Talk:格納容器
RFV[edit]
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
This entry doesn't look quite right. "Nuclear reactor containment building" is w:ja:原子炉格納容器 in Japanese, but 格納容器 doesn't seem to be used on its own to mean "nuclear containment vessel" as given in the entry. Moreover, the gloss for 格納 in the etyl is given as "nuclear containment", but 格納 (kakunō) just means "storage" and makes no reference to anything nuclear, except by homophony -- the kaku part could be spelled 核, which refers to the nucleus and things nuclear, but 核納 doesn't seem to exist in the sources I've looked at.
Can anyone confirm that this phrase is used in the way the entry describes? -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
- The definition says "containment vessel in a nuclear reactor," which I think is intended to mean "a containment vessel (in a nuclear reactor)". Glova gives: reactor container and containment vessel among other things. The Green Goddess gives "a reactor vessel" and Jim Breen's edict gives "containment vessel (nuclear reactor)". Also, Kotobank gives "原子炉周辺の主要機器を格納する密閉性・耐圧性の高い容器。実際には容器というより建造物" and Weblio gives "何らかのものや機器、物質や設備などを格納している容器、またはそうした設備のこと。「原子炉格納容器」などという具合に使われる". BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 06:13, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you Benjamin, that confirms what I was running into. I'll rework the entry a bit to clarify. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 15:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
- Following Benjamin's comment above and further research, I've reworked the entry to clarify, thereby resolving the RFV issue.
- Done, striking. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:00, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
- This looks much better! One more thing: the second part might be paraphrased as w:containment building. I didn't notice it before, but it maps onto 原子炉格納容器 and seems to fit. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 04:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Glad it suits. :) What do you mean by "the second part"? If you mean 容器, that's a really common word that just means "container", and could apply to a bottle, a bento box, or a freight shipping crate in addition to a containment building. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 04:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I should have been clearer. "Containment facility" in the second part of the definition might be better as "containment building," which could be given a definition on its own. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 19:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Gotcha. Making the change now. (I'll leave the addition of containment building to someone else more versed in adding EN entries.) -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Looks good! I'm glad I didn't make the change; yours is much better BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 21:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Gotcha. Making the change now. (I'll leave the addition of containment building to someone else more versed in adding EN entries.) -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- I should have been clearer. "Containment facility" in the second part of the definition might be better as "containment building," which could be given a definition on its own. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 19:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Glad it suits. :) What do you mean by "the second part"? If you mean 容器, that's a really common word that just means "container", and could apply to a bottle, a bento box, or a freight shipping crate in addition to a containment building. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 04:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- This looks much better! One more thing: the second part might be paraphrased as w:containment building. I didn't notice it before, but it maps onto 原子炉格納容器 and seems to fit. BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 04:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you Benjamin, that confirms what I was running into. I'll rework the entry a bit to clarify. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 15:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)