Disliking lexicons

Fragment of a discussion from User talk:Leolaursen
Jump to navigation Jump to search
  1. The point of using qualifier, was to avoid categorization.
  2. To my mind nouns and verbs that are homographs, are distinct words, not merely different senses.
  3. I did give a reason. That you think otherwise is simply an indication of us disagreeing.
Leo Laursen – (talk · contribs)13:47, 17 May 2011

There are ways for you to try to solve the conflict that arises from that disagreement, such as either actively requesting new categories that are more precise to your tastes, or passively using only the current ones.

Deliberately denying easy coverage for some highly-used categories is bad, not only because you have to waste some time and a tiny amount of server resources by typing and saving "qualifier|", but also because other people expect to find archaic senses there. In fact, it becomes worse if you don't actually use that category, because you are only denying categorization for everyone else.

Daniel.14:21, 17 May 2011

I actually suspect that the template "qualifier" uses a lot less server resources than any template calling "context", so it's just a minor inconvenience for my self.

You may see it as deliberately denying coverage, but I see it as trying to save users from getting false impressions. As an example pølse ("sausage"), can have a minor sense of "poop", which could be labeled dated, colloquial, humorous, childish, rare, slang and vulgar; but I don't think the term belongs in any of those categories. But as I think childish merits mention I used qualifier. Anybody who thinks differently may edit the page. I just don't want to be responsible for categorization that I don't approve of.

Leo Laursen – (talk · contribs)16:48, 17 May 2011