Contents

Talk:Misnomer

This article was nominated for deletion on 30 December 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Linguistics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Here are some other misnomers that should be included as examples:

• American “Indian”
• “planetary” nebula
• “rare earth” element
• “tidal” wave

I have attempted to make four edits on two topics: agriculture and geography. Two subtopics of these are buckwheat and North Sulawesi. Why these four edits have been reverted? Why there is now new examples without consensus? 2001:448A:11A3:1039:C13F:1A6A:78BB:F566 (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You ignored this hidden text that is clearly visible immediately adjacent to your edit: "BY CONSENSUS, THE NUMBER OF EXAMPLES IS LIMITED. DO NOT ADD NEW ITEMS WITHOUT CONSENSUS." I'm not sure why you think it doesn't apply to you. This is not a list article, so the examples cannot be endless. The few that are in the article now are good examples. There is a longstanding consensus that no new examples should be added to the article without a consensus to add a new example, and addition of a new example requires removing another example that is not as good as the new one. So you have three choices: Discuss any new example here and get a clear consensus to add it, or start a new article "List of misnomers", or stop trying to add new examples. Please abide by the consensus. Sundayclose (talk) 14:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I know. It has been while for a long why is the main reason there is no new examples without consensus. 2001:448A:11A3:1039:C13F:1A6A:78BB:F566 (talk) 15:48, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You knew you weren't supposed to add new examples but you did it anyway??? Don't do it again. And I've already explained why there are no new examples: It's not a list article. Sundayclose (talk) 16:13, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I create a list of misnomers, including graph in pencils is not actually created with graph and buckwheat is not closely related to wheat. Can anybody add more items in this list? 2001:448A:11A1:1A7E:6DA7:58EA:C3:B57E (talk) 06:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Add a section listing examples of geographical misnomers.

• Southwest Papua is a province of Indonesia that occupies the northwest side of Papua unlike what the name suggests.
• Greenland despite its name is more known for its icy climate being located close to the north pole rather than as the name suggests, its greenery.

1204753792 edits (talk) 06:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi this is an update to clarify why: I think these serve as textbook examples of a misnomer, it's not too hard to understand why the name is erroneus, and at least if you know a bit about geography you'd know a little bit about these two places 1204753792 edits (talk) 00:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the not-so-obvious but very common misnomer Spanish slug, Lusitanian slug, Iberian slug (Arion vulgaris) could be added here. 130.238.112.129 (talk) 16:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]