Talk:state capital
Latest comment: 6 years ago by BD2412 in topic RFD discussion: September 2017–February 2018
The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).
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.
"The capital city of any state, of the United States of America. Usage notes: almost never used to refer to capitals of states other than US States." Not true; often used e.g. of Indian states; so SoP. Equinox ◑ 19:04, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep, but reword: I don't see why this needed to be put up for deletion. It could easily be fixed by rewording the definition and either rewording or abandoning the usage notes. Purplebackpack89 19:48, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Deletion because SoP. If "X Y" can be rephrased "the Y of an X" it's usually straightforward: tractor parts are parts of a tractor; chocolate eaters are eaters of chocolate; a state capital is the capital of a state. But let's not rehash this yet again. Equinox ◑ 21:03, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ironically, because the entry exists, I changed some entries from [[state]] [[capital]] to [[state capital]]. There is also Category:en:State capitals of Brazil as well as Category:en:State capitals of the United States of America. DonnanZ (talk) 20:59, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete as SoP. — SGconlaw (talk) 08:04, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- I would keep this, if only because both (deprecated template usage) state and (deprecated template usage) capital have multiple meanings. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:06, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. SoP. DCDuring (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- IMO not the same. Since when was state a colour? Keep per Semper. DonnanZ (talk) 13:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Adjectives with multiple definitions don't count? How about wall art, kitchen counter, banana box, sofa cushion, craft fair. We could continue to fill this thing up with such entries, if we want make-work. DCDuring (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- And there's harm in that why? If people want to spend their time creating those things, and we have to allow those things to allow clearly-much-more-necessary definitions like "state capital", then I'm for allowing them. Purplebackpack89 14:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Purplebackpack89 It creates illusion about the nature of English, which has all sorts of SoP noun phrases. They are not restricted in meaning, except in context. For example, nothing prevents state capital from being used to indicate a capital letter that appeared depending on a state variable in a program or capital controlled by the state, as in state capitalism. Hell, someone might decide to construct it as term in which capital is a postpositive adjective. DCDuring (talk) 13:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- You know that the possibility of people doing that hurts the case for this being SOP, right? Purplebackpack89 13:46, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- I can't help it if some people's thinking about the purpose of a dictionary is wrong. A dictionary is NOT intended to document all the possible attestable meanings of every possible attestable word combination.
- If there are multiple possible meanings, then one has recourse to the lexicon for the possible meanings of the components, selecting the ones that make sense in context.
- Why do you think the meaning of one combination of component definitions should be singled out? The one of greatest frequency? Do you know of any sources of such information or is your opinion supposed to be sufficient. I realize that you would rather not be limited by facts, let alone the need to gather facts. but that stance does not help us make Wiktionary into a reliable source of lexical information.
- Do dictionary users really need our help in sorting out the relevant, contextual meaning from the various transparent combinations of component meanings? DCDuring (talk) 16:32, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- You know that the possibility of people doing that hurts the case for this being SOP, right? Purplebackpack89 13:46, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Purplebackpack89 It creates illusion about the nature of English, which has all sorts of SoP noun phrases. They are not restricted in meaning, except in context. For example, nothing prevents state capital from being used to indicate a capital letter that appeared depending on a state variable in a program or capital controlled by the state, as in state capitalism. Hell, someone might decide to construct it as term in which capital is a postpositive adjective. DCDuring (talk) 13:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- And there's harm in that why? If people want to spend their time creating those things, and we have to allow those things to allow clearly-much-more-necessary definitions like "state capital", then I'm for allowing them. Purplebackpack89 14:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
- Adjectives with multiple definitions don't count? How about wall art, kitchen counter, banana box, sofa cushion, craft fair. We could continue to fill this thing up with such entries, if we want make-work. DCDuring (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- IMO not the same. Since when was state a colour? Keep per Semper. DonnanZ (talk) 13:21, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete as SOP. As for being U.S.-specific, I suspect state capitol (referring to a building) has a better claim on that than state capital (referring to a city) does. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- I am unsure about this one. On the one hand, it’s a straightforward sum of state and capital. On the other, while you can always understand red + car and brown + leaf given enough context, no amount of context (or geopolitical knowledge) will help you know that a state capital is the capital of a state (“national subdivision”), but not the capital of a state (“sovereign polity”). I could be wrong, but would you answer Jerusalem, the capital of the State of Israel, or Tokyo (State of Japan), when asked for an example of a state capital? The case seems similar to that of fried egg. — Ungoliant (falai) 13:40, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- I probably wouldn't answer Jerusalem or Tokyo when asked for an example of a state capital; but I also wouldn't answer Israel or Japan when asked for an example of a state. As an American, the "national subdivision" sense is so strongly entrenched that the "sovereign polity" sense wouldn't occur to me. But if I were reminded of it, then yes, I would say Jerusalem and Tokyo are also state capitals. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- If more native speakers use state capital the same way as Angr, my vote is delete. — Ungoliant (falai) 14:05, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- I probably wouldn't answer Jerusalem or Tokyo when asked for an example of a state capital; but I also wouldn't answer Israel or Japan when asked for an example of a state. As an American, the "national subdivision" sense is so strongly entrenched that the "sovereign polity" sense wouldn't occur to me. But if I were reminded of it, then yes, I would say Jerusalem and Tokyo are also state capitals. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:46, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- It shouldn't be confused with state capitol either, which is a building (List of state capitols in the United States). DonnanZ (talk) 13:54, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- I looked on Trove - Australia has "state capitals" - so not exclusively a US thing. Also plenty of cites for such as "Tel Aviv Becomes State Capital" - which would be a different sense. I lean towards Keep, with two defs. But very SoP-ish, it cannot be denied.-Sonofcawdrey (talk) 08:43, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. --WikiTiki89 16:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. --Barytonesis (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Abstain: My first instinct was to keep it since "state" may all too easily confuse non-native speakers like me, who may fail to distinguish "state" from "country". But I don't really know. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:08, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
This is a close case, but I see no consensus to delete as revised. Six editors (including the nominator) for deletion, four for keeping, one abstaining. bd2412 T 18:40, 20 February 2018 (UTC)