) 14:46, 28 April 2023 (UTC)