Talk:coco

Adjective

"Of a chocolate-like nature. Containing or flavoured like chocolate." I've never heard of this except in the brand name Coco Pops (a chocolate-flavoured cereal). Is it used anywhere in normal English? 86.154.56.36 19:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

You are probably right. Thanks. DCDuring TALK 22:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

RFV discussion

diff

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

Rfv-sense: Adjective "Of a chocolate-like nature. Containing or flavoured like chocolate" Not in any OneLook dictionary. DCDuring TALK 22:52, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Misspelling of (deprecated template usage) cocoa? —Ruakh_TALK 00:38, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Presumably. But that doesn't speed up the process, does it? I don't even now how to use books and scholar for this because so many landscape-oriented tables of data generate false hits, so I couldn't say how "common" a misspelling it was. I'm expecting that few (no?) good cites will materialize in 1-3 months, leading to deletion. If good cites show up, so much the better. DCDuring TALK 01:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't have the time to do this now, but perhaps this link will help.—msh210℠ 17:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

That helps a good deal. "coco" occurs about 11% as often as "cocoa" with the same words in the search at Groups. That leaves us only with the question whether in our arbitrary opinion at this time the facts would make it a "common misspelling" or an "alternative spelling" (both deserving entry) or an "uncommon spelling" (deserving to be excluded). DCDuring TALK 18:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Coco combines as short for coconut (see many of the results at the Google URL I posted above), so the 11% statistic is not a good comparison to cocoa. (That's the main reason I said I don't have time now: that search result requires refining pre-search and/or careful sifting post-search.)—msh210℠ 19:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think very many of the entries were coconut related or spelled "CoCo". Let's say that would reduce the percentage from 11% to 9%. How does that change your thoughts about how it should be presented, if at all ? DCDuring TALK 20:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it's a misspelling; on Google Groups the ratio is around 1:10, but on Google Books it's less than 1:100. As to its commonness, I can't say. —Ruakh_TALK 20:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Would that be the beginnings of an explicit decision rule: very low (<5%) frequency on edited sources (News, books, scholar) => misspelling. Not so low (>10% and greater than 1000 total (on Web and Groups) => "common". Greater than 20% on edited sources => alternative spellings. "Between" areas to be decided on other criteria, like authorities, "judgment"??? DCDuring TALK 01:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. Equinox ◑ 13:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

"Grinning face" etymology

If it's true, why is this sense missing from the Spanish section? Equinox ◑ 18:44, 15 December 2013 (UTC)