Talk:Gelbstoff

RFC discussion: December 2017–January 2018

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Gelbstoff

Tagged but not listed. The tagger added the comment "inflection in head line (or else RFV)". I created the German entry but am not a German speaker, so the {{de-noun}} template needs to be properly filled in. Also, the 1875 quotation added by the tagger seems to refer to a different sense of the word. Thanks. — SGconlaw (talk) 20:15, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

OK, I think this has been addressed by 80.133.102.220 and @DTLHS. — SGconlaw (talk) 05:34, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Seems like it needs some more work with respect to the inflection in the headword vs the quote. DTLHS (talk) 06:44, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:46, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Great, thanks! — SGconlaw (talk) 11:11, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

@Sgconlaw, DTLHS, Metaknowledge: IMO the second German sense and the example from 2013 don't fit together:
"mit den komplexen und chemisch nur unvollkommen charakterisierten Gelbstoffen" literally means "with the complex and chemically only incompletely/imperfectly characterised gelbstoffs", with Gelbstoffen being dative plural. But English Gelbstoff/gelbstoff is given as uncountable without having a plural.
Does the quote belong to the first sense? Or is English Gelbstoff/gelbstoff sometimes countable too? Or is the German second sense sometimes countable while the English term is always uncountable? -80.133.107.175 04:22, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Your final guess was correct. The German sense is countable even when the English is not. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:26, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Resolved. — SGconlaw (talk) 02:29, 16 January 2018 (UTC)