Talk:manhood
Latest comment: 3 years ago by The Editor's Apprentice in topic RFV discussion: November 2020
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Sense:
All of the men of a given place, area, or human subgroup regarded collectively.
- Synonym: mankind (exclusively and universally: only synonymous in cases for which women are excluded, and when the meaning of manhood is universal or worldwide)
- Antonyms: womanhood, womankind
- During the Second World War, Russia lost a great percentage of its young manhood, giving rise to a great wave of widowhood in the country.
Tagged by The Editor's Apprentice today, not listed. J3133 (talk) 10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- @J3133:, thanks for setting this up and for the ping. I was a little busy at the time so didn't do so immediately. For the record, please note that these definitions were written by myself, though similar definitions are quite old and for manhood have existed since 2006 where it was based on the definition from womanhood which has existed since the beginning. The reason I tagged these definitions is because I personally have never heard or read either of the terms used in the way defined. If others have, great! —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 17:39, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
- Five quotes which seem to attest to this sense were added by User:68.112.86.146, thanks for that! I would therefore say that this sense has been cited. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 16:43, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hey, fellows, I have added a few more quotes to the sense, which I think should complete the verification of the sense as described. Pleas give feedback in response to this, especially as to removing the verification tag. I was thinking that the sense might have to be listed as "dated", until I encountered the Lenn Goodman quotation. Now, I do not feel so. — This unsigned comment was added by 68.112.86.146 (talk) at 22:35, 19 November 2020 (UTC).
- I think at this point there are plenty of quotations. I will probably prune some of them in the near future since expanding them takes up a large amount of visual space, the most I usually ever seen is five quotations. As to the request for verification (RfV) mark, standard practice is to wait a week after a term's sense has been considered cited without challenge before considering it to have passed the RfV process. More details on this are at the top of this page near the phrase "Closing a request". The Goodman quote does seem show recent usage, though it also seems to stand alone. At this point, I'm not planning to add any qualifiers to the sense. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 01:51, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I was going to suggest removing several of the quotes once verification had been achieved, for the sake of server space, if nothing else. You have done a good job in so doing. This particular sense seems to be less used now than it was in the early 20th century, though still used, perhaps, occasionally. I will try to find one more relatively recent (late 20th or early 21st century) quote for this; I'm sure that there must be some such usages out there, but quotation hunting can be tedious, though strangely enjoyable, work. — This unsigned comment was added by 68.112.86.146 (talk) at 13:42, 20 November 2020 (UTC).
- I hope the excess cites will be at Citations:manhood. DCDuring (talk) 05:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
- @DCDuring I'll go ahead and add them there. Also, the citations have remained uncontested and so the sense has RfV passed. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 18:21, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
- I hope the excess cites will be at Citations:manhood. DCDuring (talk) 05:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I was going to suggest removing several of the quotes once verification had been achieved, for the sake of server space, if nothing else. You have done a good job in so doing. This particular sense seems to be less used now than it was in the early 20th century, though still used, perhaps, occasionally. I will try to find one more relatively recent (late 20th or early 21st century) quote for this; I'm sure that there must be some such usages out there, but quotation hunting can be tedious, though strangely enjoyable, work. — This unsigned comment was added by 68.112.86.146 (talk) at 13:42, 20 November 2020 (UTC).
- I think at this point there are plenty of quotations. I will probably prune some of them in the near future since expanding them takes up a large amount of visual space, the most I usually ever seen is five quotations. As to the request for verification (RfV) mark, standard practice is to wait a week after a term's sense has been considered cited without challenge before considering it to have passed the RfV process. More details on this are at the top of this page near the phrase "Closing a request". The Goodman quote does seem show recent usage, though it also seems to stand alone. At this point, I'm not planning to add any qualifiers to the sense. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 01:51, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hey, fellows, I have added a few more quotes to the sense, which I think should complete the verification of the sense as described. Pleas give feedback in response to this, especially as to removing the verification tag. I was thinking that the sense might have to be listed as "dated", until I encountered the Lenn Goodman quotation. Now, I do not feel so. — This unsigned comment was added by 68.112.86.146 (talk) at 22:35, 19 November 2020 (UTC).
- Five quotes which seem to attest to this sense were added by User:68.112.86.146, thanks for that! I would therefore say that this sense has been cited. —The Editor's Apprentice (talk) 16:43, 19 November 2020 (UTC)