Talk:Scandal

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scandal article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite, and welcoming to new users Assume good faith Do not attack other users For disputes, please see our guideline	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

dicdef[change source]

I disagree with the idea that this article is a dicdef. I think we should give it more time before moving it to wikitionary. The article on en will provide enough reasons for now. However, if simple wiktionary doesn't have an article on this, one needs to be created; but there is one for en. Synergy 20:26, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the {{wiktionary}} template on the page, and as is showed a red link, I thought to myself: "it looks like a wiktionary article, let's move it there". If you can make it less like a wikitionary article and more like a wikipedia article then the {{dicdef}} can be removed (since it wouldn't be a dicdef anymore). --Gwib^-(talk)- 20:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the wiktionary thing was a mistake on my part; I copied the enwiki article header by mistake, which has its own "wiktionary" template. I forgot to remove it. It's up to you whether you want to transwiki it, but I wrote this page as an article rather than a dictionary definition; I don't know about Wiktionary's standards. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:28, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't matter really. If you have time, just provide the needed context to differentiate. Synergy 21:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kk C: --Gwib^-(talk)- 21:46, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]