Talk:Webster's Dictionary/Archive 1

message: I just deleted a statement i had added a while back, which said that Webster's International included a table of recommended reformed spellings.  This information came from something i had read at the time, i don't remember exactly where.  Since then, i have acquired that edition, the only Merriam edition i was missing, and i have been unable to find any such table.  Perhaps it was in a later printing, or maybe i've missed something, but for now, i am removing the statement.  - erl - 216.19.218.38 23:44, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted statement

message: In the introductory paragraph of Webster's Dictionary, i replaced the word direct with official.  Now i've changed my mind.  I will now change it to original.  Here is the sentence, with all three words shown for comparison:
"Merriam-Webster dictionaries are the direct/official/original descendants of Noah Webster's work, although many other dictionaries use the name, such as those by the publishers Random House and John Wiley & Sons."
Here is why direct and official are both inaccurate and misleading, and why "original" is better choice.
Because the G. & C. Merriam Company originally bought the rights to Noah Webster's work, and Merriam-Webster is descended from that company and has continued to publish dictionaries, M-W was the original official descendant of N.W, but since they lost their copyrights, now only the original descendant.  
Other dictionaries have direct links to N.W.'s work, due to the fact that their ancestor dictionaries were based on his work as much as were Merriam's.   The fact the editors of those early offspring stole, borrowed, or plagiurized N.W.'s work makes their descendants no less direct.  
Here are the links to the two other companies mentioned in the paragraph: 
1) From Noah Webster's American Dictionary, a direct line of revision runs from Ogilvie's Imperial, to Annandale's Imperial revision, to Wright's Century Dictionary.  The Century abridgment, New Century, was Barnhart's primary source for American College, which was the basis for Random House Dictionary.
2) Ogilvie's Imperial was the basis of Webster's Imperial which became Webster's Universal.  The Universal was published by World Publishing Co., which subsequently published Webster's New World Dictionary, new editions of which are now published by John Wiley & Sons.
Perhaps someone will think of an even better word.   
216.19.218.5 04:41, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Links to Noah Webster

message: I'm not going to touch it, but in the section on Webster's Third the exact dates of last definition, last typeset, etc., seem pointless and distracting.  I can understand that if someone writes a book on the long work and trials endured for the production of the dictionary, this has some meaning.  In fact, i suspect that the person who put that in took it from such a book.  I kind of hope someone takes it out, but not so much for me as for general readers.   216.19.218.229 23:20, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Extraneous information clutter

message: I've been working on this and other dictionary articles.  I am wondering what other search entries link to this article.  I'm new enough not to know how to find a list of the existing redirects to it.  It seems to me that there are many plausible ways one might seach for the information in this complex article, and yet arrive at no article, so i would like see about establishing a list of appropriate redirects.  Perhaps this would require a new disambiguation page, or improving the one at Dictionary.  Perhaps establishing a good list of redirects to the Dictionary disambiguation page, and creating a menu of redirects from there to this and a lot of other dictionary articles.  If these suggestions reveal my ingorance, i'd appreciate help on this.   216.19.218.11 21:14, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You can see the list of all links to this article, including those through redirects, at Special:Whatlinkshere/Webster's Dictionary. --Joy [shallot]
Thanks, that's very helpful.  What about the idea of creating a master list of dictionary related articles at the dictionary disambiguation page ?  Is this an acceptable thing to do ?  Or is there such a list somewhere else already ?   216.19.218.11 22:13, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Links to [[Webster's Dictionary]] article

message: Today I decided to work on extensive revisions to Webster's Dictionary and in poking around found a stub at Webster's New International Dictionary, Second Edition and a longer article at Webster's Third New International Dictionary.  It seems to me it would be best to consolidate the second and third material at Webster's Dictionary, because it is the  familiar name and it would put the history of the work, which has appeared under several names in one spot; then put in redirects under the other names.  Would anyone with comments please contact me on my talk page? PedanticallySpeaking 16:40, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
::This material is obsolete.  PedanticallySpeaking 17:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  There should be separate articles.  Gene Nygaard 02:13, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger?