Jump to content

Talk:List of English-language metaphors

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pbsouthwood (talk | contribs) at 03:53, 18 July 2022 (Inclusion criteria and ordering). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconLinguistics List‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
ListThis article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of English language idioms which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:15, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pingas

The most recent page edit (diff) replaced a square-rigger with a square-pingas. Is it trolling or does the word exist and acutually means anything? TvojaStara (talk) 17:25, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably trolling, I will revert.· · · Peter Southwood (talk): 03:36, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lists

Full disclosure, I am the author of 1001 Metaphors by Crowdsourcing http://www.niquette.com/books/sophmag/1001metaphors.html -- a non-commercial website. As of October 2015, the collection has grown to 3,405 entries and is available pro-bono for students and teachers, authors and essayists worldwide. Paul Niquette (talk) 12:07, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Only a problem if the website is used as a reference. It would not be considered a reliable source. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 03:50, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion criteria and ordering

The page does not appear to have any measurable inclusion criteria, and the listings have no obvious order within the sections.

I suggest:

  • alphabetical order within sections,
  • either a wikilink to an article or article section in which the metaphor is explained, possibly annotated in the list, or
  • a local listing, with explanation, and a reliable source cited
  • no redlinks without a reference
  • the lead should mention the inclusion criteria

· · · Peter Southwood (talk): 03:50, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss