Talk:caetera

RFD discussion: January 2018–February 2021

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

caetera

A Spanish particle only used in inter caetera.

What criteria should we use for the inclusion of {{only in}} definitions? Surely we don’t need an entry for every string that only occurs in one or two set phrases. I don’t think it’s likely that someone who comes across inter caetera would consider looking up just caetera in the same way they might look up cuentapropia. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 12:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

• I don't mind if it's deleted. --Gente como tú (talk) 12:54, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
• Keep, as it's a single word in a language which one might run across and want to look up. I don't see why it hurts to have "an entry for every string that only occurs in one or two set phrases"; there surely can't be so many set phrases consisting of words not otherwise used in the language that it will overwhelm the dictionary. In any case, I can certainly imagine myself looking this up. This, that and the other (talk) 00:32, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

  You wouldn’t mind creating omne and hoc due to the existence of et hoc genus omne? Audi, alteram and partem due to audi alteram partem? — Ungoliant ^(falai) 00:43, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

  Not at all. If one doesn't know a language very well it can be difficult to spot set phrases like this. Although before doing so I'd like to be certain that they are in fact English phrases, since both of them lack citations. This, that and the other (talk) 01:09, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

  I sure hope we never go down that road. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 20:14, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

• Delete. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 01:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
• Delete. Phrases like this should use |head=inter caetera and the like to prevent links to the individual words when the individual words aren't words of that language. I think it would be silly to have English entries for déjà and vu that say "used only in déjà vu". —Mahāgaja (formerly Angr) · talk 13:28, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
• Keep. All words, all languages. A beginning learner would look it up. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:39, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
• Redirect to inter caetera. 109.144.214.100 16:43, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

  It can't be hard redirected, because it's a string in another language besides Spanish. It's already a soft redirect. - -sche (discuss) 23:00, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Is inter caetera only used in Spanish, or is it a Latinism used in many languages? If the latter, then there is less argument for having a Spanish (and a French, etc) "only in" at "caetera", and I would rather the Latin entries for "inter" and "caetera" link to a Latin entry "inter caetera". If it's mostly just Spanish that uses "inter caetera", then I think our "only in" at "caetera" pointing to "inter caetera" is OK to keep, but only if somebody creates [[inter caetera]]! It doesn't make sense to point to a page that doesn't exist! If no-one creates [[inter caetera]] or it gets deleted, then delete this. - -sche (discuss) 22:59, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Delete, it looks to me like inter caetera is mostly (only?) used in Spanish when referring to a papal bull. So there would be no reason for either caetera or inter caetera as Spanish entries despite its importance for Spanish and Latin American history. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Delete as Latin rather than Spanish. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 22:38, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Delete. HeliosX (talk) 17:31, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

RFD deleted. I also note that inter caetera doesn't seem to ever have been created.__Gamren (talk) 12:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)