Appendix talk:Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related Terms
Latest comment: 1 year ago by BD2412 in topic Missing words?
Shouldn't all of this be an Appendix, like other glossaries? DCDuring TALK 14:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
- It's not a glossary. It's a list of words (and their definitions) to be either added to the dictionary (if they otherwise meet the CFI) or moved to a glossary. bd2412 T 04:32, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
- The dictionary definition of a glossary is: "a collection of textual glosses or of specialized terms with their meanings". How does this fail to meet that definition? How would you correct that definition? DCDuring TALK 16:02, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that the material here is not appropriate for a glossary, but that the primary purpose of these lists is to find the ones that belong in our main corpus and put them there (i.e., delete them from these lists when adding them to the dictionary). There are also quite a few terms in these lists (for example, echogram and geography) where the definition is really just the common meaning, and has no special meaning for mining requiring its inclusion in such a glossary. I suppose once all the CFI-worthy words are moved out, the whole thing can be moved to appendix space. bd2412 T 19:14, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
- The very same thing can be said of almost all glossaries that are in Appendix space. Appendix space provides a lovely home for them while the process continues and in the always possible situation that the process is neglected and becomes extended or even dies. DCDuring TALK 00:11, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- I see your point. I have no objection to moving these to Appendix space and formatting them for that purpose. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:01, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- If it can be done "easily", please do it. Most glossaries do not have very fine formatting. Separate wikiparagraphs for each term would seem a requirement for the effort to be worthwhile. Some navigation aids would be nice. Anything beyond that is up to you. I am not very good at processing found text material into useful wikipages. DCDuring TALK 15:26, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- BTW, I have taken an interest in my local geology and find the list useful, even in its current condition. I am intrigued by the idea of testing the limits of inclusion of proper nouns by including geological features, such as faults, eg, Cameron's line, which runs within a couple of miles of my house. DCDuring TALK 15:29, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- This will be a fairly substantial undertaking, so I will put aside a block of time this evening to do the moves and formatting. bd2412 T 16:10, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- OTOH, we could live with it as it is. DCDuring TALK 18:26, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- This will be a fairly substantial undertaking, so I will put aside a block of time this evening to do the moves and formatting. bd2412 T 16:10, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- I see your point. I have no objection to moving these to Appendix space and formatting them for that purpose. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:01, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- The very same thing can be said of almost all glossaries that are in Appendix space. Appendix space provides a lovely home for them while the process continues and in the always possible situation that the process is neglected and becomes extended or even dies. DCDuring TALK 00:11, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not saying that the material here is not appropriate for a glossary, but that the primary purpose of these lists is to find the ones that belong in our main corpus and put them there (i.e., delete them from these lists when adding them to the dictionary). There are also quite a few terms in these lists (for example, echogram and geography) where the definition is really just the common meaning, and has no special meaning for mining requiring its inclusion in such a glossary. I suppose once all the CFI-worthy words are moved out, the whole thing can be moved to appendix space. bd2412 T 19:14, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Missing words?[edit]
@BD2412: Both the Wiktionary Appendix as well as the online version at webharvest.gov seem to miss some words that are included in the book form here: https://books.google.com/books?id=b4IAavjDLjEC As an example, take the word arculite. Do you have an idea how that could be? — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 00:07, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- As far I recall (and it has been a while) this is a direct import. bd2412 T 00:46, 30 October 2022 (UTC)