Talk:wibble
The often unreliable Jargon File claims that this is sometimes used as a pronunciation of www in Web addresses. Equinox ◑ 23:27, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
Sense: "to be overwhelmed by emotion and take on a childish expression with a quivering lips and chin". The definition seems overly specific compared to the more general sense "to wobble" (which I've just added to the entry). I could find uses like "his bottom lip wibbling" and "her chin was wibbling" but these are just examples of the other sense. Einstein2 (talk) 20:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- RFV failed, sense removed Mintprepper (talk) 18:15, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
"(British, programming) Used as the name of a metasyntactic variable."
Just in case there's still anyone on Wiktionary who isn't a programmer: a variable is a named value in a program, like numberOfEmailMessages, and a metasyntactic variable is a placeholder variable name where it doesn't matter what the variable means. There are some traditional ones like foo, bar and baz.
My problem here is that I don't think we could ever attest this in English, nor as a noun. Computer program code is not a human language and does not have (natural) grammar or parts of speech. (If you think you can do it, beyond mentions like "increment wibble by 1", then have at it!) So: should we make it Translingual? No. It's still not human language, and anyway this one is marked as "British": an American or French programmer presumably would not use it. Equinox ◑ 00:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well I added one where it's used as a variable name in a pair of English sentences if that counts... ? I think this might be handled better at RFD, but it seems like foo, bar, baz, foobar, quux are defined similarly atm and are currently justified as placeholder terms, though I'm not convinced at all that metasyntactic variable names are doing the same thing as proper placeholder terms like "blah blah" and "John Q. Public" and the like—my inclination would be to move all of these to an appendix. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 00:36, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- If something is definitionally meaningless, why include it? - TheDaveRoss 17:56, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
- There are loads of examples of terms that are meaningless semantically but are lexically significant because they're used in particular ways, like most interjections. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 11:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Al-Muqanna But in this case literally anything is equally valid. Every letter and likely every double and tripled letter in English will be citable as variables in code or in algebra, but it wouldn't help anyone to include such senses. Interjections are usually at least narrow semantically even if not specific, whereas this has no semantic or lexical specificity. - TheDaveRoss 14:45, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- I agree, hence my suggestion above, I was just responding to the bald idea that we shouldn't include "meaningless" terms. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 14:52, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Al-Muqanna But in this case literally anything is equally valid. Every letter and likely every double and tripled letter in English will be citable as variables in code or in algebra, but it wouldn't help anyone to include such senses. Interjections are usually at least narrow semantically even if not specific, whereas this has no semantic or lexical specificity. - TheDaveRoss 14:45, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- There are loads of examples of terms that are meaningless semantically but are lexically significant because they're used in particular ways, like most interjections. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 11:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
RFV-failed. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 11:35, 7 August 2023 (UTC)