Currently interested in hyperspectral imaging & NeRFs.

The Web’s Long Tail

An unspoken truth:

Most people don’t believe they are capable of initiative.

The web is a collection of a few dedicators, go setters and initiators and a long tail of just content consumers and occasional editors. The difference between these people is that some know that their job is to be the designers of the world and not just to copyedit or add the occasional useless noise. The web is a work in progress and herein lies the magic: checkout this conversation below of a group of editors of Wiktionary who are debating whether ‘0-2-2′ should be part of the dictionary or not..

I’m not sure but I think it is not a word for a wiktionary. Contrary we must to have all “words” as 3-5-2, 3-4-3, 3-3-4, 4-3-3 and so on because all of them are “A popular soccer formations”. In any case, it can’t be an “English adverb” –VPliousnine 09:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Keep. Perhaps it should be a noun, but it describes an identifiable thing with a set meaning. There are quite a few combinations of numbers that serve similar functions. This also happens to be a steam locomotive configuration. bd2412 T 14:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Keep. See BD 2-4-1-2 above (I doubt there are more than a dozen loco wheel formations and rather fewer soccer formations, and until you’ve seen the definition of one or two, they are fairly opaque). –Enginear 23:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

For someone with the tag “Enginear” you should know better 😉 There are at least 50 steam locomotive combinations excluding rare ones, and at least a few dozen have names: 4-4-2 is Atlantic … Robert Ullmann 00:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, careless indeed! Thinking back to my steam trainspotting days, I suppose there were about a dozen, and several names, in use in England in 1960 alone, and we didn’t have anything bigger than Pacifics … it’s just it takes a while to blow out the cobwebs before I can get that bit of my brain up to speed. –Enginear 01:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

So… keep. Pedant 02:32, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I count 81. A drop in the bucket for the whole of the dictionary. Let’s collect ’em all. bd2412 T 01:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it’s a small, finite (in practical terms) set, so let’s. To come up with a figure like 81, I guess you still have some reference books, so you’d better lead, and I’ll try to find some good cites. I see that Robert Ullmann helped cite anorakish so he may know more than either of us. ;-D –Enginear 13:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

The point is that it all follows the same principle. Someone sets out with a new article, an entry that has not been defined yet or even a new book, then the community responds and expands the original thought. The risk you take when you remain silent with your ideas is detrimental to all.