Language desk
< April 18	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 20 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 19

Help from Hungarian speaker

Is this article's sourcing enough to establish notablity, ie in-depth coverage in reliable sources? Thanks --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 14:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the References? The References establish notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:02, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robert McClenon. There are four External Links. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 13:11, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strategic walking

The article Capital Ring defines the subject as a "a strategic walking route". I can't see anything that indicates the path in question has any military strategic value. Is "strategic walking" a thing? What does "strategic walking route" mean? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 15:00, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It originated with this IP edit. I'd say it's nonsense corporatespeak, but there are quite a lot of hits for [1] so it seems to have caught on, to an extent. Judging by this, it originated with London Rambling or (more likely IMHO) Transport for London. That may be WP:OR but I know which of the two of them I'd bet came up with the term. Personally, I'd get rid of it, or link it to a new article about those seven routes. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 15:08, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that explains the odd language.

Strategy is not just for military, right? Many big cities have strategies and plans for city transit. Compare USA DOT [2] and Seattle's [3] statements of transportation strategy. I did not read this as formal term, rather a simply descriptive term. I would have assumed that it was a good route for walking, strategic insofar as it minimises unsafe crossings, has good pavement, maybe utilizes pedestrian bridges, and other things like that. WP:OR when planning my walking and cycling routes around my city (that is terribly unsafe for anyone not in a 2-ton vehicle), I do tons of strategic planning for my route :) SemanticMantis (talk) 16:08, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I can say "I plan to be strategic about it when I go to the all-you-can-eat buffet tonight" too. But "strategic" sounds to me like there needs to be a goal in mind. A "strategic walking route" can make sense if the reader bears an urban planning context in mind, or if the reader can be assumed to have a goal in mind, but I'm not sure this applies in the opening sentence of that article. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 17:07, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It also happens to be official designation in some places.

“

Strategic Roads, which are those roads in the borough designated by the previous Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) as part of London’s Strategic Road Network and are intended to carry the main traffic flows and longer distance movements. They include the previous Trunk Roads...[etc.]

”

[4]. The same document also talks about the "Cross London Partnership for Strategic Walking Routes in London." It seems that strategic walking routes are meant to be understood in analogy to the strategic roads. It looks to me that "strategic walking route" is the official terminology for that route, and the article usage is correct, even if the state-sponsored terminology is a little odd. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:39, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a walking route that is strategic, not a route for strategic walking. DuncanHill (talk) 20:10, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the acontextual usage is correct. It could say "X is a walking path located in ..., and is one of several routes designated as a "strategic walking route" by Y", for example, which would be clear. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:25, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you think of it as a walking route of strategic importance or significance, you'll get the meaning, but its use as an adjective for the route itself is a little strange. Akld guy (talk) 22:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rajita

What does rajita mean in Spanish? Has it something to do with drugs? --2.37.228.109 (talk) 18:52, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to googletranslate, it means "slice". Don't know if it also has a slang meaning. Loraof (talk) 19:10, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Urban dictionary says it might be a pet name [5]. WP:OR: In my experience, it a term can be used to talk about drugs, it will have a relevant entry on Urban Dictionary. SemanticMantis (talk) 20:08, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the paper dictionary that I have handy, raja (of which rajita is diminutive) is translated ‘crack, split; splinter, chip; slice’. Perhaps it's used for crack? —Tamfang (talk) 10:10, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Buttcrack" according to my informant, although I would have understood it in context, I have never heard it. μηδείς (talk) 23:07, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The usage very much reminds me of the line

"With sweat drippin' down your little back"

From the song Spaceship buy Puddle of Mudd. μηδείς (talk) 23:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I should also clarify that I have no evidence it doesn't have a drug meaning, my informant in Caribbean, and Spanish vocabulary is notoriously variable by region. μηδείς (talk) 00:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One possibility, snorted drugs like cocaine are often separated into lines with a razor blade. I could see how each line might be called a slice. StuRat (talk) 04:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree with your speculation, but we really need a context or source text, and although my contact is an unpublished source, we really need a source. Drug jargon changes fast, but so does urban dictionary. μηδείς (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]