Talk:ticket stamping machine

Deletion discussion

The following information passed a request for deletion.

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.

---

automatic ticket stamping machine

ticket stamping machine

Sum of parts, it's basically defined as 'automatic machine which stamps tickets'. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:41, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

• delete both. Definition is obvious. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:43, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
• Delete both. It hardly gets more SoP than this. — Ungoliant ^(Falai) 11:06, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
• Keep as translation target (Non-SOP translations in German and possibly other languages). Matthias Buchmeier (talk) 12:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
  • English translations of such single-word terms terms should be ticket stamping machine (for example). SemperBlotto (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
• Delete per SemperBlotto. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 14:38, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

@Matthias Buchmeier surely we can't keep every possible English multi-word term that in German can be translated as a single word. Certainly your argument is outside of CFI, even WT:CFI#Phrasebook wouldn't allow this sort of entry. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

• Delete "automatic ticket stamping machine"; it has very few hits anyway. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:09, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

ticket stamping machine?

• As regards "ticket stamping machine", I am inclined to keep regardless of CFI. If "ticket stamping machine" is what you would most often call the thing that, when calqued from German, would be called "ticket devaluator" and that looks like the thing in the picture to the right, it seems worth having in a dictionary. Admittedly, “ticket stamping machine”, in OneLook Dictionary Search. finds nothing, yet “washing machine”, in OneLook Dictionary Search. finds a lot of dictionaries, even though it is defined in Wiktionary as "a machine, usually automatic, which washes clothes etc". OTOH, the argument for keeping "washing machine" could be that a machine for washing dishes is not a "washing machine". Using a similar argument, ticket machine would not be a sum of parts, as it is a ticket vending machine. Furthermore, "ticket stamping machine" could be a nice translation target if other languages than the compoundforminglanguage German have a single-word term: French composteur seems to be the case in point. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:09, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

  Let me highlight the advantage of translation targets. Given the question 'how do I say "Entwerter" in French?', a translation target helps you get from the German term to the French one ("composteur"). Given the question 'how do I say "ticket stamping machine" in French?' (assuming it is the most common term referring to the thing in English), a translation target chosen as a common term gets you to the French term. Translation targets are unusual in monolingual dictionaries, but useful in a multilingual dictionary. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, it could be useful, but so could including translation tables for every entry in every language, or full definitions for every inflected form. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Including translation tables for every entry in every language is an option; English Wiktionary has chosen to avoid it. Actually, translation targets is an alternative to that option: if you have translation tables in non-English entries, you do not really need translation targets. Full definitions of every inflected form create a maintenance nightmare, as far as I can see, with very little benefits. Keeping translation targets does not create any maintenance nightmare. I have not seen any convincing argument against translation targets yet, if any argument at all. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:15, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

• I've tried lots of variations on regular Google; "ticket validating machine" and "ticket validation machine" seem to be the most common terms. w:Ticket machine refers to a machine that sells tickets rather than one that (only) validates them. —Angr 21:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

  My search finds this: google:"ticket stamping machine": 109,000 hits; google:"ticket validating machine": 81,100 hits; google:"ticket validation machine": 80,200 hits. In the searches, I have clicked "Next" several times to verify the numbers are stable. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:42, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

• Delete both.​—msh210℠ (talk) 17:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Keep. Presumably, the stamp serves a specific purpose. A parking validator also stamps a ticket, but the purpose is to avoid charge, so it would not be a ticket stamping machine. DAVilla 00:40, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Weak keep, the translations somewhat contradict SoP, the German translation invalidates the ticket, Russian and Ukrainian use a loanword (from French). — This comment was unsigned.

Translations nothing to do with SoP, SoP is within a language, not to do with how one language compares to another. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Deleted automatic ticket stamping machine. Ticket stamping machine is a bit closer and looks like it might pass for no consensus. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:24, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Second term at issue, ticket stamping machine kept for lack of consensus to delete. bd2412 T 20:37, 6 August 2013 (UTC)