User talk:Dollowner69

iDollator
Hi. The sociohistorical context of a topic isn't usually something we want to include in Wiktionary, as it's just supposed to be a dictionary, i.e. clearly and briefly defining what things are. Any other kinds of information might be welcomed at Wikipedia, which is a general-purpose encyclopaedia (though it can be a frustrating bureaucracy in some respects), and indeed we often link to a Wikipedia article on the topic from the Wiktionary entry on a word. In this case, that would be the article at, so you could try adding your information there. Below is some default welcome stuff that might tell you more about Wiktionary. Equinox ◑ 22:29, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Durable archival.
Hi Dollowner69,

You expressed confusion about what sources are "durably archived". Generally, this means published print-matter — books, journals, newspapers, magazines, and so on. We don't accept Web/Internet content, except that (1) a lot of print-matter is accessible online nowadays (through such sites as ), and (2) we do accept postings to Usenet newsgroups (which you can search for via, though that also pulls up some non-Usenet forums, which don't count).

By the way, you used the phrase "google searches which produced 4,950 results", but there's no way to know that. Google makes up its counts on the spot, and they bear little relation to reality. According to http://www.google.com/search?q=%22idollator%22&start=180, there are only 170 results; but that, while likely to be a closer estimate (since it's based on actual results that Google found, rather than its crazy heuristic overestimates), is still not very reliable: it's likely to be an underestimate.

—Ruakh TALK 22:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)