Talk:Juxtaposition (disambiguation)

WWIN

Wikipedia is not a dictionary

Wikipedia is not a dictionary, or a usage or jargon guide. If you're interested in working on a wiki dictionary, check out our sister project Wiktionary. Wikipedia articles are not:

Dictionary definitions. Because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, please do not create an entry merely to define a term. An article should usually begin with a good definition; If you come across an article that is nothing more than a definition, see if there is information you can add that would be appropriate for an encyclopedia. An exception to this rule is for articles about the cultural meanings of individual numbers.
Lists of such definitions. There are, however, disambiguation pages consisting of pointers to other pages; these are used to clarify differing meanings of a word. Wikipedia also includes glossary pages for various specialized fields.
A usage guide, or slang and idiom guide. Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, etc., are used. . We aren't teaching people how to talk like a l33t cracker or a Cockney chimney-sweep. However, it may be important in the context of an encyclopedia article to describe just how a word is used in order to distinguish among similar, easily confused ideas, as in nation or freedom. In some special cases an article about an essential piece of slang may be appropriate.

Look at number two: Wikipedia is not a list of definitions. What is this article, if not a list of definitions? — MATHWIZ2020 ^{TALK | CONTRIBS} 00:46, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of overlap between a dictionary definition and an encyclopedia entry, with the chief difference being the level of detail included. The part of this article I worked on, the logic section, does include a couple of examples, which would be more than I would expect in a dictionary def. If other meanings lack that level of detail now, hopefully they will be expanded soon. Also note the numerous links to other pages. StuRat 03:32, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Example

""He was slouched alertly" is a juxtaposition." No it's not it's an oxymoron.

Well, I understand a literary juxtaposition can be direct, where the words are the objects that are positioned next to each other for effect (similar to an oxymoron). However, you can also have two different images as the objects taht are positioned next to each other for effect. For example, "He slouched in embarrassment when the courtroom stood in respect." The two images, a guy embarrassed is positioned next to a courtroom full of respect. I do think the example on the main page needs to be updated. Mauricetheferret 17:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Soft redirect to wikt:juxtaposition

This page was marked for a cleanup as a dab page per MoS:DAB. By looking through all entries one-by-one, it became clear this is not a dab page except for maybe logical fallacy and multiplication, and even then not really. For the rest, I didn't see why wikt:juxtaposition (wikitionary) can't be used instead. So instead of de-marking this page as a dab page, I thought I would have had consensus to transwiki anyway, so I was bold and did this immediately. Just in case you're wondering. – sgeureka ^t•c 15:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; it was pretty bad.

I've recreated the page with some actual disambiguations, this time. --Piet Delport 03:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Piers Anthony's Apprentice Adept series

This is the title of one of the books in Piers Anthony's Apprentice Adept series; I didn't see a really sensible way to add such a disambiguation to the page, so I'm mentioning it here, at least. JesseW, the juggling janitor 18:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

(2007) To do: disambiguate incoming links

If someone is looking for a small project, there are a lot of incoming links to this page that need to be disambiguated or removed. As a rule of thumb,

if the use refers to another article, disambiguate it (and add the target here, if it isn't already)
otherwise, if it's just a passing mention, unlink it
otherwise, if it's a specific or technical enough use, point it to juxtaposition.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pi Delport (talk • contribs) 10:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]