Talk:Covfefe/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Displaced citation

I’ve removed the only claim attributed to this source, but it may be useful for something else (though I’m not personally familiar with Heavy):

Jessica McBride (May 31, 2017). "Donald Trump & 'Covfefe' Tweet: What Did He Mean?". Heavy.com.

—151.132.206.250 (talk) 00:52, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Linguistic triumphs

I’ve removed the following line from the article because the source is clearly mocking Trump’s language, and as written here, it misleadingly comes across as sincere. I’m unable to find a secondary source commenting on this piece, and I worry it would be considered original research for WP editors to interpret an author’s intent and declare it sarcastic, so I’m leaving it here for the time being.

Journalist Tom Nicholson put covfefe as number one in a top-five list of Donald Trump's "linguistic triumphs" in a December 2018 article for Esquire, with the story's byline being "It's hard to imagine a dictionary without 'covfefe' in it now."

—151.132.206.250 (talk) 17:09, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Yiddish

Someone needs to update with the well documented Yiddish word for "pointless search." Unless you guys are antisemitic. 2600:387:C:6D35:0:0:0:6 (talk) 23:28, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

It is not a Yiddish word, that was a dumb meme that some of his fan club tried to float to cover up for a simple typo. Zaathras (talk) 23:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Might wanna check your facts. Bit of googling got me to this compilation of made-up etymologies, which says about the one you cite: The fact-checkers at Snopes, among others, have debunked these utterly false etymologies line by line. […] And it definitely doesn’t come from the Hebrew kabfefe referring to some “mystical butterfly.” —151.132.206.250 (talk) 17:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Kerfuffle

I'm surprised no one explicitly suggest it was a typo or mishearing for kerfuffle - though it is hinted at in the citation for Ref 10. -- Steve -- (talk) 15:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Speculation is that it was a typo, yes, but we'd need adequate sourcing to include that in the article. It likely was meant to be "coverage," but the sentence cuts off there without completing the thought, so we will never know the actual intended word. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

OK I Since he doesn't use that word elsewhere that makes sense. However, I don't think he uses the word 'coverage' much either. I understand you want extern al sources. It will be another unsolved mystery. Regards -- Steve -- (talk) 22:06, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Nonsense

It is possible that covfefe could mean nonsense. It is very obviously a nonsense word 23emr (talk) 20:42, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Is there something you wish to add to the article? The lede already notes that it isn't a real word, as a likely misspelling or typo. Zaathras (talk) 22:49, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Misunderstood?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

it's not 'misunderstood' . The meaning is unkown that's a completely different thing to a misunderstanding. Misunderstanding is being *mistaken* about what the meaning is. This needs fixing. 82.9.56.21 (talk) 20:53, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

Done. It was a recent POV change. DeCausa (talk) 21:01, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

It is updated to not include political agenda which violates terms of use. It's now reflecting facts and a new trademark which now produces coffee under the name Covfefe as well as the history of how the word was coined. 2600:100C:B257:EECF:0:4:36E8:3901 (talk) 05:48, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

well now a transgender guy named "MaybeirsMir" reversed my edit of pure informative meaning and relation of the word calling my edit outside objectives when that's exactly what I did. Stick to objective TRUTH rather than conjecture and subjective criticism which it is now.

well now a transgender guy named "MaybeirsMir" reversed my edit of pure informative meaning and relation of the word calling my edit outside objectives when that's exactly what I did. Stick to objective TRUTH rather than conjecture and subjective criticism which it is now.

Transgender liars pretending to be women are running Wikipedia. Wow. 2600:100C:B257:EECF:0:4:36E8:3901 (talk) 06:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Your edit was a pretty thinly-veiled advertisement. You also failed to provide a source. You should probably try to understand, or at the very least, skim through Wikipedia's guidelines and policies before you complain about who's "running" it. miranda ^:3 06:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

It means, in a lost antediluvian language, in the end we win. This assertion makes sense within the context of the original tweet. And futher goes to show the lengths fake news outlets will go to attempt to explain the unexplainable to the masses. In effect it was an inside joke that went over the heads of the self-appointed intellectual and academic cultures. 71.28.129.81 (talk) 17:17, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

It was an after-midnight typo, as covered by reliable sources. There's no deeper meaning to it, no hidden "go" message to the QAnon horde, and certainly no "inside message." Zaathras (talk) 19:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

"a lost antediluvian language". :) No worries, I've found a translation aid. DeCausa (talk) 21:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.