Titling guidelines

MINIMUMS FOR BEING A STANDARD BIPOLE

All words are made up from different words andor from etymological rootS. For example: Philosophy is a single word made up from a Bipole already «Philo (Love) Sophy (Wisdom)».

Bictiopedia shouldn’t define Philosophy itself because it is a single word, and could encourage to define LovelyPhilosophy despite it being redundant*, but should rather incentivate to define TrueLove because True seems to be an optimized better companion** for the word Love than the word Philosophy, Philotruth, Sophy or Wisdom.

*This issue may seem ridiculous and unconsistent to you or someone else, but there has to be a practical departure point for the project. Bictiopedia doesn’t want to define whatever word that is already singlely present in the more official dictionary of a language. Bictiopedia is not out there to duplicate efforts with dictionaries, it is rather a 2.0 dictionary (lol, lol).

**This issue us very open to debate. Stands on it could be gathered by existant thessaurus relations and more actual and analitics, but for bictiopedia it is definetely the dynamic motion to follow further, because this issue will always be dynamic, it won’t be settled by any dictionary, thessaurus, analitical machine or social consensus.

BIPOLES SINTAXIS AND POLES ORDER OF APPEARANCE

AdjectiveNoun for titles as main default (ex: TrueLove) along main links from those to:

1. Alternate displays (sintactically pseudoequivalent, ex: Truly loving)

2. Its Inverse (where the Noun becomes the Adjective, LovelyTruth)

With common nested contents or not, at user choice.

DEFAULT SINTAXIS EMPHASIS ON ENERGY MAY VARY AT LANGUAGES TRANSLATIONS

There should be some kind of additional reference to the fact that english default sintaxis and spanish one distribute the words default emphasis in completely opposite ways. Ex: TrueLove would equivale to VerdaderoAmor (which is a proper one but not the default sintaxis for spanish), but would be less equivalent to VerdadAmorosa (default sintaxis) and even less to AmorVerdadero (which would be the more correct translation of TrueLove…)

KEYPAIRS: THERE ARE BIPOLES MORE IMPORTANT THAN OTHERS

See the pic below and or read further why some bipoles (relational types) are more important (key), here

Everyone has favourite bipoles, they are important to define because they will be your more nuclear scale that will influence all the rest of your own world, so you want them quite strong for them being able to handle more energy.

Hierarchization of prefered bipoles help you expressing your minimal fundamentals. Axioms that define your fundamental words will apply to whichever other bipole.

See more about this issue in a videotutorial (10 mins), here.

These key relational types and their custom hierarchization should be very incentivated overall.

COMBINED NEOLOGISMS ANDOR MADEUP WORDS

They are very welcome!

COMBINED PREPOSITIONS & DISCONJUNCTIONS

They are the more important items to define! The highest keypairs! ANDOR, OFOR, ISO, etc are even more important items to define than the broadest oxymoron! So they deserve to be titled fully with CAPITALS for acknowleging so, with the sole exception of AndOr (synonim of ANDOR), because this way serves us as a bridge between the vanguard and the rest, so it being our best possible sole representative (IFWHEN needed).