Talk:List of collective nouns by subject A-H

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Title of the article[edit]

Is 'List' the right collective noun for collective nouns?


--- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.168.181 (talk) 14:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Mathematitians?[edit]

First of all it's spelled incorrectly, and second of all, it sounds rather spurious. I'm going to relabel it. GBMorris 17:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

a gang of boys


I removed: A lie of Bush's assuming it was meant as a political dig. It wasn't even in plural form!

--Woggly 07:09, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You should notice that that line (along with An oligarchy of Republicans on List of collective nouns by subject I-Z came from the same IP address, 24.170.133.133 --Ricky81682 06:27, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)

Cunts[edit]

You have a shower of bastards, I was always informed it was a shower of cunts

Wunch of bankers[edit]

Is this actually a pun on "a bunch of wankers"?

- Looks like it... Crunchysaviour 16:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


Not a pun, a spoonerism Jacob (talk) 22:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Husbands[edit]

"husbands A multiply of husbands"

"Multiply" isn't a noun. Should this be "multiple"?Crunchysaviour 16:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Butterflies[edit]

Butterflies are insects... shouldn't that simply be a "swarm" of butterflies? (Didn't make the edit because I'm not sure, but I've never heard of a "rainbow of butterflies." Granted, I've mostly heard, "Oo! Pretty butterflies!", but I'd think that the standard flying insect term would apply.) Miss W 21:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Computers[edit]

Many computers do not a network make, nor a cluster. Eight stand-alone computers are just eight computers. A network and a cluster have definitions of their own.

Gods[edit]

How is "Pantheon of Gods" uncertain? I've seen it in print many times. Perhaps the idea is that Pantheon means "the group of Gods belonging to a given religion," and may not apply to just any group of Gods? I'll remove the "uncertain" for now.

hedgehogs[edit]

The article only had prickle for hedgehogs. That is a recent term adopted from "a prickle of porcupines". Before prickle, the term was "an array of hedgehogs". Currently, the term "herd" is being adopted among domesticated hedgehogs. --Kainaw (talk) 19:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

chinchillas[edit]

chinchillas A trades union of chinchillas

come on, really? --Moozaad 11:41, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

chinchillas, baboons, etc[edit]

A trades union of chinchillas, a congress of baboons? Could someone protect the article, or move it to the wiktionary?

Quiver of arrows[edit]

A quiver is what you use to hold arrows. It is a noun but not a collective known in this instance. Not unless a cup of water counts. Or a jug of beer.

A moderate skinful of beer is a collective adjective/noun combo though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.127.33.192 (talk) 11:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Cite 'em or lose 'em[edit]

Well, there were/are clearly a bunch of fake entries in this list. Here's the simple solution: 1) I am asking for cites for all of the ones I am unfamiliar with. 2) The ones I have heard of, I am not asking for cites for. 3) If you haven't heard of one that I'm not asking for a cite for, ask for it yourself. 4) Any that are uncited and I haven't heard of, I'll remove at some point. As of today, I'm through the Cs asking for cites. ANY uncited additions after today will be removed.

So what belongs here? Clearly, I'm not leaving obvious jokes up: wunch of bankers was clearly added by a wanker and whoever added foo of bars was clearly fubar. I've also removed some that are not simply collective. Take one athelete from each of eight different sports and put them together: they are not a "team" of atheletes". A group of crows, though, is a "murder of crows" in any case. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

A "belly of (insert beer brand here)" could also be a "pint of..." or a "belly of lemonade". That is not a collective noun, it's a measure.
From here on out, if I remove one that you trust, assume I'm doubting it and requesting a cite.- Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Not all...[edit]

A group of actors is not always a troupe or a company. A group of aircraft is not always a fleet. A non-singing group of angels is not a choir. Etc. Why does this matter? So the list doesn't become: A family of people, A demographic of people, A box of matches, A handfull of matches, A book of matches, A cup of water, A liter of water, A splach of water, A pinch of salt, A dash of salt, etc. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 17:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Outrage[edit]

I refuse to believe a group of boars is called a singular. >:[ 204.10.218.44 (talk) 13:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

So remove it. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 14:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_noun#Terms_of_venery_.28words_for_groups_of_animals.29 -- Boars are solitary animals. This is why it's a 'singular'. 121.72.164.190 (talk) 09:04, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Baboons[edit]

According to an episode of QI, a group of baboons is not called a "flange". It was made up as a joke in an episode of Not the Nine O'Clock News in which Rowan Atkinson was dressed as a gorilla. The correct word is "congress". "Flange" is a fairly widespread urban legend, which has even appeared in an academic paper.

However, sources on the Web give other alternatives. Probert Encyclopaedia says it should be "troop"; and Collective-Noun.com lists "troop", "congress" and "rumpus".

There are online sources claiming that "flange" is a correct word - for example, Rinkworks.com includes it in what they claim is "a list of the correct terms to describe groups of various types of animals", but the site calls itself "online entertainment", and the homepage wished me a happy Stupid Day. A more reliable source might be AskOxford.com, which lists "flange" and "troop".

So should "flange" stay? leevclarke (talk) 18:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

For our purposes, the "correct" term (or terms) is whatever a reliable source says it is. I cannot support an argument the QI is a reliable source -- as a game show, I don't know that it really has a reputation for fact-checking. The "Probert Encyclopedia" is writen by "Matt and Leela Probert", whomever they may be, I see no indication that they meet the criteria at WP:RS either. http://www.collective-noun.com/ doesn't say anything about itself, but links to "BLTC Research", whoever they are -- again, no indication they're reliable. http://www.rinkworks.com/words/collective.shtml looks like just another website, no claim of any kind of reliability here.
I would assume askoxford was authoritative. I'm perplexed, though, by the entries with "possibly invented". Really? "Invented", like made up by people unlike all other words that are harvested from wild word trees? I don't know what they're talking about there... - SummerPhD (talk) 19:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I suppose AskOxford's "possibly invented" may mean "possibly invented by a list maker and subsequently only ever used in definitions of itself". UnaDormienda (talk) 01:50, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Collective or place?[edit]

A lot of supposed collectives here are really only the name for a place for housing such and such. For example, a kennel of dogs. It's a pack of dogs, and dogs live in kennels. Similarly, a stable of horses, and a set of badgers. (A badger's burrow is called a set). This is a bit like saying an "office of bankers/lawyers" etc. You can indeed talk about a group by referring to their container (eg. a bowl of peas), but it's not a collective. 211.31.37.40 (talk) 01:59, 7 February 2009 (UTC) Ben

Though it's not a usage of the word I'd come across, a kennel of dogs is indeed correct (in the UK at least) for a group of dogs, as well as for a shelter for them. See Wiktionary entry #3. —  Tivedshambo  (t/c) 09:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Here's the general idea: Would someone refer to a group of dogs walking down the street as a "kennel of dogs"? In any event, at present it is cited, which is more than we can say of many of these. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Pack of dogs is correct in US english. I can't imagine anyone saying "Here comes a kennel of dogs." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.21.195.143 (talk) 09:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Dear God,[edit]

WHY does this page even exist??? AshcroftIleum (talk) 23:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Scope of page question[edit]

So does this page cover all plural words? If not, what is the difference between this page and a list of plural words? For example, why does this page not contain "hats"? Locke9k (talk) 19:34, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

There is some discussion about the scope of this (and similar pages) starting at Talk:List_of_collective_nouns_by_collective_term_L-Z#sdzoo.
Your question, though, is a bit more easily addressed. "Hats" is a plural: The hat is on the table. The hats are on the table. These articles address collective nouns: they encompass a group, but are singular: The army of ants is coming this way. The armies of ants are heading for each other. - SummerPhD (talk) 20:30, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Verifiable sources[edit]

Someone says something in a speech (at a conference or wherever). Is this a reliable and verifiable source? Maybe, maybe not.

If the comment existed only in the speech (not in an available transcript, recording or article reporting on the speech), it is unlikely to be verifiable under our guidelines. Please review WP:VERIFIABILITY for details.

If it is verifiable, it still might not be a from a reliable source under our guidelines. Again, please review the appropriate guideline for details. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Merge[edit]

I recommend merging this article with List of collective nouns by collective term A-K.

Please see my comments at this Talk Page.

Ozzieboy (talk) 05:57, 15 May 2011 (UTC)


New article is complete. See List of collective nouns Ozzieboy (talk) 12:11, 29 August 2011 (UTC)