Difference between revisions of "Talk:Inspiration"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(True, but not extremely applicable in my opinion)
m (Agree)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
:That is the technical definition, true, but not at all the [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inspiration common meaning] or the content of this page.  To me, it seems that this isn't a well suited for the breathing category, but if you disagree, you can replace it or I can. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 08:59, 29 March 2016 (EDT)
 
:That is the technical definition, true, but not at all the [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inspiration common meaning] or the content of this page.  To me, it seems that this isn't a well suited for the breathing category, but if you disagree, you can replace it or I can. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|talk]]) 08:59, 29 March 2016 (EDT)
 +
 +
I agree. I too commented on its lack of common usage. [[User:AlanE|AlanE]] ([[User talk:AlanE|talk]]) 18:41, 29 March 2016 (EDT)

Revision as of 22:41, March 29, 2016

Actually, technically, pedantically, (is that right?) medically, inspiration in this context means breathing in; just as aspiration means breathing out. But hey! when did anyone hear it said in this context. AlanE (talk) 00:14, 29 March 2016 (EDT)

That is the technical definition, true, but not at all the common meaning or the content of this page. To me, it seems that this isn't a well suited for the breathing category, but if you disagree, you can replace it or I can. --David B (talk) 08:59, 29 March 2016 (EDT)

I agree. I too commented on its lack of common usage. AlanE (talk) 18:41, 29 March 2016 (EDT)