887
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by Wilshire@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] set_secret@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Weird the US slang version comes before the actual definition. Someone needs to edit that Wikipedia article.

Every other dictionary (Including US ones)

gangbang /găng′băng″/

noun

  1. Sexual intercourse forced upon one person by several others in rapid succession.
  2. Sexual intercourse involving several people who select and change partners.
  3. Sexual intercourse involving more than two persons, especially with a high proportion of men.
  4. A street gang attacking random people on the streets and/or committing gang crimes.

intransitive verb

  1. To participate in a gangbang, either consensually or as an aggressor.
  2. To participate in violent gang-related activities.
  3. To subject (someone) to a gangbang.
[-] force@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Whether a term is characteristic of a certain dialect or region isn't generally considered all that much when it comes to order on Wiktionary, unless it's an "obscure" dialect. I contribute a lot to Wiktionary (mainly for languages other than Modern English though) and there are few rules on the specific the order of definitions, it's mostly just common definitions above uncommon definitions (but this isn't even a hard rule).

Editing it to change the order for your reason specifically might be considered vandalism, as it's typical and allowed for entries to be like this and it's common for little disputes like that to cause editing wars (although that's admittedly far more common on Wikipedia, since many Wiktionary contributors are actually linguists and are less controversial).

That being said, someone actually did intentionally move the "gang member" definition above the other one, so there's clearly some sort of difference in opinion.

If you want it changed, the course of action you should take is starting a discussion about it. It's a good way to get a community consensus.

[-] set_secret@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago
[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee -3 points 6 months ago

So let’s be clear here. You’re implying very heavily. Are you actually claiming that this person did this nefarious thing? What are you saying?

[-] force@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

No, not at all. You can easily view the edit history of all Wiktionary pages – 2 years ago, someone put the definitions in the order they are now for a specific reason. This person thinks it should be the other way around, so if they want to change it it'd be best to make a discussion about it. That's the best way to get a community consensus on it. Wiktionary is a collaborative effort, people have different opinions on the specifics of a page, that's why discussions exist and are the go-to for settling differences in views.

[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

Your entire comment reads like a subtle lecture to set_secret about the pitfalls of editing Wiktionary to support his argument in this thread. I think you did that on purpose, because you figured people would interpret it as what it seems to imply.

[-] force@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

What are you talking about, I didn't imply anything I outright said what I meant

this post was submitted on 03 May 2024
887 points (98.8% liked)

News

23301 readers
1135 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS