Talk:zwavelzuurtjes

Request for verification
I really don't think this word makes any sense. Yes there are "zuurtjes" they are candies like lifesavers. "Zwavelzuurtjes" (little sulfurics acids) sounds like a morbid joke at best. Like candies filled with sulfuric acid. What's next? Kwikzilvertjes? Ones filled with mercury? I know Halloween is coming up but we don't need to teach people how to do these things.

I think this is a good example of protologism-by-template. Can we please stop that practice? I know it increases the article count but is that really all that wiktionary is about? Why not open the door for protologisms proper. They often make more sense than this kind of linguistic pollution. Jcwf 21:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That was not my intention when I created it. I saw that it had not been created, so therefore, I thought that it sounded like a reasonable enough word to have an entry for.  My intention was not to make a sick joke or anything of the sort.  I was just trying to help out. Razorflame 21:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I have changed zwavelzuur to give "no diminutive", since both singular and plural appear to be unattestable. Is this possibly a more widespread problem in Dutch entries?  Should the diminutive in  be switched off by default?  -- Visviva 02:55, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I never thought you were trying to do anything sick, Razorflame: no offence taken. The thing remains that language can be pretty tricky thing, even our own mother tongues at times, even more so one that is not your mother tongue. And yes, Visviva, this problem is more widespread. A default switch off is not a bad idea, but then I suppose a lot of existing words need to be checked. I think it is really a general issue with generation of forms by template. It is so easy to create forms that way that either are never used or even have rather undesired possible meanings. The Dutch diminutive is a particularly tricky one because it can be used for a number of very different things. One is joking or even showing disdain. Turning a word like say, 'funeral' or 'holocaust' into a dim is not advisable, unless you really want people upset. A bit like calling your dog 'holocaust' or so. Jcwf 03:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * And shouldn't the definition of zwavelzuur: be changed to a simple translation i.e. sulfuric acid: (plus sulfur trioxide: if that is real)? SemperBlotto 07:11, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ROFL thanks for the laugh Jcwf. XD There are two problems with your "theory" (and yes, I know you were possibly being sarcastic) though:
 * I doubt people looking to do something like that would be looking up a wiki.
 * They wouldn't learn how to do it anyway unless someone described how to do it in the entry. 50 Xylophone Players talk 22:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Deleted. No evidence of usage meeting CFI. Equinox ◑ 17:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)