Editing Talk:1940: The Food Size Cycle
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
::The correct plural for ''octopus'' is not ''octopi'', because ''octopus'' is not a Latin word, it is a Greek one. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.163|162.158.154.163]] 15:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Jack Rudd | ::The correct plural for ''octopus'' is not ''octopi'', because ''octopus'' is not a Latin word, it is a Greek one. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.163|162.158.154.163]] 15:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Jack Rudd | ||
:::''Octopuses'' (the most commonly used), ''octopi'' (a misguided Latinisation), and ''octopodes'' (a Greekification) are all acceptable English plurals for ''octopus''. You can't really apply rules to determine whether things are "correct" in language; the only meaningful way in which something can be said to be "correct" is through common usage / understanding. If enough of us decided the plural of ''octopus'' was ''octoplops'', then that would be correct.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.244|141.101.98.244]] 16:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC) | :::''Octopuses'' (the most commonly used), ''octopi'' (a misguided Latinisation), and ''octopodes'' (a Greekification) are all acceptable English plurals for ''octopus''. You can't really apply rules to determine whether things are "correct" in language; the only meaningful way in which something can be said to be "correct" is through common usage / understanding. If enough of us decided the plural of ''octopus'' was ''octoplops'', then that would be correct.[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.244|141.101.98.244]] 16:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
Ah, but what about the slider effect? Mini versions of (in this case burgers) to be served in a collective? --[[User:Thomcat|Thomcat]] ([[User talk:Thomcat|talk]]) 17:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC) | Ah, but what about the slider effect? Mini versions of (in this case burgers) to be served in a collective? --[[User:Thomcat|Thomcat]] ([[User talk:Thomcat|talk]]) 17:01, 10 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
Line 38: | Line 35: | ||
Does this remind anyone of a Hertzsprung–Russell diagram? [[User:Capncanuck|Capncanuck]] ([[User talk:Capncanuck|talk]]) 02:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC) | Does this remind anyone of a Hertzsprung–Russell diagram? [[User:Capncanuck|Capncanuck]] ([[User talk:Capncanuck|talk]]) 02:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
:Yes. It reminds me of a Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, but being inversed. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.188|162.158.88.188]] 13:42, 26 January 2018 (UTC) | :Yes. It reminds me of a Hertzsprung-Russell diagram, but being inversed. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.88.188|162.158.88.188]] 13:42, 26 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
BTW, I find it amusing that this comic came out the next day after a report on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation shrinkflation] of Mondelez chocolates in Europe hit the news here ... --kavol, [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.197|141.101.96.197]] 07:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC) | BTW, I find it amusing that this comic came out the next day after a report on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinkflation shrinkflation] of Mondelez chocolates in Europe hit the news here ... --kavol, [[Special:Contributions/141.101.96.197|141.101.96.197]] 07:57, 11 January 2018 (UTC) |