Talk:fork

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

very incomplete and biased, IMHO.

Who would think of a "forking open source project" before a fork in chess, forking computer process, ...? —User:MFH 21:01, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Shouldn't the reference to Open Source software be removed? Forking of main development projects happens even in propietary software. Perhaps making this more generic would be better.

Is it common practice for wiktionary to have a section for special (industry specific) uses of a word? That type of section would be better for 'Forking' a process oor 'Forking' a source code branch.

— This unsigned comment was added by 81.224.104.157 (talk) at 16:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

(intransitive) go along a fork[edit]

(intransitive) to take one of the branches that a road or river has divided into --Backinstadiums (talk) 11:47, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RFD discussion: April 2020–January 2021[edit]

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

"(geography) Used in the names of some river tributaries. West Fork White River and East Fork White River join together to form the White River of Indiana." I believe this is covered by another sense: "One of the parts into which anything is furcated or divided; a prong; a branch of a stream, a road, etc.; a barbed point, as of an arrow." Also, the challenged definition doesn't actually explain what it means in a river name; it's like saying that "Inc." is used in some company names, without explaining about incorporation. Equinox ◑ 17:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rereading sense 8, it is the actual point or place where the forking occurs, but it doesn't specify whether this is looking upstream or downstream; many rivers have islands in them or deltas at the river mouth where branches are formed. I suspect these are usually called branches but this may differ from river to river. On the other hand, sense 9 refers to the names given to tributaries for perhaps their entire length from source to the place where they converge. This is true of the Ashburton River, even though the tributaries are called branches and not forks; and branch is a synonym of sense 9 but not necessarily of sense 8, which can be compared with a junction. DonnanZ (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rereading Equinox's nomination again, he is saying it's superfluous to sense 7, not sense 8. But I think it should be kept in some form. DonnanZ (talk) 11:07, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Dentonius (my politics | talk) 14:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dentonius: Why? It's pretty annoying to put "keep" on every single thing without any logic or thought at all. Equinox ◑ 07:18, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Equinox: I agree. Personally, I think votes of users who only write the word “keep” on (almost) everything (or “delete” on everything) should be ignored or at least given less weight. J3133 (talk) 08:18, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I've expressed my opinion. What more do you want? I show up when I want to keep something. If I don't think it should be kept, you won't see me. In addition, the onus is on *you*, the person who wants to delete something, to explain yourself. If an entry wasn't deleted summarily for violating whatever policy existed at the time, you need to explain why you think it shouldn't be here. -- Dentonius (my politics | talk) 12:56, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    What is needed and not, is your opinion, which not everyone agrees with, as seen here. J3133 (talk) 14:06, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The way I feel about seeing people write "SOP" or "not dictionary material" again and again is the same way you'd feel about my justifications. There's no value in reading any of that for every single entry. You have your opinion. I have mine. Let's just vote. -- Dentonius (my politics | talk) 14:23, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Pages are not kept or deleted by a mindless algorithm. The purpose of an RFD is to convince an admin to delete a page. Voting keep on what seems like everything and canvassing keep votes makes you less convincing in opposition. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:20, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    You're putting the cart before the horse. Deleting something from this dictionary seems to me like an extraordinary position to take. My position is the default: it ought to remain here because it already is. You all are the ones who need to convince people to delete things. My argument is the entry itself as it exists. In addition, I do not vote keep on everything. I pick what I want to keep and I support that. I don't need to worry about getting anything deleted because there are enough of you people here to prune the dictionary. My purpose here is to keep what I like. Hence, you won't ever see me vote delete until the day comes when the deletionists have all disappeared (That means never). -- Dentonius (my politics | talk) 14:35, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dentonius: Your position of "anything created must stand, and deletion is extraordinary" is obviously absurd, because there is no magical property of created pages that makes them worthwhile. I could create a page called quirkyzoopymonkey and by your logic we should keep it because DELETION BAD. Please use some reasoning. Equinox ◑ 07:37, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Equinox. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 13:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mihia. (But see discussion here). --Kent Dominic (talk) 10:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the rationale given by the nominator. — SGconlaw (talk) 12:42, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, covered by sense "One of the parts into which anything is furcated or divided; a prong; a branch of a stream, a road, etc.; a barbed point, as of an arrow." Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:39, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:fork&oldid=61536396"