imported>Komonzia: /* Merge proposal */ technically this isn't a made-up word but possibly a zombified calque from ancient Greek (like using the word veriverbium (Latin root) instead of etymology (Latin via Greek, means the same thing directly translated))

2026-03-03T17:11:21Z

Merge proposal: technically this isn't a made-up word but possibly a zombified calque from ancient Greek (like using the word veriverbium (Latin root) instead of etymology (Latin via Greek, means the same thing directly translated))

New page

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=}}

"(fil-O-math-ee)" should be brought into line with [[International Phonetic Alphabet|IPA]]. [[User:Nagelfar|Nagelfar]] ([[User talk:Nagelfar|talk]]) 10:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

== What, more specifically, is a lover of learning? ==
So what are the characteristics of a lover of learning? I came to this page hoping to delve into this concept more. I wondered "does a lover of learning love to interact with all subject material? Can a lover of learning dislike learning about some things or think that some things are boring and therefore not be interested in them, or would this disqualify them as a lover of learning?" — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.221.139.235|87.221.139.235]] ([[User talk:87.221.139.235|talk]]) 11:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC) 

:I would assume. I'm a philomath, except when it comes to math itself. [[Special:Contributions/76.18.160.47|76.18.160.47]] ([[User talk:76.18.160.47|talk]]) 20:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

:I concur with the above user. I believe "love of learning", or philomathy, is the trait of loving the ''process'' of learning, and not (just) ''that which is learned''. Thus, I would assume that philomathy is someone who loves to learn, but this does not have to imply the love of learning ''everything'' or someone who ''wants'' to learn everything, which one could perhaps describe of as (newly contrived neologisms alert!) ''philomnimathy'' or maybe ''philomniscience''. –[[User:Nøkkenbuer|Nøkkenbuer]] ([[User talk:Nøkkenbuer|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nøkkenbuer|contribs]]) 11:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

== Merge proposal ==

In the last [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Pantomath|discussion about trying to delete Pantomath]] 20 years ago, some editors wanted to merge. That article's talk page also has an informal proposal from 2 years ago. I think it's worth trying formally - because "Pantomath" seems like a sort of resurrected ancient Greek term that certain writers have been trying to wedge in as a neologism. (''Very opinionated'': they're trying to sound smart OR they think "lover of knowledge" doesn't accurately describe the subject's want/desire of knowledge strongly enough.) ''Slightly less opinionated'': It has extremely light use in the English language and I don't think we should have articles about every made-up/zombie word/calque that makes it into a publication.

I propose merging [[Pantomath]] into [[Philomath]]. I think the content in Pantomath can easily be explained in the context of this article, and merging them would not cause any article-size or [[WP:UNDUE|weighting]] problems. 🔥[[User:Komonzia|Komonzia]] ([[User talk:Komonzia|message]]) 17:05, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Talk:Philomath - Revision history

imported>Komonzia: /* Merge proposal */ technically this isn't a made-up word but possibly a zombified calque from ancient Greek (like using the word veriverbium (Latin root) instead of etymology (Latin via Greek, means the same thing directly translated))