Talk:skill
Add topicAppearance
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Sgconlaw in topic Template:RQ:Fuller Holy Warre
I can't cite it, but in the UK in the 1980s things that were great/excellent were often referred to as being "skill" (at least by children); so there's an adjective sense, even if it's only school playground slang. Equinox ◑ 20:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- Now cited! Hurrah. Equinox ◑ 22:07, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
RFV
[edit]data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d359d/d359dda1999d5d0d37411ea290446033cfaa3c61" alt=""
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.
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.
Rfv-sense: (On a Call Management System) a setting permitting an extension to receive calls from a particular type of caller, eg, a corporate client.
- Is this actually attestable from independent sources, ie, not just the manual? DCDuring TALK 12:16, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- I work in an industry where this word is used to designate a call routing split (ACD) to specific agents with a particular "skill" in handling a certain type of call volume (caller, inquiry, etc.). It's an industry term. Perhaps it should be labelled as such (?) Leasnam (talk) 14:18, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Is the definition correct? I don't see an exact correspondence between what you describe and the definition given. DCDuring TALK 15:06, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- By extension, yes, ACD splits are commonly referred to simply as "skills", and can therfore also be used to refer to the "setting". The definition is adequate for Wiktionary. The ones I have given above show the evolution of the term, and are less known by those outside the industry. I would leave it as is, or remove it, as it is jargon. Leasnam (talk) 16:04, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- It needs to be understandable by people outside the industry; keep if attested (which is why it is listed here) and clean up so that more people can understand it. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:37, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- I have rewritten the def. Adding citation. Leasnam (talk) 20:28, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
- It needs to be understandable by people outside the industry; keep if attested (which is why it is listed here) and clean up so that more people can understand it. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:37, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- By extension, yes, ACD splits are commonly referred to simply as "skills", and can therfore also be used to refer to the "setting". The definition is adequate for Wiktionary. The ones I have given above show the evolution of the term, and are less known by those outside the industry. I would leave it as is, or remove it, as it is jargon. Leasnam (talk) 16:04, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- Is the definition correct? I don't see an exact correspondence between what you describe and the definition given. DCDuring TALK 15:06, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- I work in an industry where this word is used to designate a call routing split (ACD) to specific agents with a particular "skill" in handling a certain type of call volume (caller, inquiry, etc.). It's an industry term. Perhaps it should be labelled as such (?) Leasnam (talk) 14:18, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
{{look}}
- "A term referring to..." isn't a good start to a definition, unless it's a
{{non-gloss definition}}
. (For example, the definition of "cat" should be "a feline animal...", not "a term referring to a feline animal".) However, I could interpret the two citations as uses of the general sense of "skill" ("capacity to do something well"), so I don't know how to rework the definition. Er... - -sche (discuss) 08:36, 13 October 2012 (UTC)- Removed for now. - -sche (discuss) 07:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
- If there's a way to reword it to make clearer how it differs from the usual meaning of "skill", let's discuss re-adding it with that wording. - -sche (discuss) 07:22, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Template:RQ:Fuller Holy Warre
[edit]- Discussion moved from User talk:Sgconlaw.
This needs more bits, to show stuff at skill Notusbutthem (talk) 10:16, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Notusbutthem: I've updated the quotation. The template was fine and didn't need any adjustment. — SGconlaw (talk) 17:24, 1 March 2022 (UTC)