![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
There were 2 previous comments in the first and third paragraphs questioning the reliability of the sources. However, the reference which includes definitions stated in the Wahrig German Dictionary (references 3 & 4) basically reinforce the other areas. Hopefully this is acceptable, since I didn't see any specific comments in the Talk section regarding the previous source concerns. Yobbo14 ( talk) 16:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
"Schnickelfritz" is generally thought to be German slang that a relative would use as a term of endearment for a child. It roughly translates to "little rascal." This could mean that the word is indeed known in Germany. It is not, though. -- FA2010 ( talk) 18:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the rationale for removing the {{ italic title}} template, I assume that the relevant comment is this one:
There are a few sentences in the Snicklefritz article where the word is not (and should not) be italicised. For each sentence it is clear whether the word should be italicised or not, each sentence giving the context that is needed to determine whether the word should be italicised or not. Without context (as is most often the case for an article title) the "words as words" rationale for italicisation can not be applied.
— User:Francis Schonken 14:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
The places where snicklefritz is not italicized in the article are either direct quotes or the names of fictional characters etc. In all other instances, it is italicized per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC: "Wikipedia prefers italics for phrases in other languages and for isolated foreign words that do not yet have everyday use in non-specialized English".
The only possible context in which to view the title is that of a treatment of the word itself as the article subject – see WP:WORDISSUBJECT. Therefore MOS:WORDSASWORDS also applies to the title and the various mentions of the word snicklefritz within the article. Therefore, I suggest restoring {{ italic title}} to the article. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 21:55, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The title, IMO, probably should be italicized, because it is a foreign word. 68.233.214.74 ( talk) 20:46, 1 May 2017 (UTC) |
Incorrect, the word is *English* dialect or slang: as such this word doesn't exist in any other language, it only exists in English (dialect). As the page is now a mere dictionary definition, apart from some WP:COATRACKing (German ... Schnickschnack ...), we'd need a soft redirect to wikt:snicklefritz. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 08:36, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
References
I've removed a chunk of text that was just a bunch of unsourced, trivial instances of use in various pop cultural works. Per WP:NOTEVERYTHING, "A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject. Verifiable and sourced statements should be treated with appropriate weight." See also WP:TRIVIA. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 17:45, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
There were 2 previous comments in the first and third paragraphs questioning the reliability of the sources. However, the reference which includes definitions stated in the Wahrig German Dictionary (references 3 & 4) basically reinforce the other areas. Hopefully this is acceptable, since I didn't see any specific comments in the Talk section regarding the previous source concerns. Yobbo14 ( talk) 16:04, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
"Schnickelfritz" is generally thought to be German slang that a relative would use as a term of endearment for a child. It roughly translates to "little rascal." This could mean that the word is indeed known in Germany. It is not, though. -- FA2010 ( talk) 18:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the rationale for removing the {{ italic title}} template, I assume that the relevant comment is this one:
There are a few sentences in the Snicklefritz article where the word is not (and should not) be italicised. For each sentence it is clear whether the word should be italicised or not, each sentence giving the context that is needed to determine whether the word should be italicised or not. Without context (as is most often the case for an article title) the "words as words" rationale for italicisation can not be applied.
— User:Francis Schonken 14:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
The places where snicklefritz is not italicized in the article are either direct quotes or the names of fictional characters etc. In all other instances, it is italicized per MOS:FOREIGNITALIC: "Wikipedia prefers italics for phrases in other languages and for isolated foreign words that do not yet have everyday use in non-specialized English".
The only possible context in which to view the title is that of a treatment of the word itself as the article subject – see WP:WORDISSUBJECT. Therefore MOS:WORDSASWORDS also applies to the title and the various mentions of the word snicklefritz within the article. Therefore, I suggest restoring {{ italic title}} to the article. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 21:55, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
The title, IMO, probably should be italicized, because it is a foreign word. 68.233.214.74 ( talk) 20:46, 1 May 2017 (UTC) |
Incorrect, the word is *English* dialect or slang: as such this word doesn't exist in any other language, it only exists in English (dialect). As the page is now a mere dictionary definition, apart from some WP:COATRACKing (German ... Schnickschnack ...), we'd need a soft redirect to wikt:snicklefritz. -- Francis Schonken ( talk) 08:36, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
References
I've removed a chunk of text that was just a bunch of unsourced, trivial instances of use in various pop cultural works. Per WP:NOTEVERYTHING, "A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject. Verifiable and sourced statements should be treated with appropriate weight." See also WP:TRIVIA. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 17:45, 21 April 2017 (UTC)