User talk:Daniel2501
Add topicLatest comment: 19 years ago by Daniel2501
Hi, welcome to Wiktionary. Follow the links in the "Policies, guidelines, and policy discussions" section of the community portal if you haven't already - these pages will help you with formatting articles, knowing what to include and what to leave out, etc.
You might like to have a look at my reply to your comments on the requests for verification page about the words you added (craptastic, etc).
I hope you become a regular and profilic contributor. — Paul G 16:00, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks Paul.
- It may very well be that this is not a word deserving inclusion. I think that according to my reading of WT:CFI, it does. Thanks :for the engaging discussion! --Daniel 16:11, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- I think you're right that it does, as it seems to be well-established in use on the web, at least, and, as I've already mentioned, it has a few hits on Google Print. I've modified the definition. Could you have a look at it and see what you think? I'm not entirely sure what the definition should be, but you might know better than I do. If you like, could you do "craptacular" in a similar manner? Thanks. — Paul G 16:23, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks so much for your input. Indeed, if I can find some more spare time, I'd like to contribute as much as possible. Although until I improve my skills, my contributions will benefit from some scrutinizing. Thank you for perfecting my definition. I'm still learning about how to write a good entry. Studying the changes you've made has been insightful. I'll do craptacular as soon as I can. In regards to your edits, why "blend" rather than "portmanteau" in the etymology? Is it because the entire word, "crap" is present in the word, untruncated? As far as the definition itself, yours is certainly an improvement. --Daniel 05:39, 17 November 2005 (UTC)