Talk:meitsie
Add topicThis entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Finnish: "selfie"
Nominated on 26 April 2014.
Hekaheka said in April 2014: First internet appearances of meitsie seem to be from January this year, and thus it does not fulfil our "spanning over one year" -criteria
Three quotations are in the entry but they are not from durably archived sources. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:19, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
- Define "durably archived", and explain to me in which sense they are worse than the quotes provided for "selfie". The quotes for meitsie are from the pages of three well-established newspapers. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- If they're print newspapers, they're durably archived. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I remember cases where we have accepted postings from discussion groups. All but one of the current quotes for "selfie" are from non-print sources, one even appears to be a transcript of a radio programme. All three newspapers I quoted are print newspapers but the quotes are from their web pages. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- @User:Hekaheka: The safe core of "permanently recorded media" (WT:ATTEST) is Google books and Usenet. Usenet is a collection of discussion groups. Not any and all discussion groups on the Internet are considered permanently recorded media.
- Can you please format the quotations at meitsie as per WT:ELE, especially providing dates, author, and work title? --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:08, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
- I remember cases where we have accepted postings from discussion groups. All but one of the current quotes for "selfie" are from non-print sources, one even appears to be a transcript of a radio programme. All three newspapers I quoted are print newspapers but the quotes are from their web pages. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- If they're print newspapers, they're durably archived. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:36, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Define "durably archived", and explain to me in which sense they are worse than the quotes provided for "selfie". The quotes for meitsie are from the pages of three well-established newspapers. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Now done, sorry for the delay. --Hekaheka (talk) 15:17, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- @User:Hekaheka It is now apparent that the quotations in meitsie do not meet the "spanning at least a year" requirement of WT:ATTEST. Furthermore, the quotations seem to be mentions, not uses: "Santtu Toivonen has claimed the fatherhood of meitsie. First, he asked for proposals from his Facebook friends. Other suggestions he got included omis, omakas, itsi, itsari, itsukka, meikkis, meitsis, meitzu, peilaus and peilitsu" talks about the word and mentions other words that could have been used instead of that word. Similarly, 'I wonder if "meitsie" will become to primarily mean such self portraits which the speaker doesn't take quite seriously himself…' seems to talk about what the word is going to mean rather than using the word to convey meaning. --Dan Polansky (talk) 22:02, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- This is a new word, still chiefly used in speech and in non-permanently recorded media. Therefore, it is not so odd if majority of permanently recorded uses are from articles that discuss the word itself. I would turn your argument upside down: if media such as the country's leading newspaper (Helsingin Sanomat) and the homepages of the guardian of Finnish language (Kotus) publish an article about it, it is most likely used. Also, 74,000 Google hits and hundreds of hits in picture search for e.g. "meitsie 2015" must count as something. --Hekaheka (talk) 05:25, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Further, you may want to reflect what the word "or" means in our definition of attestation criteria:
- clearly widespread use, or
- use in permanently recorded media, conveying meaning, in at least three independent instances spanning at least a year
- Further, you may want to reflect what the word "or" means in our definition of attestation criteria:
- This is a new word, still chiefly used in speech and in non-permanently recorded media. Therefore, it is not so odd if majority of permanently recorded uses are from articles that discuss the word itself. I would turn your argument upside down: if media such as the country's leading newspaper (Helsingin Sanomat) and the homepages of the guardian of Finnish language (Kotus) publish an article about it, it is most likely used. Also, 74,000 Google hits and hundreds of hits in picture search for e.g. "meitsie 2015" must count as something. --Hekaheka (talk) 05:25, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
--Hekaheka (talk) 05:34, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- In the previous paragraph (including "it is not so odd if majority of permanently recorded uses are from articles that discuss the word itself"), you are arguing against WT:ATTEST, claiming that WT:ATTEST is too strict, right? I am not convinced by the arguments; we should not include emerging neologisms at any and all costs; they should meet WT:ATTEST, IMHO.
- As for clearly widespread use, my position is that "meitsie" is a Finnish neologism that is not in clearly widespread use, and that "clearly widespread use" item of WT:ATTEST is for such obvious cases as "dog" or "city".
- Maybe the hot word lovers (
{{hot word}}
) will come here and arbitrarily declare this to be a hot word, and thereby defy most of attestation requirements (durably archived, used rather than mentioned, spanning a year); I don't know. - One more thing. Citations:meitsie does not get deleted even if this RFV fails. I have copied your quotations there to prevent their accidental lost. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:42, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
@User:Dan Polansky I added three new quotes, which to my understanding will do the job. --Hekaheka (talk) 14:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- The first three quotations in meitsie seems to be uses, not mentions, so they meet this requirement of CFI. I make no comment about their being durably archived. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:58, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
There have been no new comments within a month. Shall i consider this "passed"? --Hekaheka (talk) 07:38, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
- Appears so: RfV passed. --Hekaheka (talk) 17:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)