Talk:-gry puzzle/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about -gry puzzle. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Frustrating riddle

Section title added. —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 16:14, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

This is the answer to a frustrating riddle (as most riddles are before they are solved). "There are three words in the English language that end in "gry". ONE is angry and the other is hungry. Everyone knows what the third ONE means and what it stands for. Everyone uses them everyday, and if you listened very carefully, I've given you the third word."

I wouldn't say that the word "Gry" is known by everyone, and used everyday. Neolux 22:21, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Answer: "language".

Eh? That makes no sense at all. How's it related to the other 2 words? Evercat 22:29, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

the phrase "the English language" has three words in it. The third word is "language". It is a play on words and basically one of those trick riddles.

But how do angry and hungry fit into it? It seems this riddle would work just as well with any 2 words. Evercat 22:43, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Also, how can this possibly be shortened to "Name three commonly used English words that end in 'Gry'."? Evercat 22:45, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I rather like 'gryphon' as the proper solution. All one needs accept is that the word 'ends' is meant more in terms of, say, bookends (which are present on both sides) instead of taking a fourth-dimensional beginning->end view of things.

-Jabberwocky, 21 Jan, 2007

Good point – I’ve added a note to that effect: either end.

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 08:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Alright then, that makes more sense now. It's almost too funny that it's allegedly librarians who are most vexed by this, given that I too work in a library. :-) Evercat 23:09, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Ask someone at the reference desk (and duck) <G> It's a very annoying riddle. -- Someone else 23:11, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I think my edit is right third word is age just think about that Chandel Deepak (talk) 19:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Large edit by anonymous user

Please don't delete large blocks of text (especially anonymously).

This has been done again on Sep 20, 2007. The excuse is that the material removed is "stupid" and "unattributed." The first adjective is pejorative but the second requires a brief comment. People seriously questioning whether the removed versions exist can satisfy their curiosity with a Web search. Since this is the most popular word puzzle in the last thirty years, such a search will turn up hits in newsgroups, on Web pages, in books, and in magazines. After performing this search, the person questioning the reference can insert a citation into the article if said person feels it should be there. The practice of simply deleting "unattributed" passages if consistently applied will decimate Wikipedia. Canon 13:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Unit of measurement

"Gry is an obsolete unit of measurement, equal to one tenth of a line, which is in turn one twelfth of an inch. Hence, a gry is 120th of an inch, or 211.66 micrometres, presuming international inches are used."

I doubt that "obsolete" is the correct terminology here. Can whoever added it cite any sources? It seems more likely that this is a recent neologism, a non-serious coinage made with the "gry puzzle" in mind. Maybe it was applied half-seriously to some dot-matrix printer resolutions or something like that, but not something that ever rose to the level of any significant actual usage? Gene Nygaard 13:08, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

John Locke's proposed use of gry was unsuccessful, but it was neither recent nor non-serious. It predates this puzzle by well over a century. Cited here: See http://oll.libertyfund.org/Texts/Locke0154/Works/0128-02_Bk.html JOHN LOCKE, THE WORKS OF JOHN LOCKE IN NINE VOLUMES (1824) VOL II: OF HUMAN UNDERSTANDING (PART 2), ELEMENTS OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY, AND OTHER WRITINGS

...A gry is 1/10 of a line, a line 1/10 of an inch, 
an inch 1/10 of a philosophical foot, a philosophical foot ⅓ of a pendulum, whose diadroms, 
in the latitude of 45 degrees, are each equal to one second of time, or 1/60 of a minute. 
I have affectedly made use of this measure here, and the parts of it, under a decimal division, 
with names to them; because, I think, it would be of general convenience, that this should 
be the common measure, in the commonwealth of letters...

. Hope this helps. jg 11:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Trick Answers

I don't deem myself established enough here to actually edit the article, so I'll post here. In trick version one, the word stated is 'agree'. But 'pedigree' (and probably other words) also hold here. In trick version two (which I rather like), 'energy' is stated, but I thought of 'metallurgy'& 'lethargy'. Of course, one might argue that 'pedigree' and 'metallurgy' aren't words that everyone knows, but I'd put them on par with 'gryphon'...

I have an allergy to questions like this. 142.151.169.167 23:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I have an orgy to questions like this? Anyway orgy's another one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.25.79 (talk) 21:04, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Orgy isn't an answer, it ends in rgy, could have also picked clergy, whats on your mind? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.20.32.128 (talk) 05:20, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Proposed History

The version cited (which is essentially the same as the eighth in the list of alternate versions) was first published in the late 1990s whereas the puzzle is known to have originated in the mid 1970s, so how could it have been the origin of the puzzle? Canon 02:47, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Canon: I didn't see version #8. Did someone erase it, too? The explanation I found and copied in makes the most sense. "Language" is a common word, it is mentioned in the puzzle, and we have has a long history of other attention-diverting riddles. Ted Pack 12:29, 25 Mar 2006

The "language" version is the eighth in the list of alternate versions but it is numbered "1" because it is the first in the list of meta puzzles. Sorry for the confusion. I agree that there are many puzzles that are based on the tricks used in the meta puzzle list. However we can see that the -gry puzzle did not arise in that way, because the "language" version did not appear until the 1990s while the -gry puzzle was popular in the 1970s. All of the alternate versions have proponents, people who claim them to be the original versions. To find the real origin of the puzzle, you need to find the first occurrence in time of the puzzle, which is what I have done, and I've given the documentary evidence in this article. If anyone can find a version that predates March 1975, let them come forward. The evidence that this will not happen is that the letters to Merriam Webster started at that time and have been continuous since then. Canon 21:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Another proposed history

I have removed the proposed history below from the main article, because it is known that the puzzle in it's current form originated in 1975 (over 30 years ago) as is explained in the main article. This newer version is listed in the main article as the first in the meta-puzzle section:

Here is the riddle in its original form (going back about 20 years):

"Think of words ending in -GRY. Angry and hungry are two of them. There are only three words in the English language. What is the third word? The word is something that everyone uses every day. If you have listened carefully, I have already told you what it is."

In its proper, original form, the first two sentences have absolutely nothing to do with the question: "Think of words ending in -GRY. Angry and hungry are two of them." Ignore those two sentences. They are there only to throw you off course. (And it worked, didn't it?) What's left is the actual riddle itself: "There are only three words in the English language. What is the third word? The word is something that everyone uses every day. If you have listened carefully, I have already told you what it is." The key is the phrase "the English language." In this three-word phrase, the third word is simply the word "language." Get it? "Language" is definitely something that "everyone uses every day"! Without that quirky little twist, the puzzle would be just another trivia question, not a riddle.

You might be tempted to say something like: "That can't be the right answer. It's too stupid!" Hey, remember that most riddles ARE "stupid." For example, there's an old riddle which asks: "What is Bozo the Clown's middle name?" (The answer is "the." Now THAT'S "stupid"!)

Canon 16:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

alleged copyvio

This article is derived from the rec.puzzles archive entry http://rec-puzzles.org/index.php?Gry which predates http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxwordse.html and is in the public domain. Canon 00:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

There is no evidence that that's public domain. Also, the section is pretty useless with all the words listed there like "power-hungry". I like my version better. Ashibaka tock 15:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Rec.puzzles is a Usenet newsgroup. Posting to Usenet means intentionally releasing the posting to the public domain. The problem with the shorter version of the list is that it invites people to add words to it, as can be seen from the history of this article. The longer list is also intrinsically interesting because it contains many words that are hard to find. I agree that in general we do not want to clutter up Wikipedia with lists like "all the words that contain the vowels once in any order" because these lists can readily be found elsewhere and if not they can be created easily by scanning a word list by computer. However, this list of words ending in "gry" was not assembled that way; it was assembled by concerted human effort scanning many obscure sources and required decades to produce. Since the "-gry" puzzle has been the most frequently asked word puzzle for over thirty years, the list is notable and it is appropriate that it be included in Wikipedia. Canon 14:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

"Posting to Usenet means intentionally releasing the posting to the public domain." Oh, this is your reasoning? Well, that's flat-out wrong, so I'm afraid I'll have to remove the copyvio. Ashibaka tock 23:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're arguing here. If you're saying that posting to Usenet does not automatically release copyright, then you are right. You cannot post copyrighted material on Usenet (e.g., a song or a movie) and thereby remove the copyright. However, original postings to Usenet are certainly put in the public domain, because the whole idea of Usenet is to release material to be copied freely by anyone who wants to. This is why Usenet postings can be legally copied from computer to computer, collected into archives, distributed on CD-ROMs, and put onto Web sites (like Wikipedia). Actually, in this case the situation is even clearer because the original posting to rec.puzzles contained only 100 "-gry" words. When I authored this article I added to that list with the results of recent research. Even the original posting to rec.puzzles was collected together from other previous lists. No one person could claim copyright even if they wanted to. The list quite clearly is in the public domain. So I'm going to put the list back, and if you still disagree, I suggest that rather than unilaterally deleting material you escalate the issue using normal WP procedures. I see that you're a sysop so you know what those are. Canon 04:17, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Anticipating a dispute on this issue, here are my arguments for keeping the list in the article. This may repeat some of the arguments above, for which I apologize, but it's probably a good idea to have all the reasons in one place.

First, the list is worthy of being in Wikipedia. The "-gry" puzzle is the most frequently asked word puzzle. It first arose in 1975 and has been around ever since. Rec.puzzles regulars coined the word "nugry" to describe a newbie who asks a FAQ. It is a standing joke on the Stumpers reference librarian list that it's time to change your car's oil when it is posted again on that list. Merriam-Webster receives about four letters a year asking the question, by far the most commonly asked question. I've been editing the rec.puzzles archives for twenty years and I know of no other puzzle that has generated as much interest, and as many alternative versions, as this puzzle. The list of 130 words in the Wikipedia article was composed originally for the article, extracted from 30 years of research in obscure reference sources looking for words and names ending in "-gry." My experience is that if you publish a shorter list, people just add words to it until it approaches this list anyway, and unfortunately many of the words added are incorrect, so publishing the whole, correct list is a defensive move to save editorial time.

Second, the list can legally be included. I published a 94-word version of the list in rec.puzzles in 1992 and I think that list is in the public domain. That list has been extensively copied and edited, into other Usenet postings, onto Web sites, into books, on CD-ROMs, etc. The specific 130 word list in this article is original to this article. I think it clearly is legal to put Usenet postings into other media, and in particular Web sites, and I'm not alone in that opinion. Google, for example, offers Google Groups that does just that. Fortunately I don't need to argue this in this case, however, since I'm the author of the original 1992 94-word version of the list and of the 130-word version in this article. And if they were not already in the public domain, I now positively affirm that they are in the public domain now. Canon 11:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Usenet is not a public domain resource-- there's no legal cause for that-- and Google is taking a risk by posting its entire archives online. But since this is your list, it absolutely makes sense to publish it here. Thanks. Ashibaka tock 22:57, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

The courts have repeatedly found that Usenet is a public domain resource, unless copyright is asserted in the posting or the posting of the material is itself a copyright violation (both of which are rare occurrences). Here is a recent case involving Google specifically:

Parker v. Google, Inc., 422 F. Supp. 2d 492, 499 (D. Pa. 2006) ("USENET postings" not a registered work as required by the Copyright Act).

Outside of the USENET context, myriad cases could be cited for the proposition that a published work falls into the public domain unless published with the requisite copyright notice. See for example:

Letter Edged in Black Press, Inc. v. Public Bldg. Com., 320 F. Supp. 1303, 1309 (D. Ill. 1970) (An author is not allowed to publish a work and then after a period of time has elapsed choose to invoke statutory copyright protection. If the statutory protection is not acquired at the time of publication by appropriate notice, the work is lost to the public domain).

It concerns me that Ashibaka as a sysop would not be aware of this, since this is well known to old Internet hands like myself. Is there somewhere I should go on Wikipedia to straighten out the youngsters? Canon 19:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the reason I haven't heard of this is because Parker v. Google dealt with automatic caches and not republication, and Letter Edged etc. was obsoleted by the Copyright Act of 1976. Ashibaka tock 23:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The Berne convention (and the Copyright Act of 1976) did switch the default for a published work with no copyright notice from uncopyrighted to copyrighted, but it did not do this for Usenet postings, which is why the Parker case is relevant. I agree that Google in the Parker case makes much use of DMCA, but of course that is just conservative lawyering; a careful reading shows that the passage quoted is not referring to a DMCA safe harbor. No court has ever ruled, nor will it ever rule, that unmarked Usenet postings are copyrighted. This is because such a ruling would be contrary to public policy. The fine line that can been drawn is that as defined in the Copyright Act Usenet postings have no economic motivation and hence are not "published" in the sense of the Act. It is easy to verify that this is indeed the case, since there are no rulings to the contrary despite decades of litigation. Canon 17:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. Does the same thing go for posts on non-Usenet Internet forums? How about just posting content on the Internet in general? Ashibaka tock 01:15, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

No. The fine line does not extend to all forms of Web publication, because, first, the Web does not predate the Berne convention, and second, the Web is advertising supported, hence it has economic motivation. This may seem arbitrary, but as an old law professor once explained, "the law is the process of drawing lines where none exist." There are many cases where post-Berne copyright has been enforced on the Web. Canon 13:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no fine line. Usenet postings are under copyright just like everything else. The only source you claim says otherwise is your rather liberal interpretation of a law that dealt with caches and not republishing. Since Google and others also cache websites, if your same reasoning were applied equally then no website is copyrighted either, and we know that's not true. DreamGuy (talk) 16:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

In the case of this article this is a moot point because the author of the original list has given permission to include it and others has extensively revised it.Canon (talk) 18:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The Value of a List

I value the inclusion of a comprehensive list of words and sources. The words are of far greater interest to me than the versions of the puzzle.

For what it's worth, most of the list of -gry words in the article, as well as most of the sources, originally appeared in the article "In Goodly Gree," by George H. Scheetz. In addition, Scheetz used the shorthand version of citing sources that was carried over to the Usenet and Wikipedia.

The one flaw in the list, from my perspective, is the title. All of the words (and names) are not obsolete. I propose a simpler title: "Words and Names that End in -Gry." Any comments (before I edit the article)?

I think it is very appropriate to add newly discovered words and names to the list, in order to make the article in Wikipedia the most comprehensive source of information on -gry words. In the near future, I will be adding several names to the list.

PlaysInPeoria 20:57, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the word "obsolete" is at least debatable and probably pejorative. On the other hand, I think some qualifier should be added to the title of the list, in order to alert the unwary that these words are not in any currently published general English language dictionary. This suggests that the list be titled "Non-dictionary Words and Names that End in -Gry." Canon 00:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The OED might take issue with your insinuation that it is not a "currently published general English language dictionary." :-) Nonetheless, I agree with your point vis-à-vis a qualifier, and hasten to point out that the list includes at least two common words (and several names) that are in current use.

As an aside, I am a librarian (and a logologist) who enjoys the challenge of compiling such lists.

Perhaps the list should be titled "Words (Current and Archaic) and Names that End in -Gry," though most of the words are not common. As another idea, perhaps the title should be straightforward ("Words and Names that End in -Gry") with a subtitle that could serve as a qualifying note, such as "A list of words and names, many of which are obsolete, archaic, or simply uncommon."

PlaysInPeoria 15:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Compound Names and Other Curiosities

I just added a great number of new (to the list) names that end in -gry, including several compound names.

I considered whether it was appropriate to include compound names and finally did so for two reasons: (1) at heart, I am a completist, and (2) I believe that two names with a shared element (such as "York" and "New York" or "Sioux City" and "South Sioux City") are truly different names. (It helps if the names refer to different places, as well.)

However, I did not include any particular name more than one time if it was spelled exactly the same and not part of a compound name. For example, there are several populated places named Bugry, but that name only appears as a main entry in the list one time.

In a few instances, two names differ only because of a diacritical mark. At this point, I created a new main entry for such names, primarily because the original sources used the variant spellings. Upon further research, if the names refer to the same place, then I believe the entries should be combined.

In a few entries, it appears that words and nouns with the same spelling (except for the capital letter, of course) have been combined into one entry without distinction. In other instances, there are two entries, one for the word and one for the name (proper noun). Some clean-up work is needed.

Here is the rule of thumb I tend to follow: If two entries (such as the same word with different meanings or used in different parts of speech) would be combined into one entry in a standard dictionary, then I would favor a single entry in the list. If, however, two entries (such as a word and a name) would appear separately in a standard dictionary, I would favor two entries in the list.

Another variation of this idea is found in the word "gry," which appears in the list in two separate entries, apparently because the origins (etymologies) of the two words are completely different. In such a case, I favor using two main entries.

PlaysInPeoria 16:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

In the list, I just changed the bullets to numbers, for ease of counting the number of entries.

In addition, I created a main entry for duplicate (or similar) spellings and clustered the variations as subordinate entries. I am interested in feedback on this solution.

PlaysInPeoria 17:48, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

My suggestion is somewhat radical, but this list is long enough now that I think a simple alphabetical listing is inadequate. I would recommend classifying the list into at least three groups: words, place names, and other names. Canon 00:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I like thinking outside the box! In playing with the idea of a subject classification, I found two (perhaps) significant negative results: (1) words and names that are spelled the same ended up in different lists, and (2) a reader seeking a particular word or name (for whatever purpose) would need to review all three lists. I consider the latter issue of greater importance than the former, because the list of words is more important to me than the puzzle itself, though I find both interesting. Therefore, I concluded that one alphabetical list (like a dictionary) is easier to use and, perhaps more important, maintain. PlaysInPeoria 00:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Title of Article?

I suggest changing the title of the article from "Gry" to "-gry" (or "-Gry"), which more accurately reflects the subject matter and relates better to "Gry (Disambiguation)," which refers to this article as "-gry." Another option might be to change the title to "The -Gry Puzzle." PlaysInPeoria 00:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I second that motion. Canon

I moved the page to -gry, but can move it back if there are any objections. Jason Smith 07:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I too approve of the move, but perhaps moving it to "-gry" (lowercase) would be even better? After all, the reference is to a suffix. SnowFire 16:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion of word list in article

For ease of reference I have extracted the argument for including the word list from the above discussion. If this were a print publication I might also suggest that the word list be shortened by putting more than one word on a line. However, I'm not sure that consideration is relevant for Wikipedia.

The list is worthy of being in Wikipedia. The "-gry" puzzle is the most frequently asked word puzzle. It first arose in 1975 and has been around ever since. Rec.puzzles regulars coined the word "nugry" to describe a newbie who asks a FAQ. It is a standing joke on the Stumpers reference librarian list that it's time to change your car's oil when it is posted again on that list. Merriam-Webster receives about four letters a year asking the question, by far the most commonly asked question. I've been editing the rec.puzzles archives for twenty years and I know of no other puzzle that has generated as much interest, and as many alternative versions, as this puzzle. The list of words in the Wikipedia article was composed originally for the article, extracted from 30 years of research in obscure reference sources looking for words and names ending in "-gry." My experience is that if you publish a shorter list, people just add words to it until it approaches this list anyway, and unfortunately many of the words added are incorrect, so publishing the whole, correct list is a defensive move to save editorial time.

Canon 16:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Broken link

The link, "comprehensive list", in the first paragraph of the article is broken. There appears to be a problem related to the case of the letters in the link. D021317c 17:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

It scrolls to the list later in the article. Canon 18:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup

I'll delete the "cleanup" tag and await the details of what needs to be cleaned up here. Note the discussions above about the reasons for including the word list. Canon 17:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It was because of the references and sources, the sections are ugly as they are. Why not use <ref> tags and the like? But since you mentioned the word list, it could use trimming. Perhaps include a link to an off-site location? 172 entries is a bit much. Sazielt c 21:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

In the history of this article, the list has been deleted at various times and immediately thereafter people begin to add it back piecemeal, without references, with misspellings, and so on. It is safe to conclude that a great many readers of this encycloedia think that this article should include the list. AFAIK there is no way (yet) to allow annotated references such as are used in the list. Canon 22:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Footnotes, then? Sazielt c 13:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

What we need is a way to annotate a footnote, e.g., [OED (see "sado-masochism")], so that we have only one footnote for the OED. Canon 14:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

How about using a superscript for the "see" part? Sazielt c 18:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Like this? affect-hungry ^[1]^{(see "sado-masochism")}

^ The Oxford English Dictionary. 1933

Does this seem clearer to you?

Scrabble official -gry word

FYI: There is only one obscure -gry word in the Official Tournament and Club Word List 2006 edition (TWL06, the current standard for word games like Scrabble in North America et al): puggry. This is not noted in the article, but may be interesting to some. -- Adam Katz 19:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Does TWL06 include "ahungry"? Canon 21:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

No. angry, hungry, puggry, and nothing else. -- Adam Katz Δ talk 19:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

filagry

What about the word "filagry", if you look it, up its a type of jewel and the word is used fairly commonly ?

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=filagry&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

13:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)122.107.228.81 (talk)Nik 23/4/08

This is a mispelling of the word "filigree." The Google count for "filagry" is 67, whereas the Google count for "filigree" is about 4 million. Canon (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

There Is a word

The third one for gry would be Orgy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.34.224 (talk) 20:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

That is the same trick as number 2 in -gry#Trick versions. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

"Orgy" does not end in "gry". 2A00:23C5:FE0C:2100:9DA6:F25E:43A3:A54D (talk) 21:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Alternative versions

The alternative versions have been published in secondary sources that satisfy WP:RS such as the "Wordplay" book. Canon (talk) 18:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

A book from a reputable publisher would be a reliable source, yes. But restoring links to random websites by any old person off the street is not justified.

Beyond that, random USENET postings do not count as reliable sources either. *ANyone* can post to Usenet, so citing an archived posting there is no better than saying you heard it off the street. Unless you get a real source for the ones that are currently only cited that way those will have to go. DreamGuy (talk) 16:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The USENET postings are prima facie evidence that these alternative versions of the puzzle exist. The book referenced documents these alternative versions in a WP:RS source. Canon (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Just because they exist does not mean they are NOTABLE. There's no reason to list every alternate that ever came up. Most of them are boring or extremely minor differences.

But on top of that you seem to have missed my major point here, so maybe I wasn't clear enough when I put it into my edit comments while changing the article: We do not list sources as sources unless they are RELIABLE SOURCES, per WIKIPEDIA's rules on reliable sources, not a personal quixotic sense of innate reliability of the information that you feel. Specifically, the contest center website is NOT a reliable source by any stretch of the imagination. There is NO reason to provide links to it. You have consistently put them back. Is it that 1) you are just undoing all changes I make just to be contrary, 2) that you think some site about contests with a bunch of ads on it is somehow an encyclopedic source, 3) you have some other reason to restore a link to that particular website, or 4) some other explanation? Similarly, random USENET posts do not meet Wikipedia standards of WP:RS -- instead of providng the link back to me, go read the thing, please. DreamGuy (talk) 23:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The primary references are prima facie evidence that the versions exist, and the secondary reference establishes that they are notable. Canon (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Most frequently asked word puzzle

The claim that this puzzle is the most frequently asked word puzzle is sourced (and an interesting fact about it). Canon (talk) 18:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you have a misunderstanding about what sourcing does. Sources proves that someone made a claim, not that the claim is accurate. To source that it IS accurate, you'd need some sort of hardcore statistical study, and even there you'd be on stronger footing to just say who said it and not just claim it. If we put a claim in an article, it means Wikipedia is stating it's a fact. At best you can say that some sources say it is the most common one, not that it is. Do you understand the difference? DreamGuy (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The sources indicate that it is the most frequently asked word puzzle in the Merriam-Webster correspondence file, on the USENET rec.puzzles group, and on the reference librarian listserv. No other puzzle is mentioned as frequently asked. This evidence makes it appropriate to state this as a fact in the article. Canon (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Please provide the exact quotes, as I've read the sources and saw nothing like that. I'm not calling you a liar, as I might have missed it, but we can end this back and forth if you be specific. DreamGuy (talk) 23:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The Cole reference states that Merriam-Webster has received a steady stream of requests for the answer to the puzzle since it originated in 1975. No other puzzle has resulted in such a steady stream of letters. The USENET FAQ reference indicates that regular readers became sufficiently annoyed by the frequent postings of the puzzle to invent a word to describe newbies that was the third word. No other puzzle resulted in such annoyance. The STUMPERS-L reference establishes that the reference librarians used the posting of the puzzle as a signal to change their cars' oil. No other question provoked this response. A quick search of the Web reveals several sites by well known word puzzle authorities such as Ask Oxford, Richard Lederer, and so on that document this fact, for example, from http://www.fun-with-words.com/word_gry_angry_hungry.html

Without a doubt the most common question we receive from visitors to Fun-with-words.com is about the famous "-gry" puzzle, so we've decided to put the story of this curious puzzle on the site.

Canon (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Moved from article

This looks more like a random list than an encyclopedic list and really doesn't give much context to an enduser, so I've moved it here for cleanup and eventual reintegration. MBisanz ^talk 21:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Although that throws off "'gry,' one of the obsolete words listed at the end of this article." Шизомби (talk) 01:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

The issue of including the word list in the article has been previously discussed here. The list is not random; it is a complete list of all known words that end with "gry" and has been culled from many sources, which are given. Experience has shown that if the list is deleted it will be added back piecemeal by end users interested in the subject. Canon (talk) 07:10, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Canon, I tend to agry. ;-) Unfortunately, there are a lot of Wikipedians who don't like lists, or compilations made by Wikipedians made from multiple sources, or for Wikipedia to be an encyclopedia of specific things (e.g. an encyclopedia of word puzzles), or things that are "useful." Шизомби (talk) 15:11, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Understood. The list has been deleted before by such people. Then other people start to build a new list, usually with mistakes. Then I add the complete list back. *sigh* Canon (talk) 17:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia would benefit from more lists embedded in articles, such as the one (that should be) in this article, which is—or rather was—the most complete and authoritative article on the puzzle and words that end in -gry in existence, complete with references so that anyone can look up the original sources for each word. This article, with the list of words intact, demonstrates the power of Wikipedia. This article, without the list of words, simply leads to frustration. By the way, a classic example of the phenomenon to which Canon refers is found in "-onym"—which suffers from a significant lack of references and Wikipedians who insist on adding new words willy-nilly. PlaysInPeoria (talk) 04:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

We had our first edit today from someone who remembered some word that ended in "gry" in an old dictionary. I'll wait until we have three of these before adding the list back. BTW I'm surprised that the WP police haven't cited us for linking from the main article to the discussion page. I'm guessing that is a violation of some policy. If we get cited, I'll move the list back then too. Canon (talk) 23:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

As predicted the link to the list on this discussion page was edited out of the article (even though no policy was cited, there probably is one against such links). I previously said I would put the list back if that happened, but now that seems a bit rash. Let's see if people start adding words piecemeal into the article. Maybe the whole puzzle has grown stale. Canon (talk) 21:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Words and names that end in -gry

A list of names and words ending in -gry, many of which are obsolete, archaic, or simply uncommon.

Reference abbreviations, in brackets, are explained below under Sources consulted.

affect-hungry [OED (see "sado-masochism")]
aggry [OED:1:182; W2; W3]
agry / Agry:
1. agry [OED (see "snappily")]
2. Agry [GNS]
3. Agry Dagh (Mount Agry) [EB/11:15:682 (as "Agry-dagh"); Partridge/2 (as "Agry Dagh"); Stieler:49 R18 and Stieler/Index:3 (as "Agry-Dag")]
ahungry [OED:1:194; FW; W2]
air-hungry [OED (see "Tel Avivian")]
angry [OED; FW; W2; W3]
anhungry [OED:1:332; W2]
Badagry [Johnston; EB/11; GNS; OED (see "Dahoman")]
Bagry [GNS]
Ballingry [Bartholomew:40; CLG:151; GNS; RD:164, pl.49]
begry [OED:1:770,767]
Bellangry [GNS]
Beregovyye Langry [GNS]
bewgry [OED:1:1160]
Bol’shiye Tugry (GNS]
"boongry maugry" [Partridge/2] — created by Partridge, for purposes of satire, from bongre maugre, willy-nilly; cf. maugry
boroughmongry [OED (see "boroughmonger")]
bowgry [OED:1:1160]
braggry [OED:1:1047]
Bugry — cf. Chistyye Bugry, Golyye Bugry, Peschanyye Bugry [GNS; Times/IG]
Bungry — see Hungry Bungry
chandeliegry — from "Chandeliegry Puzzle"; created for purposes of satire [rec.puzzles]
Chagry [GNS]
Changry [GNS]
Chistyye Bugry [GNS]
Chockpugry [Worcester]
Cogry [BBC]
cony-gry [OED:2:956]
conyngry [OED:2:956]
cottagry [OED (see "cottagery")]
croftangry / Croftangry:
1. croftangry [OED (see "way")]
2. Croftangry — Mr. Chrystal Croftangry, fictitious editor of The Chronicles of Canongate, by Sir Walter Scott, 1827–28. The Chronicles of Canongate is an inclusive title for Scott's novels, The Highland Widow, The Two Drovers, and The Fair Maid of Perth, to which the author attached the fiction that they were written by Mr. Chrystal Croftangry, who draws on the recollections of his old friend, Mrs. Bethune Baliol, a resident in the Canongate, Edinburgh. Mr. Croftangry's own story, notable among Scott's shorter sketches, forms an introduction to the Chronicles. [Barnhart:1:1134; Freeman/1:101; Freeman/2:109; OCEL/5:241,197,461; Scott:2:234-329; Walsh:110] — "a pseudonym of Sir Walter Scott; the name of the imaginary editor of his 'Chronicles of the Canongate.'" [Wheeler:88]
culture-hungry [OED (see "culture")
de Pélegry — see Pélegry
diamond-hungry [OED (see "Lorelei")]
dog-hungry [W2]
dogge-hungry [OED (see "canine")]
Dygry [GNS]
Dshagry [Stieler]
Džagry [Andrees:43 (141 L 7)]
Dzhagry [GNS; OSN/42:2:325; Times/7:61 (44 G8); Times/IG:233 (44 G8)]
eard-hungry [CED (see "yird"); CSD]
Echanuggry [Century:103-104, on inset map, Key 104 M 2]
Égry [DNCF:376; France(?); GNS; OSN/83:1:335; Times/IG:239
euer-angry [OED (see "ever")]
ever-angry [W2]
fenegry [OED (see "fenugreek")]
"filigry" [WO; Google] — misspelling of filigree; other misspellings include "filagry," "filegry," "fillagry," "fillegry," and "filligry"
fire-angry [W2]
Gagry — cf. Novyye Gagry [EB/11; GNS]
Garrynagry [GNS]
girl-hungry [OED (see "girl")]
Golyye Bugry [GNS]
gonagry [OED (see "gonagra")]
Gregry — surname and given name, perhaps a variant of Gregory; e.g., Lui-Kwan Gregry, an attorney [Google], and Gregry Gilroy, on Facebook [Google]
gry / Gry / GRY:
1. gry (from Latin gry) [OED:4/2:475; W2]
2. gry (from Romany grai) [W2]
3. Gry (given name: Gry Bagøien, alias Gry, a female singer from Denmark) [Wiki]
4. gry / GRY acronyms, initialisms, and abbreviations:
  1. GRY — Granada, Spain (airport symbol) [AIAD:1403]
  2. gry — abbr. gray [ADA]
  3. GRY — Gray Drug Stores, Inc. (New York Stock Exchange delisted symbol) [AIAD:1403]
  4. GRY — abbr. all cap. Grayling Air Service, Grayling, Alaska (TAH [The Airline Handbook] code) [TAH:281]
  5. GRY — abbr. Greymouth, New Zealand (seismograph station code, United States Geological Survey); closed [AIAD:1403; Poppe]
  6. GRY — abbr. Greystoke Exploration (Vancouver Stock Exchange symbol [AIAD:1403]
  7. GRY — abbr. all cap. Grimsey, Iceland (airport symbol) [AIAD:1403; OAG]
haegry [EDD (see "hagery")]
half-angry [W2]
hangry [OED:1:329]
heart-angry [W2]
heart-hungry [W2]
higry pigry [OED:5/1:285]
hogry [EDD (see "huggerie"); CSD]
hogrymogry [EDD (see "huggerie"); CSD (as "hogry-mogry")]
hongry [OED:5/1:459; EDD:3:282; Theroux:21]
hound-hungry [OED (see "hound")]
houngry [OED (see "minx")]
huggrymuggry [EDD (see "huggerie"); CSD (as "huggry-muggry")]
hund-hungry [OED (see "hound")]
hungry [OED; FW; W2; W3]
Hungry Bungry [DI]
hwngry [OED (see "quart")]
"igry" [Partridge/2] — from "... igry slov of the Slavs." — created by Partridge for purposes of satire
iggry [OED]
Jagry [EB/11:23-874 (II. D4)]
jingry / Jingry:
1. jingry [OED] — additional source needed; not found in full-text search of OED Online^[1]
2. Jingry — given name (perhaps from Chinese); e.g., Jingry Liu, a scientist [Google]
job-hungry [OED (see "gadget")]
Kagry [GNS]
kaingry [EDD (see "caingy")]
Kiegry [GNS]
land-hungry [OED; W2]
Langry — cf. Beregovyye Langry, Novyye Langry [GNS; Times/7; Times/IG]
leather-hungry [OED]
ledderhungry [OED (see "leather")]
life-hungry [OED (see "music")]
Lisnagry [Bartholomew:489; GNS]
Longry [GNS]
losengry [OED (see "losengery")]
MacLoingry — surname, of Irish origin; e.g., Flaithbhertach MacLoingry, bishop of Clonmacnois (1038) [Cotton, Phillips:613]
mad-angry [OED:6/2:14]
mad-hungry [OED:6/2:14]
magry [OED:6/2:36, 6/2:247-48]
malgry [OED:6/2:247]
Malyye Tugry [GNS]
man-hungry [OED]
managry [OED (see "managery")]
mannagry [OED (see "managery")]
Margry [Indians (see "Pierre Margry" in bibliog., v.2, p. 1204)]
maugry [OED:6/2:247-48]
mawgry [OED:6/2:247]
meagry [OED:6/2:267]
meat-hungry [W2; OED (see "meat")]
Megry [GNS]
menagry [OED (see "managery")]
messagry [OED]
music-hungry [OED (see "music")]
Myagry [GNS]
nangry [OED]
Novyye Gagry [GNS]
Novyye Langry [GNS]
"nugry" / Nugry:
1. "nugry" — regular readers of the Usenet newsgroup rec.puzzles coined this word to describe a (presumably) new reader who posts a frequently asked question
2. Nugry [GNS]
overangry [RH1; RH2]
Pélegry [CE (in main index as "Raymond de Pélegry")]
Peschanyye Bugry [GNS]
Peshungry [GNS]
pigry — see higry pigry
Pingry [Bio-Base; HPS:293-94, 120-21]
Podagry [OED; W2 (below the line)]
Pongry [Andree (Supplement, p. 572)]
pottingry [OED:7/2:1195; Jamieson:3:532]
Povengry [GNS]
power-hungry [OED (see "power")]
profit-hungry [OED (see "profit")]
puggry [OED:8/1:1573; FW; W2]
pugry [OED:8/1:1574]
red-angry [OED (see "sanguineous")]
rungry [EDD:5:188]
scavengry [OED (in 1715 quote under "scavengery")]
Schtschigry [GNS; LG/1:2045; OSN:97]
Seagry — cf. Upper Seagry [EB/11:28:698a; GNS; Times/IG:762]
Ségry [Andrees:152 (87/88 B 3); GNS; Johnston]
self-angry [W2]
selfe-angry [OED (see "self-")]
Semibugry [GNS]
sensation-hungry [OED (see "sensation")]
sex-angry [OED (see "sex")]
sex-hungry [OED (see "cave")]
Shchegry [GNS]
Shchigry [CLG:1747; GNS; Johnson:594; OSN:97,206; Times/7:185,pl.45]
shiggry [EDD]
Shtchigry [LG/1:2045; LG/2:1701]
Shtshigry [Lipp]
sight-hungry [OED (see "sight")]
Sillegry [GNS]
skugry [OED:9/2:156, 9/1:297; Jamieson:4:266]
Skugry [GNS]
Ssemibugry [GNS]
Suchigry [GNS]
Sygry [Andree]
Tangry [France; GNS]
Tchangry [Johnson:594; LG/1:435,1117]
Tchigry [Johnson:594]
tear-angry [W2]
th'angry [OED (see "shot-free")]
tike-hungry [CSD]
tingry / Tingry:
1. tingry [OED (see "parquet")]
2. Tingry [France; EB/11 (under "Princesse de Tingry"); GNS; Wiki]
toggry [Simmonds (as "Toggry"; but all entries are capitalized)]
Tugry — cf. Bol’shiye Tugry, Malyye Tugry [GNS]
"ugry" / Ugry:
1. "ugry" [Partridge/2] — from "... white ugry of history." — created by Partridge for purposes of satire — probably a reference to "Ugri Bielii, tribe : see Khazars, race." [EB/11:15:774b, 23:525a, 23:883d]
2. Ugry [GNS]
ulgry — modern form of Vlgrie (word form not actually found, but the existence of which is inferred), an animal (not specifically identified): "a coat made of ulgry's hair...." [Partridge/1 (as "ulgry"); Scheetz (as "ulgry" and "Vlgrie"); Smith:24-25 (as "Vlgrie" and "Vlgries")]
unangry [OED; W2]
Ungry [GNS]
Upper Seagry [GNS]
vergry [OED:12/1:123]
Vigry [CLG:2090]
vngry [OED (see "wretch")]
Wągry [GNS]
war-hungry [OED (see "war")]
Wegry:
1. Wegry [GNS]
2. Węgry [GNS]
WGRY — all cap. call letters of a radio station in Grayling, Michigan. [...]
Wigry [CLG:2090; GNS; NAP:xxxix; Times/7:220, pl.62; WA:948]
wind-hungry [W2]
Yagry [GNS]
yeard-hungry [CED (see "yird")]
yerd-hungry [CED (see "yird"); OED]
yird-hungry [CED (see "yird")]
Ymagry [OED:1:1009 (col. 3, 1st "boss" verb), (variant of "imagery")]
Zygry [GNS]

References

^ In a great many books found in Google Books, the word "angry" was tagged as "jingry" [Google Books]; this problem may have led to this (possible ghost) entry

Sources consulted

Specialized word-books employed as finding aids include A. F. Brown's Normal and Reverse English Word List, in 8 volumes (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1963), Martin Lehnert's Reverse Dictionary of Present-Day English (Leipzig: Verlag Enzyklopädie, 1971), and Richard C. Herbst's Herbst's Backword Dictionary for Puzzled People (New York: Alamo Publishing Company, 1979).

ADA = Jone, David J., comp. The Australian Dictionary of Acronyms and Abbreviations, 2nd ed. Leura, New South Wales, Australia: Second Back Row Press Pty. Ltd., 1981.
AIAD = Acronyms, Initialisms & Abbreviations Dictionary: A Guide to More Than 500,000 Acronyms, Initialisms, Abbreviations, Contractions, Alphabetic Symbols, and Similar Condensed Appellations, 15th Edition, 1991. Volume 1, Part 2: G-O. Edited by Jennifer Mossman. Detroit, New York, London: Gale Research Inc., 1990.
Andree, Richard. Andrees Handatlas (index volume). 1925.
Andrees Allgemeiner Handatlas in 139 Haupt- und 161 Nebenkarten nebst vollständigen alphabetischen Namenverzeichnis. Fünfte, völlig neubearbeitete und vermehrt Auflage. Jubiläumsausgabe. Herausgegeben von A. Scobel. Beilfeld und Leipzig: Verlag von Velhagen & Klasing, 1907.
Barnhart = The New Century Cyclopedia of Names. Edited by Clarence L. Barnhart. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1954. [Form: Barnhart:volume:page]
Bartholomew, John. Gazetteer of the British Isles: Statistical and Topographical. 1887.
BBC = BBC Pronouncing Dictionary of English Names.
Bio-Base. (Microfiche.) Detroit: Gale Research Company. 1980.
CE = Catholic Encyclopedia. 1907.
CED = Chambers English Dictionary. 1988.
Century = "India, Northern Part." The Century Atlas of the World. 1897, 1898.
CLG = The Colombia Lippincott Gazetteer of the World. L. E. Seltzer, ed. 1952.
Cotton, Henry. Fasti Ecclesiæ Hibernicæ: The Succession of the Prelates and Members of the Cathedral Bodies in Ireland. 5 volumes. Dublin: Hodges and Smith, 1849. Volume examined: Volume III: The Province of Ulster.
CSD = Chambers Scots Dictionary. 1971 reprint of 1911 edition.
DI = The Daily Illini [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign], Friday, 30 January 1976, p. 27; Tuesday, 3 February 1976, p. 18; Wednesday, 4 February 1976, p. 14; Wednesday, 11 February 1976, p. 16; Friday, 13 February 1976, p. 37; Wednesday, 18 February 1976, p. 15. "Hungry Bungry" appears in a series of six advertisements for The Giraffe, a restaurant.
DNCF = Dictionnaire National des Communes de France, 17e éd. Paris: Éditions Albin Michel, 1959.
EB/11 = The Encyclopædia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, Literature and General Information, 11th ed. New York: The Encyclopædia Britannica Company, 1910-1911. [Form: EB/11:volume:page (map reference if applicable).]
EDD = The English Dialect Dictionary. Joseph Wright, ed. 1898.
France = Map Index of France. G.H.Q. American Expeditionary Forces. 1918.
Freeman/1 = Freeman, William. Dictionary of Fictional Characters. Boston: The Writer, Inc., Publishers, 1963.
Freeman/2 = Freeman, William, and Fred Urquhart. Dictionary of Fictional Characters, rev. ed. Boston: The Writer, Inc., Publishers, 1974.
FW = Funk & Wagnalls New Standard Dictionary of the English Language. 1943.
GNS = GEOnet Names Server (GNS), developed and maintained by the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA); the GNS database is the official repository of foreign place-name decisions approved by the U.S. Board on Geographic Names
Google = Google Web Search
Google Books = Google Book Search, a topic-specific search engine from Google
HPS = The Handbook of Private Schools: An Annual Descriptive Survey of Independent Education, 66th ed. 1985.
Indians = Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico. F. W. Hodge. 1912.
Jamieson, John. An Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language. 1879-87.
Johnston, Keith. Index Geographicus... 1864.
LG/1 = Lippincott's Gazetteer of the World: A Complete Pronouncing Gazetteer or Geographical Dictionary of the World. 1888.
LG/2 = Lippincott's New Gazetteer: ... 1906.
Lipp = Lippincott's Pronouncing Gazetteer of the World. 1861, undated edition from late 1800s; 1902.
NAP = Narodowy Atlas Polski. 1973-1978 [Polish language]
OAG = Official Airline Guide, Worldwide Edition. Oak Brook, Ill.: Official Airline Guide, Inc., 1984.
OCEL/5 = The Oxford Companion to English Literature, 5th ed. Edited by Margaret Drabble. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985.
OED = The Oxford English Dictionary, 1933; or The Oxford English Dictionary, Second Edition, 1989. [Form: OED:volume/part number if applicable:page]
OSN: U.S.S.R. Volume 6, S-T. Official Standard Names Approved by the United States Board on Geographic Names. Gazetteer #42, 2nd ed. June 1970.
Partridge/1 = Partridge, Harry B. "Ad Memoriam Demetrii." Word Ways, 19 (August 1986): 131.
Partridge/2 = Partridge, Harry B. "Gypsy Hobby Gry." Word Ways, 23 (February 1990): 9-11.
Phillips, Lawrence. Dictionary of Biographical Reference. 1889.
Poppe, Barbara B., Debbi A. Naub, and John S. Derr. Seismograph Station Codes and Characteristics. Geological Survey. Circular 791. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of the Interior, 1978.
RD = The Reader's Digest Complete Atlas of the British Isles, 1st ed. 1965.
rec.puzzles = Chandeliegry Puzzle, 1996
RH1 = Random House Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged. 1966.
RH2 = Random House Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition Unabridged. 1987.
Scott, [Sir] Walter. The Fair Maid of Perth and Other Chronicles of the Canongate, including The Highland Widow. Boston; New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1913. 2 volumes. [Copy examined bound in 1 volume.]
Simmonds, P.L. Commercial Dictionary of Trade Products. 1883.
Scheetz, George H. "Captain Smith's Vlgrie." Word Ways, 20 (May 1987): 84-86.
Smith, John. The True Travels, Adventvres and Observations: London 1630.
[Stieler, Adolf.] Stielers Hand-Atlas: 100 Karten in Kupferstich mit 162 Nebenkarten .... Gotha: Justus Perthes, 1907. <1925?>
Stieler/Index = Alphabetisches Namenverzeichnis (Alphabetical Index ...) ... von Stielers Hand-Atlas .... Gotha: Justus Perthes, n.d. (238 pp.) Includes prefatory information in German, English, French, and Italian. <1925?>
TAH = The Airline Hand Book, 1985. (9th Issue.) Ed. Paul K. Martin. Cranston, R.I.: AeroTravel Research, 1985.
Theroux = Theroux, Alexander. The Enigma of Al Capp. Seattle: Fantagraphics Books, 1999, p. 21: "hongry" as Li'l Abnerese for hungry, as in "Ah's hongry."
Times/7 = The Times Atlas of the World, 7th ed. 1985.
Times/IG = The Times Index-Gazetteer of the World. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1966 (c) 1965. [Partially a reference to The Times Atlas Mid-Century Edition; partially an independent reference.]
W2 = Webster's New International Dictionary of the English Language, Second Edition, Unabridged. 1934.
W3 = Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged. 1961.
WA = The World Atlas: Index-Gazetteer. Council of Ministries of the USSR, 1968.
Walsh, William S. Heroes and Heroines of Fiction: Modern Prose and Poetry; .... Philadelphia; London: J. B. Lippincott Company, (c) 1914, 1915.
Wheeler, William A. An Explanatory and Pronouncing Dictionary of the Noted Names of Fiction; ..., 2nd ed., rev. Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1866.
Wiki = Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia
WO = Webster's Online Dictionary
Worcester, J. E. Universal Gazetteer, Second Edition. 1823.

"Expert Subject" Tag

With all due respect, the "Expert Subject" tag ...

... seems a bit pretentious and begs a question (or two): "Who says so—and why?"

It is quite clear to even the most casual reader that experts on (a) the puzzle itself and (b) words that end in -gry created, debated, revised, and copy-edited this article based on intense curiosity and interest in the subject, as well as knowledge and sound scholarship. In short, the tag is fatuous and should be removed with all due haste. PlaysInPeoria (talk) 07:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

"Context" Tag

In respect to the "Context" tag ...

... and speaking as someone who is not particularly interested in the puzzle itself, I believe that the introduction is well-written and to the point. In other words, the "Context" tag is specious—in the sense of "having a false look of truth or genuineness"—and should be removed forthwith. PlaysInPeoria (talk) 07:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

"Article Issue" Tags

The whole string of "article issue" tags leaves one with the distinct feeling that a goose visited the article.

Further explanation for the tags is warranted. In other words, adequate grounds for the tags are needed, because the reasons for the tags are not apparent from the article. PlaysInPeoria (talk) 07:45, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

If the person adding the tags does not provide explanations for them, it seems reasonable to delete them. Canon (talk) 01:26, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

One last call for an explanation for the tags. Canon (talk) 17:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the removed list

While I certainly understand the concerns about original research in this article, it's clear that the list of words is sourced to reliable sources and obeys a simple objective condition, no different from the ones appearing in List of English words containing Q not followed by U or List of words in English without vowels or List of the longest English words with one syllable. I think words in the list that not sourced to reliable sources should certainly be removed (regularly) but my interpretation of the policy is that such a list almost certainly falls under the exclusion of "simple synthesis" where the synthesis being performed is objective enough to be beyond contesting. Dcoetzee 15:05, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

As it is now the list is effectively deleted from the main text of Wikipedia, since the link from the article to this page was deleted. Is there a specific policy that allows "simple synthesis"? If so perhaps the list can be moved back to the main article with a reference to this policy. Canon (talk) 02:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

This list is just a simple compilation (as are all our articles, essentially, though this is debated). It's allowed per WP:OR, and is not synthesis, as we're not drawing any original conclusions.

I'd support adding the list back, but ideally the references section could be condensed somewhat, and the list of words put into 2 columns. As the editor who removed it said above, "I've moved it here for cleanup and eventual reintegration".

There's a way to create a separated second "footnotes" section. See WP:REFGROUP. That would be perfect (but is beyond my headache threshold - it requires someone who knows the names of the refs intimately).

And just fyi, yup, cross namespace links are strongly discouraged, per WP:SELFREF. The only exceptions are meant to be hatnotes enclosed in a {{selfref}}. HTH. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 04:33, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

The person who originally moved the list here said: "This looks more like a random list than an encyclopedic list and really doesn't give much context to an enduser, so I've moved it here for cleanup and eventual reintegration." But then this editor never did the cleanup, and another editor removed the link to the list, no now the list is effectively deleted from Wikipedia. That seems odd. Canon (talk) 14:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I support restoring the list, as is, to the article, for several reasons. (1) The list clearly is encyclopedic in nature; there is nothing random about a list devoted to a precise topic that cites a source for each entry. (2) The article is incomplete without the list, which represents a significant aspect of the puzzle for word aficionados—the quest, as noted in the article. (3) The list, with its references, serves as a great example for editors of similar articles, many of which would benefit from a similar encyclopedic (and thoroughly cited) approach to the presentation of lists.

I suggest that, if there are no substantive objections to this idea (restoring the list to the article) by 1 January 2011, then the list in fact be restored to the article. PlaysInPeoria (talk) 16:10, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

I second this motion. Canon (talk) 18:47, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 18 April 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move to -gry puzzle. This is an unusual name, but we have clear consensus that it's the most preferable option. The consensus is unanimous that the article is about the puzzle specifically, and evidence has been presented that this term is somewhat established for it. — Cúchullain ^t/c 17:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

-gry → Gry puzzle – The article isn't about "-gry" or even "words ending in -gry", it's about a particular word puzzle with no particular name, but which the article generally refers to as "the gry puzzle". McGeddon (talk) 11:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Weak oppose, and further suggest "-gry puzzle" if it is moved at all (it is "-gry" as a suffix, not "Gry" alone). The problem is, as noted, that there isn't really a name for this topic; Wikipedia kind of made up "-gry puzzle". However the suffix "-gry" is notable and definitely exists, even if it's notable just for this one riddle. Not sure there's really a great name for this at all, but think the current simple version is the least-bad. SnowFire (talk) 20:30, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Support -gry puzzle. I agree with the nominator that -gry isn't a good name for the article, and I agree with SnowFire that the puzzle involves the suffix "-gry." Logically, that would make the best name "-gry puzzle." -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Support -gry puzzle @SnowFire: Google books indicates that the term "-gry puzzle" is not something that wikipedia made up, but is rather a somewhat common way of referring to the riddle (others are "gry puzzle" and "gry riddle" and "-gry riddle", with the 'riddle' variants being significantly less common than 'puzzle'), so your suggestion of "-gry puzzle" is spot on. Other options could include "Words ending in -gry" or "Think of words ending in -gry", but these are a little longer and don't seems to be significantly common names for the riddle either (there doesn't seem to be an agreed upon name for the riddle). Insert CleverPhrase Here 03:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

grep example

Output on Ubuntu 18.04.3 LTS:

> grep 'gry$' /usr/share/dict/words
angry
demagogry
hungry

Unsine (talk) 11:10, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

What is the third word.

Angry and hungry are two words in the English language that end in "gry". "What" is the third word. The word is something that everyone uses every day. If you have listened carefully, I have already told you what it is.

The answer is "what". But again, the quotation marks spoil the puzzle when it is printed.

But the unclarity of what punctuation is being used spoils the puzzle when it is spoken. I was taught a similar version with the relevant sentence as

What is the third word.

with the key to the puzzle lying in realising that that's a fullstop at the end, not a question mark. [1] Strictly speaking, "What" should be enclosed in quotes as the word is being mentioned rather than used, but the reality is that this rule isn't always followed. — Smjg (talk) 23:21, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I suppose it's open to interpretation whether, when spoken, the unclarity of punctuation is part of the trickery or the loss of a clue that the recipient of the puzzle is expected to pick up if sufficiently astute. The latter is what I'd made of the page I've just linked to, but the former is a possibility, depending on whether said version was originally intended to be presented orally or on paper. But I can see now that, if "What is the third word." was indeed part of the original version, the mentioned change to a question mark may have been either transcribed from a spoken instance, accidentally miscopied from a written instance, or "corrected" from a written instance by somebody who thought the fullstop was a mistake. — Smjg (talk) 08:58, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

[2] In a great many books found in Google Books, the word "angry" was tagged as "jingry" [Google Books]; this problem may have led to this (possible ghost) entry

[1]

[1]