Project:Requests for verification/Non-English: Difference between revisions

From The Languages of David J. Peterson
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with " = October 2019 = == Category:Old Prussian lemmas == : I've wondered about our Old Prussian coverage as well, but I'm not sure anyone active here knows enough about t...")
 
(Replaced content with "= [Month] [Year] = == Example ==")
Tag: Replaced
Line 1: Line 1:
= [Month] [Year] =


 
== Example ==
= October 2019 =
 
== [[:Category:Old Prussian lemmas]] ==
 
 
: I've wondered about our Old Prussian coverage as well, but I'm not sure anyone active here knows enough about the language and its corpus to dare to speak up about it or to be able to answer this rfv satisfactorily. I really am not sure what is to be done; if I had the leisure time right now to research this all on my own I would, but I don't. — [[User:Mnemosientje|Mnemosientje]] ([[User talk:Mnemosientje|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Mnemosientje|c]]) 10:48, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
:: Maybe they are. I know that Old Prussian has long vowels, furthermore the Elbing vocabulary, the one online, provides, I think, a reconstruction of words phonetically. The examples above are strange given the other Baltic languages don't have a ē in {{cog|lt|diẽvas}} and {{cog|lv|dìevs}}. From what I know, Old Prussian had no phonological development that caused stressed vowels to lengthen, only the opposite, that unstressed long vowels were reduced to simple vowels. [[User:Holodwig21|𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃]] ([[User talk:Holodwig21|talk]]) 14:31, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 
RFV for the following:
* [[azzaran]]: EGPV "See   Assaran", see [[assaran]]
* [[ballo]]: EGPV "Stirne   Batto"
* [[dags]]: see EGPV in [[dagis]]
* [[irma]]: EGPV "Arm   Irmo", TLP "''irmo'', Arm, Oberarm", see [[irmo]]
* {{m|prg|kams}}: EGPV "Bene   Bitte" & "Hu͡mele   Camus", TLP "''camus,'' Hummel, [..] ''Voc.'' 788."
* [[naguttis]]: EGPV "Nagel   Nagutis", TLP "''nagutis'', Nagel am Finger"
* [[pazzuls]]: EGPV "Nacke   Passoles", TLP "''pa-ssoles'', (pl.?), Nacken"
* [[salts]]: "(manuscript forms:) salta" sounds like "salts" is a non-manuscript form, i.e. a reconstruction. TLP "''salta'', kalt", WBdSG "kalt   Salta"
*
* [[skals]]: EGPV "Kinne   Scalus", TLP "''scalus'', Kinn"
* [[sunnis]]: EGPV "Hunt   Sunis", TLP "''sunis'', Hund", WBdSG "Hundt   Songos"
* {{m|prg|swerreps}}: EPGV "Keynhe͡gest   Sweriapis", TLP "''sweriapis (keynhengest)'' ''Voc.'' 431. ist nunmehr wohl hinreichend klar gelegt als Zuchthengst, Beschäler; es ist das Masc., welches den Femininis poln. ''[..]'', böhm. ''swerzepice'', Stute, entspricht; [...] niederrhein. ''kîen,'' beschälen [...]"
* {{m|prg|August}}, {{m|prg|Daggis}}, {{m|prg|Rags}}: not in EGPV, TLP, WBdSG.
EGPV = Elbing German-Prussian Vocabulary ([https://books.google.com/books?id=KmwwAQAAMAAJ by G. H. F. Nesselmann], [http://donelaitis.vdu.lt/prussian/Elbin.pdf online with reconstructions]); TLP = [https://books.google.com/books?id=JGs-AAAAYAAJ Thesaurus linguae prussicae (etc.) by G. H. F. Nesselmann]; WBdSG = [http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etcs/balt/apreuss/apreu008.htm Wörterbuch des Simon Grunau].
BTW RFC for [[undan]] and [[unds]], see the comment in [[unds]] and in the source of [[wundan]]. TLP "''wundan'', Wasser, ''Voc.'' 59., ''wunda'', ''Gr.'', vgl. ''und-s''" and "''und-s'', nom., ''undan'', acc. ''undas'', gen. sg., ''undans'', acc. pl., Wasser; ''Ench.'' [..]; ''wundan'', ''Voc.'', ''wunda'', ''Gr.'' s. dd."
--[[User:Trothmuse|Trothmuse]] ([[User talk:Trothmuse|talk]]) 14:43, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
:: {{re|Trothmuse}} Most of the RFV pressed forthward don't match with the given phonetic reconstruction, so I would say '''delete'''. I cound't access the TLP so I can't check those; I have my doubts about WBdSG since it gives a diferent picture from EGPV, two examples are TLP {{cog|prg|maiʃta|t=town}} and EGPV {{cog|prg|mēstan|t=town}}, and TLP {{cog|prg|kayme|t=village}} and EGPV (Caymis) {{cog|prg|*kaimis|t=village}}.
:: If [[salts]] isn't attested then it should be deleted; yet an adjective ending with "-a" isn't normal, if the word occurs in a text then it could be the nominative feminine singular, if not then it's either a noun, a adjective given in the feminine nominative or something I'm not quite seeing.
:: I guess the real intetion of "masculine singular" was "singular nominative". The EGPV {{m|prg|(v)undan}} maybe be because of the different forms attested in different sources, so we have {{cog|prg|wunda|t=water}} in TLP, while the Enchiridion has {{cog|prg|unds|t=water}}.
:: One major thing, that I forget to mention, is that Old Prussian, in the Enchiridion, had stress vowels marked by a macron. Therefore if {{cog|prg|Dēiwas}}/{{m|prg|Dēiws}} are from the Enchiridion then it's possible that the correct form is {{cog|prg|Déiwas}}/{{m|prg|Déiws}}, as in diphthongs the macron served to represented the stressed vowel instead of a real long vowel. Another rule, altough not entirely agreed upon, is that vowels after conants are themselves stressed. [[User:Holodwig21|𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃]] ([[User talk:Holodwig21|talk]]) 19:38, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 
::: EGPV has ''wundan (Wasser), caymis (Dorf), mestan (Stat)''. ''(v)undan, mēstan'' are not in EGPV but reconstructions (by V. Mažiulis, added in [http://donelaitis.vdu.lt/prussian/Elbin.pdf that online version of EPGV]).
::: [https://books.google.com/books?id=U6gFAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR10 Nesselmann's ''Die Sprache der alten Preußen (etc.)''] quotes Grunau too (and adds some remarks in brackets and sometimes mentions [https://books.google.com/books?id=SV5Za1t_qvcC&pg=RA1-PA89 Hartknoch's forms]), but has another text than the [http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etcs/balt/apreuss/apreu008.htm WBdSG]. Nesselmann's Grunau has ''Dewus (Goth), Maysta (Stadt), Cayme (Dorff), Wunda (wassere), Songos (hundt)'' and not ''Dewes, Maiʃta [= Maiſta, Maista], kayme, Songos, Wunda'' as in the WBdSG (or ''Devus, Maiſta, Caymo, Sangor, Wunda'' as in Hartknoch's). Nesselmann's TLP ([https://archive.org/details/thesauruslingua00nessgoog here at another source]) has "''deywis'' ''Voc.'' 1., ''dewus'' ''Gr.''" and no ''Dewes/dewes'' (or ''Devus/devus''). [http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/balt/altprbs.htm] mentions the existence of at least two manuscript versions of Grunau's ("Göttinger Handschrift", "Königsberger Handschrift") - the Göttinger version probably being unknown to Nesselmann.
::: Enchiridion ([https://digital.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/werkansicht?PPN=PPN682496707&PHYSID=PHYS_0003&DMDID= original], [https://books.google.de/books?id=U6gFAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA7 Nesselmann's ''Die Sprache der alten Preußen (etc.)''], [https://books.google.com/books?id=QcIFAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA13 ''Die drei catechismen in altpreussischer Sprache (etc.)''], [https://archive.org/details/diealtpreussisch00trau/page/14 Trautmann's ''Die altpreussischen Sprachdenkmäler (etc.)'']) has tilde in original Fraktur, macron in Antiqua editions. In it, it is (ignoring long s): ''{{l|prg|Deiws}}/{{l|prg|Deiwas}} ({{l|prg|Deiwan}}, {{l|prg|Deiwans}})'' without diacritic, ''{{l|prg|piēncts}}'' (other numerals are: ''{{l|prg|pirmois}}, {{l|prg|antars}}, {{l|prg|tīrts}}, {{l|prg|kettwirts}}, {{l|prg|uschts}},{{l|prg|septmas}}, {{l|prg|asmus}}, {{l|prg|newīnts}}, {{l|prg|dessīmts}}''). That makes the original RFV for all terms with macron obsolete, as for example ''{{l|prg|piēncts}}'' is properly attested.
:::Also RFV for the following terms with macron:
:::* {{m|prg|Dēiwas}}/{{m|prg|Dēiws}} & {{m|prg|dēiwas}}/{{m|prg|dēiws}}
:::* {{m|prg|wisasīdis}}: EGPV "Dinstag   Wissaseydis", TLP "wissa-seydis, Dienstag, Voc. 19"
:::* {{m|prg|Janwārs}}, {{m|prg|Februārs}}, {{m|prg|Mārts}}: not in EGPV, TLP, WBdSG.
::: --[[User:Trothmuse|Trothmuse]] ([[User talk:Trothmuse|talk]]) 21:47, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
:::: Right, I normally use the reconstruction by V. Mažiulis instead of the original wording.
 
:::: Sorry I mistaken the TLP with WBdSG, in my comment above where it say "TLP" I meant "WBdSG". In any case, from what I can tell they share similar roots, but not the endings, which IMO can be verified by checking them with the other Baltic languages.
 
:::: If that’s the case then they should be '''deleted'''.
 
:::: I haven't been able to verify all of them but for now I haven't found {{m|prg|Mārts}}; {{m|prg|kams}} is probably a reconstruction of "camus". [[User:Holodwig21|𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃]] ([[User talk:Holodwig21|talk]]) 11:53, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
'''RFV-resolved''' for most of the above. Still TBD: I have to add the actual Enchiridion quotes to [[unds]] and [[undan]], but they do exist. I want to make a template for that. Also, the various forms of "deiwas"/"deiws" with the macrons aren't attested. However, ignoring capitalization and the macrons, all of those forms are attested. However it's quite a mess at present, with different definitions on the entries instead of using {{tl|alt form}}, and with lots of weird labels like "archaic" and "regional". (What does "archaic" mean exactly? The language is extinct!) [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 19:20, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 
= November 2019 =
 
== Classical Nahuatl country-name neologisms ==
 
* {{l|nci|Gallitlalpan}}
* {{l|nci|Inglatlalpan}}
* {{l|nci|Teutontlalpan}}
 
In actual Classical texts, the names for these countries are simply loaned from Spanish: {{m|nci|Francia}}, {{m|nci|Inglatera}} and {{m|nci|Alemania}}. --[[User:Lvovmauro|Lvovmauro]] ([[User talk:Lvovmauro|talk]]) 05:49, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 
References.--[[User:Marrovi|Marrovi]] ([[User talk:Marrovi|talk]]) 13:09, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 
*García Escamilla, Enrique (1994); ''Historia de México narrada en náhuatl y español''. [https://books.google.com.mx/books?id=QNON_26zDyEC&pg=PA59&lpg=PA59&dq=Gallitlalpan+Escamilla&source=bl&ots=KKZGpiM61D&sig=ACfU3U0AOXL-K_FWE_OK9ZCbFe1qlKRxdA&hl=es&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjB7YD80tXlAhUIiqwKHTrKAAEQ6AEwDXoECAUQAQ#v=onepage&q=Gallitlalpan%20Escamilla&f=false], Mexico City.
: That proves nothing. Anything written by a modern author is a simulation of Classical Nahuatl, not the real thing. In the 19th century, someone wrote a story in {{m+|ine-pro|-}}, just to show that it could be done- but that's not attestation according to our standards. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 14:31, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
::"Narrada en nahuatl y español" - but by time (1990s/2000s), it can't be [[Classical Nahuatl]], but must be some other Nahuatl (and may it be some kind of Neo-Classical Nahuatl).
:: --[[User:Trothmuse|Trothmuse]] ([[User talk:Trothmuse|talk]]) 21:12, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Marrovi}} Can you confirm that you understand the problem with this source? That it is The Languages of David J. Peterson policy not to use "revivalist" modern texts in long-extinct languages as attestations for that language? Unless you do, it might be better not to work on Classical Nahuatl at all. — [[User:Mnemosientje|Mnemosientje]] ([[User talk:Mnemosientje|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Mnemosientje|c]]) 10:35, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
:This case is complicated, Classical Nahuatl is taught at many universisties and schools in Mexico, most like to be it a New-Classical Nahuatl mixing with life Nahuatl languages as Central Nahuatl or Morelos Nahuatl language, There's literature in Classical Nahuatl written in the XX century as the case of Enrique García Escamilla or Miguel-León Portilla. However, I understand that this case causes them problems with certain codes allowed here.--[[User:Marrovi|Marrovi]] ([[User talk:Marrovi|talk]]) 11:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 
[http://www.gdn.unam.mx/termino/search New reference].
 
:Commenting to cross-link a related discussion: [[Project:Beer parlour/2019/December#Nahuatl_(nah)%3A_convert_etymology-only_or_delete%3F]]. [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 02:02, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
::If these terms meet the ''attestation'' requirements (momentarily disregarding the ''date'' of the attestations), then the question is whether to view modern use of this language as more similar to Latin (where we include sufficiently-attested modern terms) or Gothic (where we exclude even attested neologisms). Marrovi's comment suggests we should take a Latin approach. [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 02:03, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
::: The reality of Nahautl seems to be that the 1.4 million speakers of Nahuan languages, as divergent as they might be, do try to work online and in literature as speakers of Nahuatl, not many different dialects (wisely in my opinion); see [[w:nah:Calīxatl|the Nahuatl Wikipedia]] for example. I think we should recognize this, and not act as if writing in a common lect of a group of tiny related languages is the same as writing in long-extinct languages like Gothic or PIE.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] ([[User talk:Prosfilaes|talk]]) 11:07, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
:::: The majority of the editors of the Nahuatl Wikipedia do not seem to be native speakers and I'm not sure if their writing would even be intelligible to native speakers. --[[User:Lvovmauro|Lvovmauro]] ([[User talk:Lvovmauro|talk]]) 12:55, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 
=December 2019=
 
== Old English [[andwyrdan]], [[andwirdan]] "to present" ==
 
{{ping|Leasnam|Lambiam|Urszag|Hundwine}} [[User:Stardsen]] created these entries several years ago. {{m|ang|andwyrdan}} definitely means "to answer", but I can find no dictionary that verifies the meaning "to present". The derivation from {{m|ang|andweard}} makes total sense semantically and phonetically, but just doesn't seem to exist. [[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] ([[User talk:Benwing2|talk]]) 05:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
: I found this [[http://web.ff.cuni.cz/cgi-bin/uaa_slovnik/gmc_search_v3?cmd=formquery2&query=and-weardian&startrow=1]] where the gloss for {{m|ang|andweardiende}} says ''presentans'' ({{m|la|praesentans}}) and here [[https://koeblergerhard.de/wikiling/?query=andweardian&f=ae&mod=0]] where ''andweardian'' is glossed as {{m|de|vorbringen}}/{{m|la|respondeo}} (click anywhere on line 1 to expand), and this [[https://books.google.com/books?id=eLYiXNHnQWsC&pg=PA21&dq=%22andwyrdan%22+%22andweardian%22&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjloK32oJbmAhVIrVkKHW6NAXQQ6AEwAHoECAYQAg#v=onepage&q=%22andwyrdan%22%20%22andweardian%22&f=false]], so that would suggest that {{m|ang|andweardian}} (also ''andwyrdian'') has the meaning of "render, offer up, proffer". I couldn't find anything tying ''andweardian'' to {{m|ang|andwyrdan}} or {{m|ang|andwirdan}}, which mean "to answer" [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 05:35, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
:: Thanks. Yes, ''andweardian'' definitely means "present". However, your third source (Clark Hall et al.) should not be interpreted to mean that ''andwyrdian'' means "present". What it says is ''(+andweardian also = andwyrdian)''; the + means "only when prefixed with ''ġe-''" (+/- means "with or without a ''ġe-'' prefix"), so this notation means "ġeandweardian can also mean the same as andwyrdian" (namely "to answer"). [[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] ([[User talk:Benwing2|talk]]) 06:07, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
:::Isn't ''andwyrdian'' (i.e. ''andwyrdan'') different to ''andwyrdan'' though ? [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 18:20, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 
= February 2020 =
 
== [[#rfv-sense-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. Rfv-sense: to make [[cross]] —[[Special:Contributions/95.185.32.82|95.185.32.82]] 09:42, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
: The definition is ambiguous: "[[cross]]" is probably a verb here, in which case it would be better as "to cause to cross". That's at least halfway plausible as the literal counterpart to this etymology's figurative senses. I sincerely doubt it's an adjective, which would mean "to cause to be annoyed; to annoy". [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 12:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
: That’s what {{R:ar:Lane|page=1937a|entry=}} writes about this sense:  , (Lh, K,) inf. n. ; (TA;) and  ↓ , (Lh, K,) and ; (TA;) He made him to cross, go across, or pass over, or he conveyed him across, the water, (Lh, K, TA,) and the river. (TA.). Yes, a ditransitive verb is meant. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 13:36, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
:: Well, this {{m|ar|}} is “to {{m|en|get across}}” in the literal meaning and in the figurative meaning (but only the latter is notorious nowadays and perhaps already in the 7th century). I do not see in what distinct sense “to interpret” is meant here which the IP added. In the example quote for the base stem it is not much different, it is just “to express to make something known with the other party”, and interpretation is always part of the process of expressing something. Probably one should change the definitions of both verbs to “to get across”, because that’s what it basically is, adding that it is normally or by now only used in the figurative sense of expressing or interpreting (to be safe in case somebody ever comes across a literal use so he might be incited by it to add his quote; now there is no hope for us to find the literal meaning by systematic search because occurrences of {{m|ar|}} in any form are most likely to be the base stem and the very common sense of expressing and the very common preposition “across”) [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 14:20, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 
= March 2020 =
 
== [[otofoto#rfv-notice-nl-|otofoto]] ==
 
Dutch protologism. —[[User:Metaknowledge|Μετάknowledge]] 22:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
: It is attested [https://issuu.com/boumara/docs/boumara_2/80 here] and also in the subtitle of an article about Heleen van Royen (so NSFW) [https://www.groene.nl/artikel/de-gelukkige-huisfotograaf here]. Perhaps someone could check Usenet? Should at least be tagged as rare if it passes.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  12:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
::It's mentioned [https://issuu.com/babylonbmagazine/docs/b-magazine_mei here]. I don't see anything on Usenet. [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 16:20, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
:: Also used as a title [https://krantenbankzeeland.nl/issue/pzc/2015-04-11/edition/null/page/5?query=otofoto here], but whether that should qualify as a use is rather arguable. As an aside, it turns out that it was also the title of a column about car photos in the 70s.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  19:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 
{{look}}
 
== [[miinibaashkiminasiganibiitoosijiganibadagwiingweshiganibakwezhigan#rfv-notice-oj-|miinibaashkiminasiganibiitoosijiganibadagwiingweshiganibakwezhigan]] ==
 
Sounds like a "dictionary-only" word. Any takers? [[User:SemperBlotto|SemperBlotto]] ([[User talk:SemperBlotto|talk]]) 11:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
: And is that really one word?  This looks like a long descriptive phrase with all the whitespace deleted.  ‑‑ [[User:Eirikr|Eiríkr Útlendi]] │ 04:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
:: Don't forget that this is a polysynthetic language. It's not a long phrase, it's a compound of compounds, with affixes filling the role of particles instead of separately. Here's a [https://ojibwe.lib.umn.edu/main-entry/miini-baashkiminasigani-biitoosijigani-bakwezhigan-na page showing the morphology and related words]. You can even hear it pronounced. Given Ojibwe's LDL status, that might even suffice. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 04:53, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
:::* {{ping|Chuck Entz}}, my comment was actually inspired by my study of a different highly agglutinating polysynthetic language, Navajo, where we find things like {{m|nv|chidí naaʼnaʼí beeʼeldǫǫh bikááʼ dah naaznilígíí||tank|pos=as in an armored fighting vehicle}} -- a long descriptive phrase, literally parsing out to "the thing that's a car that crawls about and has a cannon and people sit on it".  So when I see super long words like the one above, and then I see it broken down, I find myself wondering if this is really just a typography problem where someone decided to remove the whitespace.  ‑‑ [[User:Eirikr|Eiríkr Útlendi]] │ 15:47, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
:::The key question is whether the University of Minnesota's webpage counts as durably archived (I'm on the fence here). Secondarily, they spell it with a bunch of hyphens separating morphemes, so if we do keep it, we probably ought to move it to match their spelling. —[[User:Metaknowledge|Μετάknowledge]] 05:08, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
::::Note that the UMN website has a shorter word, lacking the ''badagwiingweshigani'' component (see also [https://ojibwe.lib.umn.edu/main-entry/badagwiingweshin-vai ''badagwiingweshin'']) in the entry taken here from the Anishinaabemowin website.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 11:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 
They may be putting the hyphens in solely as an aid to the reader, the way Russian dictionaries put accents on that aren't used in  normal writing.  There are other examples of this such as [https://ojibwe.lib.umn.edu/main-entry/biinji-gizhaabikizigan-adv-loc biinji-gizhaabikizigan],  Okay I see native speakers using  hyphens, but it still could be that one dictionary is using them to show the morpheme boundaries as an aid to the reader when they would not be used in ordinary writing. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 17:42, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 
Sorry for the ''very'' long delay, but I forgot    about this.    [[:user:CJLippert]] replied to me on Wikipedia and the answer is [[:w:User_talk:CJLippert#Hyphens|here]]. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 23:52, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 
So to sum up, the current spelling we have for this word is fine.  Some linguistic dictionaries will add hyphens, which would make the word [[miini-baashkiminasigani-biitoosijigani-badagwiingweshigani-bakwezhigan]], a policy which we seem to follow at least some of the time.  But it is still definitely a single word and should not be written with spaces.  Is it a dictionary-only word? I think not, because it's quite easy to find this word being used online on sites that aren't dictionaries.  I would say that nearly all people using this word are specifically choosing it because of how long it is, but that hasn't stopped us from including other very long words. (Also, we never said this was the longest word in Ojibwe, since after all the part that means blueberry is just ''miini'' ... a [[odatagaagomin|blackberry]] pie would be a few syllables longer.)
:I note, as said above, that this word also seems to be in circulation without the fourth morpheme, producing the slightly shorter [[miini-baashkiminasigani-biitoosijigani-bakwezhigan]]. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 01:45, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
:: Pinging {{ping|-sche}}, who knows more about this language than we do. A lot depends on the context: if it's not accompanied with the normal morphology associated with similar words in similar contexts, it might be more like a mention or an example sentence than an actual use. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 02:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
::: Am I correct in understanding that the remaining question is only whether the term should be spelled with or without hyphens, since its existence as a word (with no ''spaces'', despite the length) is demonstrated by the Ojibwe People's Dictionary? Unfortunately, I don't speak much Ojibwe at all and haven't read enough literature in it to have a sense of whether this would most often be written with or without hyphens. Online, I find various mentions of the hyphenated word, vs only a few unhyphenated examples (often low-quality or embedded in Russian); based on that and the Ojibwe People's Dictionary, it seems it should be moved to the form with hyphens. As to why it's not spelled with ''spaces''... as Chuck said in an early comment, some languages prefer strings like this, parsed as words (with or without hyphens: e.g. Nuxalk has some rather long strings with no spaces or hyphens, nor even vowels or syllable breaks), where other languages (like Navajo) might prefer to use several separate words parsed as forming a long descriptive term. [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 03:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
:::: {{ping|-sche}}: This isn't in the ''Ojibwe People's Dictionary''. Rather, a form with fewer components is: ''[[miini-baashkiminasigani-biitoosijigani-bakwezhigan]]'', which I've just created. AFAICT, we generally hyphenate Ojibwe compounds, as does OPD. Compare ''[[akiiwe-wiigiwaam]]'', ''[[aabita-niibino-giizis]]'', ''[[gichi-manidoo-giizis]]'', etc. I can't comment as to whether the hyphens are used in actual texts written in the language, because almost all hits I've found while searching for the preceding three terms on Google are mentions embedded in other language (usually English) text. Exceptions include [https://books.google.com/books?id=lp4-CgAAQBAJ&pg=PT151&dq=%22gichimanidoogiizis%22 this tribal constitution] and [https://books.google.com/books?id=rdhrAAAAMAAJ&q=%22gichi-manidoo-giizis%22&dq=%22gichi-manidoo-giizis%22 this journal article], both of which use the hyphens.
:::: As an LDL, one source suffices for Ojibwe. However, [[WT:CFI]] still says that "the community of editors for that language should maintain a list of materials deemed appropriate as the only sources for entries based on a single mention". [[Project:About Ojibwe]] is silent on that (as it is about hyphenation), but based on actual practice, OPD would undoubtedly be in that list. Would the current source pass muster? IDK. There may be others. Almost all the Google hits are just sites about long words, though.
:::: Btw, I strongly suspect that the more normal word for blueberry pie would be ''miini-biitoosijigan'', but ironically that isn't in OPD and barely registers on Google. OPD does have ''[[miskomini-biitoosijigan]]'' (raspberry pie), though. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 09:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 
= April 2020 =
 
== [[Tom#rfv-notice-az-|Tom]] ==
 
Azerbaijani. Tagged but not listed. [[User:Old Man Consequences|Old Man Consequences]] ([[User talk:Old Man Consequences|talk]]) 17:39, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 
:Untagged by {{ping|Mnemosientje}} {{diff|62305244||here}}. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 04:23, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
::There's no doubt that Azerbaijani works will include references to foreigners (real or fictional) named Tom. E.g. [https://issuu.com/nara777/docs/tm_se/6 here], talking about {{w|Tom Sawyer}}, [https://issuu.com/nara777/docs/_rp_l_ng_u_uran/422 here], apparently talking about {{w|Dan Rather}} and {{w|Tom Brokaw}}, or [https://issuu.com/harunyahya/docs/d___n_n_insan_42_sent-2017/84 here], talking about a zoologist affiliated with Oxford University. But I'm not sure about the definition "A transliteration of the English male given name Tom." How can it be a transliteration if the starting and ending points are in the same script and identical? Are we just using "transliteration" to emphasize that it's not used natively? [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 04:53, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Pol#rfv-notice-az-|Pol]] ==
 
Azerbaijani. Tagged but not listed. [[User:Old Man Consequences|Old Man Consequences]] ([[User talk:Old Man Consequences|talk]]) 19:48, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 
== [[KBC#rfv-notice-de-|KBC]] / [[ABC#rfv-notice-de-|ABC]] ==
 
German. Probably only used in terms like {{m|de|KBC-Waffen}} / {{m|de|ABC-Waffen}}, in which at best there is a pseudo-prefix {{m|de|KBC-}} / {{m|de|ABC-}}. --[[User:Bakunla|Bakunla]] ([[User talk:Bakunla|talk]]) 05:53, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
:'''Cited''' ABC, will look for KBC later. Used in a variety of hyphenated compounds. It's clearly a common initialism, and being a "pseudo-prefix" isn't really an argument to delete it, since by definition it implies it is really some other POS, presumably that of its constituents (i.e. adjective in this case). —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 02:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 
:{{l|de|ABC}} isn't cited yet, only some examples for terms like {{l|de|ABC-Krieg}} and {{l|de|ABC-Vollschutz}} were provided. It's comparable to [[:Category:German terms prefixed with Langzeit-|terms with ''Langzeit-'']] ({{m|de|Langzeit}} doesn't exists). Maybe compare with:
:* [https://www.wissen.de/rechtschreibung/langzeit wissen.de] which has it as ''Langzeit...'' It says: "in Zus." = in compounds, which is true like: {{l|de|Langzeitversuch}} = {{com|de|lang|Zeit|Versuch}}.
:* [[:de:Langzeit-]] calls it a bound lexeme ("gebundenes Lexem") which they distinguish from affixes and also from "affixoids" (like [[:de:tod-]] which they call prefixoid ("Präfixoid")). In en.wiktionary however bound lexems and affixoids are simply given as affixes.
:* [https://www.duden.de/suchen/dudenonline/Langzeit duden.de] while having some terms with ''Langzeit-'' has nothing like ''Langzeit, Langzeit-, Langzeit...'' but it lacks some affixes, ''affixoids'' or ''bound lexemes''. ([https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/tod_ ''tod-''] is an example which they have and they call it prefix.)
:--[[Special:Contributions/2003:DE:372E:DA74:2560:4D6F:A0D6:B2F5|2003:DE:372E:DA74:2560:4D6F:A0D6:B2F5]] 15:05, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
::"In en.wiktionary however bound lexems and affixoids are simply given as affixes"—not really, The Languages of David J. Peterson has things like {{tl|only used in}} precisely for bound lexemes and generally those entries are not formatted as affixes. As for ''Langzeit-'', in all but one of the existing entries in ''Langzeit-'' the term is straightforwardly broken down to ''lang'' + ''Zeit'', the "affixoid" category with one entry you linked is not the standard practice. If we're following de.wikt, [[:de:ABC]] has its own entry and is simply noted as "meist in Wortverbindungen gebräuchlich", which is comparable to the standard practice to en.wikt. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 15:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
:::If de.wt's "meist in Wortverbindungen gebräuchlich" (''meist = mostly'', not ''only'') is factually correct, then it deserves an entry at [[ABC]]. Question is, is it correct? --[[Special:Contributions/2003:DE:372E:DAD0:B169:E28F:1253:8DB8|2003:DE:372E:DAD0:B169:E28F:1253:8DB8]] 21:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== Old English {{m|ang|wesan||to feast, consume}} ==
 
This is listed in the descendants of {{m|gem-pro|*wesaną|id=consume}}, but it's not listed in Bosworth-Toller. Köbler does have it, but with a question mark. It also lists the derived {{m|ang|forwesan}} without a question mark, while BT is missing that too. —[[User:Rua|Rua]] ([[User talk:Rua|mew]]) 11:11, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
:{{reply to|Rua}} I've chased why this {{l|ang|wesan#Etymology_2|wesan|t=to feast}} is in some dictionaries. It's only used once—maybe—in Old English (and possibly again in Middle English? I haven't gone after that one yet), but it's fairly doubtful. I've added the info at the entry. —[[User:Caoimhin ceallach|caoimhinoc]] ([[User talk:Caoimhin ceallach|talk]]) 06:17, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[Λεώνη#rfv-notice-el-|Λεώνη]] ==
 
Greek for [[León]], Spain. According to Wikipedia it's [[w:el:Λεόν (Ισπανία)|Λεόν]]. [[User:Ultimateria|Ultimateria]] ([[User talk:Ultimateria|talk]]) 05:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
:That article on the Greek Wikipedia gives Λεώνη as the “Hellenization” of ''León'' and ''Llión''.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 08:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
:{{ping|Sarri.greek}}, could you please take a look at this? —[[User:Metaknowledge|Μετάknowledge]] 03:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
:: Yes [[User:Metaknowledge|@Metaknowledge]], it is as [[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] explains. Many  cities have both variants: phonetic unadapted simplified spelling and -usually older style:- adapted with declension. But The female's name is only Λεώνη, not Λεόν, [[User:Ultimateria|@Ultimateria]]. ‑‑[[User:Sarri.greek|Sarri.greek]]  [[Special:Contributions/Sarri.greek||]] 07:45, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Sarri.greek|Sarri.greek]]: In [[Special:Diff/59816303|this edit summary]], you stated a willingness to add quotations. When you have the free time, it would be nice if you could do that, so we can close this RfV. (You can even just send me links to Google Books or similar and I'll do the rest, if desired.) [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 08:05, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
:::: Happy New Year. No need for quotation. A google search for "Λεώνη" "Ισπανία" (Spain) gives numerous examples with snippets and titles for given name and placename (of no other interest). I verify that both definitions exist. ‑‑[[User:Sarri.greek|Sarri.greek]]  [[Special:Contributions/Sarri.greek|I]] 11:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 
= June 2020 =
 
== [[อุตสาห#rfv-notice-th-|อุตสาห]] ==
 
Thai. This seems to be a morpheme, not a word.  I'm not sure how to clean up the entry, or whether it should remain when fixed.  According to the (Thai) Royal Institute Dictionary (RID), the independent word is {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|อุตส่าห์}} (note the tone mark and cancellation mark), yielding the unbound pronunciation shown, while {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|อุตสาห}} is a trisyllabic prefix, notated {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|อุตสาห-}} in the RID.  (The Thai of the RID does use hyphens.) The RID also reports a trisyllabic stand-alone form, {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|อุตสาหะ}}.  Before one spelling reform, if the word existed (evidence?), the trisyllabic unbound form would have been spelt the same as the challenged lemma. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 11:09, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 
:You will find lots of [[อุตสาหกรรม]] ([[อุตสาห]] + [[กรรม]]) in search results, and some rare compounds like [[อุตสาหการ]] (อุตสาห + [[การ]]). In The Languages of David J. Peterson, every form of a word can have its own page, that is, we can have [[อุตสาห]], [[อุตส่าห์]], [[อุตสาหะ]], [[อุษาหะ]], [[อุสสาหะ]], and [[อุสส่าห์]]. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 13:37, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
::The compounds you cited are evidence for {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|อุตสาห-}}, are they not?  I'm not sure how to link all these forms.  Linked they should be.  Is the etymology of [[อุตสาหกรรม]] {{temp|compound|th|อุตสาห|กรรม}}, {{temp|compound|th|อุตสาหะ|กรรม}}, {{temp|compound|th|อุตส่าห์|กรรม}}, {{temp|compound|th|อุตสาห-|กรรม}} or even {{temp|compound|th|อุตสาห-|-กรรม}}?  Or {{temp|prefix|th|อุตสาห|กรรม}}? And why doesn't the latter link to a form with a hyphen?  Amusingly, [[อุตสาหกรรม]] gets broken between lines with a hyphen (at the morpheme join) in the 1999 edition of the RID.--[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 16:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
If [[อุตสาห]] is now only the combining form (the disyllabic nonocombining form has vanished since I raised this RfV), why is its part of speech 'adjective' as opposed to 'prefix'? --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 16:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
:::I added {{temp|compound|th|อุตสาห|กรรม}}. Thai lemmas here do not have hyphen for prefix/suffix because they have same meaning of its full word so prefix/suffix will be written on the same page, unless they are spelled different. And Thai lemmas can always attach to another word even they are not prefix/suffix (a noun can modify another noun, etc), like Chinese and other languages in the SEA region. In case of อุตสาห, the dictionary said:
 
'''อุตสาห-, อุตส่าห์, อุตสาหะ''' น. ความบากบั่น, ความพยายาม, ความขยัน, ความอดทน, ใช้ว่า อุษาหะ อุสสาหะ หรือ อุสส่าห์ ก็มี. ก. บากบั่น, พยายาม, ขยัน, อดทน.
 
and
 
'''อุสส่าห์, อุสสาหะ''' น. อุตสาหะ. ก. อุตส่าห์.
 
:::that means the entry อุตสาห should be noun (น.), since morpheme cannot be verb (ก.). อุตส่าห์, อุตสาหะ, อุสส่าห์, อุสสาหะ, and unmentioned อุษาหะ are full words. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 01:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 
::::No, it means the preceding combining form is written in words as "อุตสาห", while as a whole word it is {{m|th|อุตส่าห์}} or {{m|th|อุตสาหะ}}.  The rest means that the word forms are both nouns and verbs, and that there are yet other spellings in use.  Taking the RID as a whole, it's not clear to me what the status of {{m|th|อุษาหะ}} is; unlike the other forms, it has no entry of its own in the RID.  Note there is no entry '''{{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|อุตสาห}}''' in the RID; the entry is '''{{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|อุตสาห-}}'''. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 08:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 
::::There are two main modes of noun compounding in Thai.  Indic words are combined in the order (modifier, head), and the first element usually sprouts a linking vowel and the restoration in speech of the silent final vowels, and often clarification of the phonation of a final stop.  There may also be spelling changes.  This the old Indo-European order, still seen in English compounds like [[coalmine]].  The native order is (head, modifier), and it is often not clear whether this is syntax or word derivation.  The first element may be modified, e.g. by the vowel shortening, but this is not visible in writing.  There are then a few anomalous compounds, like {{m|th|ผลไม้|t=fruit}}, with native ordering but still a link vowel. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 08:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 
::::Note that in this case that the noun and its compounding form ''are'' written differently.  I believe there is no big problem with giving the etymology of the compound as {{temp|compound|th|อุตสาหะ|กรรม}}; what is uncertain is whether it is a compound of the 2- or 3-syllable form. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 08:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 
:::: I notice that Octahedron80 has sneakily changed the part of speech to 'noun'.  With that change, the entry is clearly a candidate for deletion, as there is no noun {{m|pi|อุตสาห}} in correctly spelt modern Thai. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 08:32, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
::::: I have originally created it as a noun, since the PoS distinction in a language such as Thai is blurred, especially for compound words. I was guided by its meaning and my Thai is below average.
::::: It's was reasonable to change it to noun. The term is present in Sanook dictionary. There are so many derivations. Please '''keep''' the word. {{th-l|อุตส่าห์}} should be the alt or the main spelling, IMO. --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 09:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::: It's not a ''word'' in modern Thai!  The Sanook dictionary is a compilation of other dictionaries.  Which one are you citing?  The headword from the RID looks corrupt, but perhaps it's from so old a version that the hyphen wasn't there.  A 1950's book teaching Thai laments that the spelling {{lang-lite|pi|sc=Thai|นม}} represented both of what are now written as {{l|th|นมะ|t=homage|tr=námá}} and {{l|th|นม|t=milk)}}. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 10:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::::: Here's the [https://dictionary.sanook.com/search/dict-th-th-royal-institute/อุตสาห link]. What are you suggesting? I don't think it's very typical to have Thai entries with hyphens. Another solution, like having a component as SoP may be required. --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 11:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
::::::::: I'm stating that as a copy of a recent RID dictionary, the headwords in the Sanook dictionary are corrupt.  I have one other big Thai dictionary, and that also shows combining forms with a hyphen.  It seems that the correct way forward is to:
:::::::::# Mark this entry as a 'noun form', the combining form of {{m|th|อุตส่าห์}} and {{m|th|อุตสาหะ}}.  (I have jocularly referred to Thai as having a genitive case.) --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::::::# Use first of these forms as the central lemma, referencing compounds to it. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::::::# On those two pages, say, in the usage notes, how compounds are formed and handled.  Display this entry with a hyphen, which is the expectation of readers who have used a good Thai dictionary. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
:::::::::A longer term solution is to change {{temp|prefix}} so that it expects Thai prefixes to have hyphens, and rename this entry to the hyphenated form, as seen in good dictionaries.  Special handling will be needed if we can find evidence of the use of the challenged word's form as a noun. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
::::::::: Michell's 1892 dictionary has {{m|th|อุสสาห}}, but curiously indicates a disyllabic pronunciation.  If that had been entered as a noun, it would be right to keep it as an obsolete spelling. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 
Hundreds of words are in the same case like this. For example [[แพทย]]/[[แพทย์]], [[อินทร]]/[[อินทร์]], [[ศาสตร]]/[[ศาสตร์]], [[ธุร]]/[[ธุระ]], etc, if you want to look into it. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 04:49, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
:Yes.  They need to be dealt with.  I intend to create a template for noting the existence of a combining form.  I think I'll call it {{temp|th-combining}}.  Its expansion may need rework, as head-initial and head-final compounding are different, but I couldn't think of a snappy way of saying that to non-linguists.  For {{m|th|แพทย์|t=physician}}, {{m|th|แพทย์หญิง|t=female doctor}} versus {{m|th|แพทยศาสตร์|t=medicine (the disicipline)}} exemplifies the difference. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 08:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 
== German "Suffixes" ==
 
* {{m|de|-beck}}, {{m|de|-büren}}/{{m|de|-bühren}}, {{m|de|-broich}} in place-names: Instead of being formed with the suffix, rather the place-names are borrowed, e.g. {{m+|de|Lübeck}} from Low German or Middle Low German.
* {{m|de|-vitz}}/{{m|de|-witz}} in surnames: Rather from place-names, e.g. {{w|Horowitz}} from the German place {{m|de|Horowitz}}, influenced by Slavic.
--[[User:Marontyan|Marontyan]] ([[User talk:Marontyan|talk]]) 10:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 
== [[сука#rfv-sense-notice-ru-|сука]] ==
 
Russian. Rfv-sense "(vulgar, offensive) promiscuous slut". Originally added by an IP (with the wrong template) with the reasoning: "Reliable source needed for that use of the word" in [[Special:Diff/59646089|diff]]. — [[User:Surjection|'''s'''ur]][[Special:Contributions/Surjection|'''j'''ec]][[Special:Log/Surjection|'''t'''ion]] ⟨⟩ 21:40, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
:There are lot of senses in this word. But of course it also has the sexual connotations associated with dogs, actually more than the English {{m|en|bitch}} which often refers to the pesky behaviour of dogs (→ {{m|en|bitchy}}), so translation is not one to one. Maybe all those senses you find for {{lang-lite|ru|sc=Cyrl|как суку}} in pornographic sites on the web are examples for this gloss. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 20:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
:I would say not necessarily promiscuous, but a slut in some quasi-positive sense, more like a sexually attractive sophisticated woman. --[[User:GareginRA|GareginRA]] ([[User talk:GareginRA|talk]]) 12:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 
= July 2020 =
 
== New Saxon Spellings ==
 
See the [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=250&offset=0&profile=default&search=%22New+Saxon+Spelling%22&advancedSearch-current={}&ns0=1 search results]. The [[w:New Saxon Spelling?oldformat=true|Wikipedia article]] was deleted. --[[User:B-Fahrer|B-Fahrer]] ([[User talk:B-Fahrer|talk]]) 14:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 
= August 2020 =
 
== [[буковинець сипав воду а галичан віллів]] ==
 
Ukrainian. [[User:Atitarev|@Atitarev]] This has no hits outside of The Languages of David J. Peterson, and the grammar of галичан віллів seems questionable; галичан is genitive plural, which doesn't fit, and віллів cannot be found in any dictionary. [[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] ([[User talk:Benwing2|talk]]) 03:40, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
:[[User:Benwing2|@Benwing2]]: Entry created by [[User:Kevlar67]], apparently from hearsay, used by some narrow community in Canada. I don't understand the grammar and most of the vocab in the phrase. --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 03:50, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
::{{ping|Atitarev|Benwing2}} "Hearsay" is one way of saying it.  It's actually "oral history research" done by professional museum researchers.  http://www.artsrn.ualberta.ca/heritagevillage/dictionary.php#B  see the quote: "Bukovýnets sýpav vódu a halychán výlliv — a Bukovynian and a Galician both pour water, but each calls it by another name." I just transliterated it into Cyrillic. (though perhaps it should be в'''и'''ллів) [[User:Kevlar67|Kevlar67]] ([[User talk:Kevlar67|talk]]) 17:59, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Kevlar67}} So what we have here is an obsolete Canadian dialect of Ukrainian, taken from a website of questionable provenance, with no source identified for the words, written in a non-scientific transcription, then  back-transliterated into Cyrillic (sometimes with errors) and identified as "Ukrainian" often with no indication that it's obsolete dialect. This doesn't bode well, to say the least. I feel uncomfortable about accepting these terms at all into this dictionary; I think it does no favors to the quality of the dictionary to include them. Furthermore, do you understand the grammar of this sentence? I don't: the word for Galician is галича́нин (галича́н is genitive plural, which makes no sense here) and ви́ллів looks like a genitive plural but I don't know of what word; it can't be found in the dictionary. I suspect this phrase is garbled by whoever did the research. [[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] ([[User talk:Benwing2|talk]]) 19:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
::::[[User:Benwing2|@Benwing2]]: Obsolete is a bit strong; it's in decline, sure, but so are thousands of languages and dialects around the world.  The research was done the [[w:Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village]|Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Village, an agency of the Government of Alberta, by professional researchers including [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert Klymasz]] Robert Klymasz the preeminent Ukrainian-Canadian folklorist and expert on the local dialect.  The link I provided is a summary comprised of the glossaries of several published works of oral history research, most notably Robert B. Klymasz, [https://archive.org/details/svitocelebrating00klym|'''''Sviéto''''': ''Celebrating Ukrainian-Canadian ritual in East Central Alberta through the Generations''], Edmonton, 1992.  Notice that the title is even in dialect, the standard being ''Sviato''.  Yes, indeed the phrase it should be given context labels.  I have no issue with that, in fact I can do it now. [[User:Kevlar67|Kevlar67]] ([[User talk:Kevlar67|talk]]) 23:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
:::: About the transcription: it is a modified version of the Library of Congress system that the research staff at the Ukrainian Village adopted for their first published report in 1976, ''Ukrainian Vernacular Architecture in Alberta'' by John Lehr, when access to word processors that could make diacritical marks in Canada was limited.  Further, the materials were meant to be read by non-linguists, mainly museum employees, historians, folklorists, etc.  I don't see this as an issue in any way.  Works about the dialect were also published in Cyrillic, notably https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaroslav_Rudnyckyj Jaroslav Rudnyckyj's multi-volume Ukrainian-Canadian Folklore and Dermatological Texts (Winnipeg, 1956, 1958, and 1962-63). [[User:Kevlar67|Kevlar67]] ([[User talk:Kevlar67|talk]]) 23:43, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
::::: [[User:Kevlar67|@Kevlar67]]: The phrase has no value and should be deleted. It was poorly transliterated (the page just uses phonetic Anglicisation, not any specific standard) and poorly translated or rather described. Now I understand what it meant:
::::: At play is a variation of two verbs with similar meaning:
::::: си́пати/насипа́ти (наси́пати)/висипа́ти (ви́сипати) vs ли́ти/налива́ти (нали́ти)/вилива́ти (ви́лити)
::::: "sýpav" refers to си́пав (from си́пати-impf) and "výlliv" is ви́лив (from ви́лити-pf, to pour out).
::::: There is a mix-up in East Slavic languages, not unique to Ukrainian about си́пати (to pour friable/solid objects, such as sand, sugar, salt, etc) and ли́ти (to pour (liquid). Using си́пати (*sỳpati) is normally considered incorrect in standard Ukrainian, ли́ти (*liti) should be used for liquids. This incorrect usage is ascribed to a Galician speaker and it's supposed to be funny in how one person from Bukovina pours water in, the other from Galicia pours it out but they just use different verbs to describe their action.
::::: The sentence uses inconsistent aspects - the first part is imperfective and the second is perfective.
::::: It's grammatically incorrect. It can be rewritten as "букови́нець си́пав во́ду, а галича́нин '''вилива́в'''" (imperfective) or "букови́нець '''naси́пав''' во́ду, а галича́нин '''ви́лив'''" (perfective). --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 12:22, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::: Of no value to whom?  Yes, I understand it is humourous, that was the point all along.  It is equivalent to the English saying: Britain and American are two countries ''divided'' by a common language.  Rather than give an word-for-word translation, I think the point of the sentence is best compared to this popular English joke.  This was how Galicians and Bukovinians felt about each other when they settled together in Canada: similar enough to understand each other but different enough to get confused.  Again, this is recorded exactly as spoken from oral history interviews, using the Library of Congress system so if the grammar doesn't match standardized conventions, this is '''not''' an error, it is verity.  In any event, I will be adding more examples of Ukrainian-Canadian usage as part of my work to document and publicize this endangered dialect.  [[User:Kevlar67|Kevlar67]] ([[User talk:Kevlar67|talk]]) 16:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
::::::: [[User:Kevlar67|@Kevlar67]]: Are you even sure that "виллів" is correct? Why is "l" doubled and it's an "і", not "и"? It's not Ukrainian by any measure. What is this word? Are you sure that the author did a good job by transliterating into an Anglicised version of Ukrainian? Why different verbs aspects are used? It doesn't make sense. How well did the interviewees speak Ukrainian? Diaspora Ukrainian differs from modern standard Ukrainian but in different ways. Such examples only give false impressions. By not providing the links to lemmas or providing the literal translations (on top of the explanation), you're doing a disservice to users. Adding some labels (Canada, dated) is a good start but your spellings suggest that Ukrainians in 1920's in Canada didn't know how to pronounce or spell. Your source actually provides stresses, which you failed to insert. The RFV will take its course and the entry will be deleted (by any user who knows the rules here) because there are no citations provided. A single mention in this dictionary is not a enough. There are zero uses and one mention. On top of that, we don't record non-idiomatic phrases. --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 02:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
::::::::Maybe this should be put into an appendix, along with any other such Canadian Ukrainian idioms that have a similar level of attestation, if there are any. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 03:54, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[gichi-#rfv-sense-notice-oj-|gichi-]] ==
 
Ojibwe. Gichi- is one of the ways to say ''right'' (not left). It is not clear whether it should be considered a preverb (see [https://www.freelang.net/online/ojibwe.php?lg=gb here]) or an initial (initials are written without a hyphen), as in [https://ojibwe.lib.umn.edu/main-entry/gichinik-ni gichinik], or whether it can be analyzed as a separate lemma at all. [[User:SteveGat|SteveGat]] ([[User talk:SteveGat|talk]]) 14:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 
:I can't find evidence of "gichi-" being used as a preverb in Ojibwe for directional right. Proto-Algonquian [https://protoalgonquian.atlas-ling.ca/#!/entry/5ab2bdac-ac48-4b54-a561-15f4074b97b0 ''*keʔčineϴki''] is reconstructed for "right arm/hand", cf. Cree ''kihcinisk'', and that is composed of {{m|alg-pro|*keʔči-}} (the same as ''gichi-'') + {{m|alg-pro|*-neθki}}. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that ''gichi-'' on its own is productive in meaning "right" in Ojibwe, either as a preverb or initial, outside of the inherited word ''gichinik''. I'd want to see more evidence for that, that I just can't find. But I'll ping [[User:-sche]] in case they want to have a look. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 10:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 
= September 2020 =
 
== [[abulhayat]] ==
 
Indonesian. [https://www.google.com/search?q=abulhayat&lr=lang_id&newwindow=1&safe=strict&tbs=lr:lang_1id,bkv:a&tbm=bks&prmd=mvin&sxsrf=ALeKk03J2DIazsyPi_GWzTmMaSdvoUXhTA:1600373507630&source=lnt&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjgibjz__DrAhVYX30KHbwjAbIQpwUIIQ&biw=360&bih=564&dpr=3#ip=1 Only found 2 times in regular books (not dictionary or glossary) in Google Books] (other used as person name). First book used "rain" sense. Second book is not clear. [[User:Rex Aurorum|Rex Aurorum]] ([[User talk:Rex Aurorum|talk]]) 20:33, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
:The word [https://kbbi.kemdikbud.go.id/entri/abulhayat is listed] with the given meanings in the ''{{w|Great Dictionary of the Indonesian Language of the Language Center|KBBI}}'', the official dictionary of the Indonesian language. While Indonesian is not an LDL and this is a mention, not a use, it is a strong indication that the term exists.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 22:11, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
:: LDL? Many foreign words forced listed in KBBI to enrich KBBI (to encourage people to use these words) while ignoring attestation in Indonesian. See [[Project:About Indonesian#Detailed consideration]] —[[User:Rex Aurorum|Rex Aurorum]] ([[User talk:Rex Aurorum|talk]]) 14:50, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
:::If I understand what is written there, such entries of foreign words are labelled with a code indicating which language they are from, like ''Jw'' for Javanese. The entry for ''abulhayat'' has no such label.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 19:18, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
:::: Yeah, but not all loaned words required a etymology (language label) according their policy. According a KBBI Daring editor: language labels are not required for common words. Almost all words which used language label is part of 'forced borrowing' what i said in earlier comment. So, it's not weird for KBBI do such partice. —[[User:Rex Aurorum|Rex Aurorum]] ([[User talk:Rex Aurorum|talk]]) 11:29, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
 
== [[denk#rfv-sense-notice-af-|denk]] (Afrikaans) ==
 
Afrikaans. Rfv-sense of "thought", all I find are old-fashioned verb forms or parts of compounds.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  14:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
: {{re|Lingo Bingo Dingo}} [https://books.google.nl/books?id=H6oyAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA172&dq=%22die+denk%22+baie&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjxofzq6Y3zAhWEh_0HHSMkDXAQ6AF6BAgGEAI#v=onepage&q=%22die%20denk%22%20baie&f=false "maar hy hat het iets in hom gehad wat buite die '''denk''' van ons volk gereik het"] [https://books.google.nl/books?id=zyVKAAAAYAAJ&q=%22die+denk%22+baie&dq=%22die+denk%22+baie&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjxofzq6Y3zAhWEh_0HHSMkDXAQ6AF6BAgDEAI "maar vir die '''denk''' moet ons onderskei - en altyd onthou dat dit ons is wat die onderskeiding gemaak het."]. I suppose the translation "thinking" may be better, but there is definitely a noun in this form. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 15:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Thadh}} These are basically substantivised infinitives, like Dutch ''het denken''. So yes, the translation is "thinking". I don't think they are lemmatised separately. {{ping|Metaknowledge}}?  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  19:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 
= November 2020 =
 
== [[#rfv-sense-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. Rfv-sense: narrator --[[Special:Contributions/188.54.114.229|188.54.114.229]] 06:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
 
:Added by @[[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] eight years ago [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B4&diff=prev&oldid=32407763 diff] - is it possible you added it to the wrong entry? [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 06:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
::{{ping|This, that and the other}} It's probably more the case that Steingass is totally unreliable as a dictionary source; [[User:Fay Freak]] can confirm. [[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] ([[User talk:Benwing2|talk]]) 06:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] I confess my total ignorance of Arabic, and perhaps I should wait for Fay Freak to reply, but is it possible you made a typo for {{m|ar|}} or similar, substituting an "m" in place of the "q"? This is what I find when I search Steingass for "narrator" [https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/The_Student_s_Arabic_English_Dictionary/bmtOAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=inauthor:Steingass+narrator&pg=PA813&printsec=frontcover]. The semantics of a term that means both "foot soldier" and "narrator" seem unbelievable. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 08:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[หน้าม้า#rfv-sense-notice-th-|หน้าม้า]] ==
 
Thai. Is หน้าม้า really used to refer the Hindu god? Does someone have example? If so, can Krishna be called หน้า[[ช้าง]] too? --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 00:44, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 
== [[dada#rfv-notice-nl-|dada]] (Dutch) ==
 
Childish for "bye-bye; away".  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  18:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
: Seems to be Flemish: [http://www.vlaamswoordenboek.be/definities/term/dada Het Vlaams woordenboek] (sense 2); [https://schrijvenonline.org/forum/het-schrijfproces/taal-en-spelling/10490 schrijvenonline.org]; Agreed, not the best sources, but still mentions. Better one: [https://docplayer.nl/67003101-Het-dialectenboek-10-moi-adiee-en-salut-groeten-in-nederland-en-vlaanderen-dialectenboek2009-indd-15-53.html Het Dialectenboek] (page 193) [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 21:40, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 
== [[daven#rfv-notice-nl-|daven]] (Dutch) ==
 
Base form for the frequentative {{m|nl|daveren}}, but I am not convinced that this is attested in Dutch.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  14:21, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
: [https://books.google.nl/books?id=lBQSAAAAMAAJ&pg=RA1-PA77&dq=hij+daafde&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj5y_3B9Z3tAhULMewKHTtJB7gQ6AEwAHoECAMQAg#v=onepage&q=hij%20daafde&f=false 1881]  I guess this is technically Dutch. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 14:46, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
:: [[User:Thadh|@Thadh]] 1618 is ''draaft'', 1629 is ''ſlaaft'' (next to ''draaft''), 1820 is ''laaft'' and 1881 is correct, but also a bit mentionny and an example sentence. (It is used to illustrate the mentioned verb ''daven''.)  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  15:27, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
::: Oh, you're right. Reading this writing is extremely difficult :O [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 15:29, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
:::: [[User:Thadh|@Thadh]] Yes, many scanned texts before 1850 are of very poor quality, so there are many scannos and other problems. Long s is rather common in Dutch before 1830.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  15:38, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 
== [[De Haag#rfv-notice-nl-|De Haag]] ==
 
Dutch, area form of {{m|nl|Den Haag}}.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  19:33, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
: Archaic Dutch: [https://books.google.nl/books?id=lNNv6kz3dt0C&pg=PA5&dq=%22De+Haag%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjQ8MChuuruAhVnxYUKHYwRCdAQ6AEwAHoECAAQAg#v=onepage&q=%22De%20Haag%22&f=false] [https://books.google.nl/books?id=8YBEAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA376&dq=%22De+Haag%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjQ8MChuuruAhVnxYUKHYwRCdAQ6AEwAnoECAIQAg#v=onepage&q=%22De%20Haag%22&f=false] Haags Dutch: [https://haags.nu/] [https://www.omroepwest.nl/nieuws/3285141/Hagenees-maakt-stadsplattegrond-De-Haag-op-ze-Haags] ([https://www.citoplan.nl/product/haag-op-haags/]) [https://www.omroepwest.nl/media/33087/De-Haag-was-je-klahwe] [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 23:04, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 
= December 2020 =
 
== [[Eszwaren#rfv-notice-de-|Eszwaren]] ==
 
German. Tagged by [[User:Malpadam|Malpadam]] on 8 October 2019, not listed. [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 08:29, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
* I added one use with that spelling.  There are more in Google books.  I have a hard time reading those old German fonts.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 09:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
** If by "those old German fonts" you mean {{w|Fraktur}} we have to be careful, because "ſz" in Fraktur is actually "ß". So at [https://books.google.de/books?id=olUyAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Eszwaren%22&dq=%22Eszwaren%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjAk8bvw6ztAhVK6uAKHWJ3BSsQ6AEwCHoECAgQAg], for example, the search engine finds "Eszwaren" but the scan shows it's actually {{m|de|Eßwaren}}. But [https://books.google.de/books?id=nFhDAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Eszwaren%22&dq=%22Eszwaren%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjAk8bvw6ztAhVK6uAKHWJ3BSsQ6AEwBXoECAQQAg] is an unambiguous example of "Eszwaren" in {{w|Antiqua}}. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 10:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
*** The one I added was in a legible font, not Fraktur.  I found more[https://books.google.com/books?id=4RgQAQAAMAAJ&q=Eszwaren][https://books.google.com/books?id=m04-AQAAMAAJ&q=Eszwaren], but maybe this is only a rare misspelling under the influence of reading ''ſz'' as ''sz''.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 10:44, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
**** In older texts I wouldn't call it a misspelling. There was a time when ''sz'', ''ss'', and ''ß'' were sort of competing ways of rendering ''ſz'' in Antiqua. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 11:32, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
**** Modern Philology (inside the entry) is English and [https://books.google.com/books?id=m04-AQAAMAAJ&q=Eszwaren] is Dutch. That aren't good examples for German spellings. --[[User:Schläsinger X|Schläsinger X]] ([[User talk:Schläsinger X|talk]]) 11:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
****: The proceedings are mainly in Dutch, but the context around ''Eszwaren'' obviously isn't Dutch.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  14:44, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[ကွေန်ၚါ်တြုံ#rfv-notice-mnw-|ကွေန်ၚါ်တြုံ]] ==
 
====[[ကောန်ညာ်တြုံ#rfv-notice-mnw-|ကောန်ညာ်တြုံ]]====
According to a complaint of a native Mon speaker ([[Special:PermaLink/61255799/#Mon_Vocabulary_problem_explanation_(%E1%80%80%E1%80%BD%E1%80%B1%E1%80%94%E1%80%BA%E1%81%9A%E1%80%AB%E1%80%BA%E1%80%90%E1%80%BC%E1%80%AF%E1%80%B6)]]; [[:File:You stop hurt my language.jpg]]), these two spelling variants for {{m|mnw|ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ||boy}} are non-existent. I googled these two and failed to obtain favorable results though some of their components ({{m|mnw|ကောန်|tr=kon}} / {{m|mnw|ကွေန်||child}}, {{m|mnw|တြုံ|tr=truˀ||male}}) are attested. --[[User:エリック・キィ|Eryk Kij]] ([[User talk:エリック・キィ|talk]]) 10:46, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 
* For ကွေန်ၚါ် , go to [http://sealang.net/mon/] to look for "ကွေန် ၚါ် ". (That site uses space between compound).
* For ကောန်ညာ် , here is my evidence [https://drive.google.com/open?id=14_MMxjLS4BfzZQ-D47CkSGRKnjfQbYzd พจนานุกรมไทย-มอญ สำเนียงมอญลพบุรี(p122lost).pdf] (2007) look at page 70. It is intentionally spelled like that.
* တြုံ is a word that can be added any noun expressing male.
 
:[https://www.bangkanmark.org/oldweb/index.php/%E0%B8%A0%E0%B8%B9%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%8D%E0%B8%8D%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%8A%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A7%E0%B9%84%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%A2%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%8A%E0%B8%B7%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%8D/266-%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%88%E0%B8%B3%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%B5-%E0%B8%8B%E0%B8%B7%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%A2%E0%B9%8C-%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%8A%E0%B8%8D%E0%B9%8C%E0%B8%8A%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%9A%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%99-%E0%B8%94%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%A0%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A9%E0%B8%B2%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%B0%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%93%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%A1 About its author, จำปี ซื่อสัตย์], I don't know if he is still alive. He must be 90 years old now.
 
:Anyway, you should copy my another dictionary too [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1psxQWRm45q7RyG5tlR-qcS4GBdfhnn5A พจนานุกรมมอญ-ไทย.pdf] (1984).
 
:And if you can open sqlite database, also take this too [https://drive.google.com/open?id=1iQubW0OjdKaGx320ThX-wbcWKB6wHxgt Mon-Thai Dictionary.sqlite]. I extracted from [https://www.facebook.com/themonland/posts/mon-thai-dictionaryhttpswwwmediafirecomdownload29ca052ttsp7q3d/1939490419611393/ this mobile app].
 
:--[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 16:48, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
:: [[User:Octahedron80|@Octahedron80]] Thank you for your explanation. I have difficulty understanding Thai, so it would be harder without you. OK, some combinations of the components are indeed attested. Then, is there any source that shows each of the spellings ''from beginning to end''? Even some parts of them are attested, it would be another matter whether these two combinations are documented [[as it is|''as they are'']].  The variants listed at the current version of {{m|mnw|ကောန်ၚာ်|tr=kon ṅāk}} are of course OK, but when it comes to the forms seen at {{m|mnw|ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ}}, things are quite uncertain. Your attitudes gives the impression that you could create an entry *徒葩 as a spelling variant for Japanese {{ja-r|徒花|あだばな|a flower that blooms but never bears fruit}} since  both {{m|ja|葩}} {{qualifier|quite uncommon}} and {{m|ja|花}} {{qualifier|quite common}} are read as ''hana'' and have the sense “flower, blossom” in common, therefore they are always freely interchangeable—no, no, actually it is not! We cannot do such a horrific deed without complete evidence —otherwise, what we do will be perfect ''invent''ion! --[[User:エリック・キィ|Eryk Kij]] ([[User talk:エリック・キィ|talk]]) 20:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 
::: {{ping|エリック・キィ}} About the whole word "ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ", I was not the one who created it at first, I renamed to another form and, after 咽頭べさ was mad, then I reverted back. (I cannot rename same page twice so I edited it instead.) I can only verify ကောန်ၚာ် and တြုံ solely. You may ask him about "ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ" if there is some evidence either. (It should be documented somewhere / or it is just SOP?) I could remove alternative forms of "ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ" if there is no evidence, even their parts have.--[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 00:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 
::: By the way, 咽頭べさ mistakenly put some unknown texts into IPA template in many words; I assume he does not know IPA. I must follow his track to cleanup this mess. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 00:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
:::: [[User:Octahedron80|@Octahedron80]] I agree with you on this point. I asked him about this topic (it seems something other than IPA, then what is it?) before, but he has made no reply so far...--[[User:エリック・キィ|Eryk Kij]] ([[User talk:エリック・キィ|talk]]) 09:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 
: A few observations: First, the self-assessment by this editor as "en-2" is rather generous. Figuring out how much they understand our policies is likely to be a challenge, and explaining anything doubly so.
: Second, it's easier to take the word of a native speaker as to the existence of something in their language than its non-existence. Unless they're familiar with all the other dialects, they could be just as ignorant as non-speakers about the vocabulary of people a couple of valleys over.
: Also, in an environment where their language is actively discouraged, one would expect a certain prescriptivism that sees variation from what they're battling to defend as an attack (that environment would increase isolation between speakers, as well, which reinforces my second point).
: Of course, I have no direct knowledge, so I could be completely off base. I would rather bend over backward and walk on eggshells than risk piling on with those around them who don't want to hear their language. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 02:05, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Octahedron80|Chuck Entz}} Please don't worry, I have no doubt about the existence of the term {{lang-lite|mnw|sc=Mymr|ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ}} itself, since I am able to find its records through Google Search. What he (yes he, judging from the [[commons:Special:Contributions/咽頭べさ|audio records]]) and I regard as a problem is which combination is allowed to spell and which is not. --[[User:エリック・キィ|Eryk Kij]] ([[User talk:エリック・キィ|talk]]) 08:29, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Chuck Entz}} >''Unless they're familiar with all the other dialects, they could be just as ignorant as non-speakers about the vocabulary of people a couple of valleys over.''
:: Of course, I understand this point. That's why I have made [[Special:Diff/61249163/next|this edit]]. Mon language has numerous dialects but no official standard variety is seen while something similar to it exists ([https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.281591 Bauer 1982]: xvii; [https://doi.org/10.5167%2Fuzh-110202 Jenny 2005]: 30; [https://books.google.com/books?id=xwSjBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA555&dq=standard&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=standard&f=false Jenny 2015: 555]). Thus, even if a certain word itself is attested in a material in terms of pronunciation and spelling, there is NO guarantee that we can apply it directly to other dialects. --[[User:エリック・キィ|Eryk Kij]] ([[User talk:エリック・キィ|talk]]) 09:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 
== Jeju terms for modern concepts ==
 
As categorized by UNESCO and as discussed in {{w|Jeju language|Wikipedia}}, fluent speakers of the actual Jeju language were all born in the 1940s or earlier. The following terms relating to modern concepts are not likely to be found in traditional Jeju, which was spoken solely by impoverished peasants. As what is now spoken in Jeju Island—an indubitably Korean dialect—is not what we mean by Jeju in The Languages of David J. Peterson, I believe these entries should all be deleted unless someone can provide an actual early attestation (preferably from the very first academic studies of the dialect, in the 1960s). The [http://www.kikigengo.jp/ Digital Museum for Endangered Languages and Cultures] or [https://opendict.korean.go.kr the NIKL dictionaries ported at Urimalsaem] is not necessarily reliable in this regard, since they do not really make this distinction.
 
Making the distinction between traditional, soon-to-be-extinct Jeju and [[:Category:Jeju Korean]] is crucial for maintaining some integrity in [[:Category:Jeju lemmas]]. The most credible dictionary of Jeju, {{lang-lite|ko|sc=Kore|개정증보제주어사전}}, does not bother with these modernisms and I believe we should follow their lead. {{unsigned|Karaeng Matoaya|19:58, 5 December 2020 (UTC)}}
 
:To anyone who's going through these, please do '''not''' delete them for now, as I'm finding cites and am planning on making a complete update soon, but have been behind recently. Thanks! [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 07:43, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 
:: I know that your opinions have changed a lot since this comment and that we've been able to find a TON of material made in Jeju, so I don't fault you at all for making them at the time. Since the start of the revitalization efforts, there have been more materials being made in native Jeju by Jeju natives (and not in {{lang-lite|ko|sc=Kore|제주 사투리}}) and more lexicons being made, so I don't necessarily agree with saying that everything must be from pre-1960, as even if the only Jeju speakers were born in the 1940s or earlier (there are younger Jeju natives but they're more rare), they'd still be able to make up new terms for things that have come into play since then. However, I have deleted the senses that I am completely unable to find and don't think that I will find, per the RFV guidelines. Additionally, the cites that I have found have been written by-and-large in native Jeju and not Jeju-tinged Korean, by or the with consultation of native Jeju speakers and have been published either by the Jeju Preservation Society, the Jeju Provincial Government, or in related Jeju studies. [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 
======
Wasei kango for "society", not a traditional word. I think it should be deleted entirely because the actual form in modern Jeju speech is likely to be {{ko-l|사훼}} (due to the loss of {{IPAfont|/ɔ/}}), which is pronounced identically to Standard Korean {{ko-l|사회}}. The word {{m|jje|ᄉᆞ훼}} represents an intermediary stage between "true" Jeju and the modern Jeju-tinged Korean, and I do not think we should categorize this stage as Jeju.
 
: FYI, the historical Korean reading for 社 was 샤, not ᄉᆞ. So it cannot start with ᄉᆞ in Jeju. --[[Special:Contributions/172.58.16.111|172.58.16.111]] 06:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 
'''RFV-failed''' and I've moved the sense to {{m|jje|사훼}}. However, I have added the other {{m|jje|ᄉᆞ훼|ᄉᆞ훼(司會)|t=moderator}}, as that is cited in {{lang-lite|jje|sc=Kore|개정 증보 제주어 사전}}.  [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 
======
How many bicycles existed in Jeju before South Korean industrialization? This form is a dialectal pronunciation of {{m|ko|자행거|自行車}}, a term which was definitely used in many mainland dialects in 1945, so it could well be a post-1940s introduction into the island. Should be changed to {{ko-l|자영거}} under the Korean header with {{tl|lb|ko|Jeju}}.
 
: On the other hand, the historical Korean reading for 自 was ᄌᆞ. So it can start with ᄌᆞ in Jeju. --[[Special:Contributions/172.58.16.111|172.58.16.111]] 06:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 
'''Cited'''. [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 
======
This word is not attested in Korean in the "tourist" sense before the 1910s, and is a Japanese import. How many tourists were in Jeju before South Korean industrialization?
 
'''Cited'''. [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 
======
"Memorial hall" in the modern sense. Also likely to be a modernism.
 
'''RFV-failed'''. Was only able to find it in one source, and it doesn't seem like an actual usage, but just in a name. [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 00:06, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 
===[[냉장고#rfv-notice-jje-|냉장고]]===
"Refrigerator". Refrigerators were not common in South Korea until the 1970s.
 
===[[브랜드#rfv-notice-jje-|브랜드]]===
English loan meaning "brand" (as in a perfume brand, etc.). Highly unlikely to be found in traditional Jeju.
 
===[[사진끼#rfv-notice-jje-|사진끼]]===
"Camera".
 
======
"Biosphere" in the modern scientific sense.
 
'''RFV-failed'''. Was only able to find it in the name of something, not an actual usage. [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 00:06, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 
===[[선풍기#rfv-notice-jje-|선풍기]]===
"Electric fan". Electric fans were not common in South Korea until the 1980s.
 
===[[악매#rfv-notice-jje-|악매]]===
"Demon, Devil". Has Christian connotations to me as a native speaker of Korean, and not found in {{lang-lite|ko|sc=Kore|제주도무속자료사전}} or other sources on Jeju religion; the very concept is alien to Jeju religious practice. Likely a late Christian introduction; the date is unknown, but Christianity was very marginal in Jeju until the 1950s and is still not particularly important there. If it fails RFV, should be changed to the Korean header with {{tl|lb|ko|Jeju}}.
 
===[[조선시대#rfv-notice-jje-|조선시대]]===
A modern historiographical term that could not have existed before the 1950s.
 
===[[주인공#rfv-notice-jje-|주인공]]===
"Main character; protagonist" in the modern literary sense, probably from Japanese.
 
===[[텔레비전#rfv-notice-jje-|텔레비전]]===
"Television". Did not exist in Korea before the 1950s.
 
===[[풍력단지#rfv-notice-jje-|풍력단지]]===
"Wind power plant".
 
== [[decyl#rfv-notice-nl-|decyl]] ==
 
===[[decyn]]===
Dutch. These seem unattestable.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  15:33, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
: I'm not sure how chemical CFI works, but compounds with ''decyl'': [https://books.google.nl/books?id=wDgTAQAAIAAJ&q=decyl+stof&dq=decyl+stof&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSrruS-bntAhVvMewKHaNmChcQ6AEwAHoECAIQAg N,N'-bis(10-(p- methoxyfenoxy)-'''decyl''')-p-diaminobenzeen], [https://books.google.nl/books?id=fXlaSpWKozkC&pg=PA1467&dq=decyl+stof&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSrruS-bntAhVvMewKHaNmChcQ6AEwAXoECAMQAg#v=onepage&q=decyl%20stof&f=false di(n-hexyl,n-octyl,n-'''decyl''')ftalaat] [https://books.google.nl/books?id=YeJsAAAAMAAJ&q=decyl+stof&dq=decyl+stof&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSrruS-bntAhVvMewKHaNmChcQ6AEwAnoECAAQAg '''decyl'''-trimethylammonium], plain decyl: [https://books.google.nl/books?id=1oM1AAAAMAAJ&q=scheikunde+%22decyl%22&dq=scheikunde+%22decyl%22&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiqktGq-7ntAhVJLewKHe_MA14Q6AEwAHoECAEQAg]. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 18:18, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
:: That is a systematic name but has Dutch spelling of components, {{m|nl|benzeen}} instead of {{m|en|benzene}}, etc.  A paper from 2009 talks about chemistry translation: [https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ci800243w doi:10.1021/ci800243w].  I think ''di(n-hexyl,n-octyl,n-decyl)ftalaat'' appearing in a Dutch paper can be used to support {{m|nl|decyl}}, {{m|nl|octyl}}, and {{m|nl|ftalaat}} (= {{m|en|phthalate}}, I assume). [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 19:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 
== [[deel en heers#rfv-notice-nl-|deel en heers]] ==
 
Dutch, many scannos on BGC.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  16:49, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
:It may be archaic or obsolete: [https://books.google.com/books?id=xWC_cgCiu9YC&pg=RA1-PA60&dq=%22deel+en+heersch%22&hl=en], [https://books.google.com/books?id=uSVTAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA7&dq=%22deel+en+heersch%22&hl=en], [https://books.google.com/books?id=Q4BRAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA71&dq=%22deel+en+heersch%22&hl=en].  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 15:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
:: That is certainly an obsolete spelling, but I agree they are all valid uses. If this spelling isn't attested, it can be moved to that spelling.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  11:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
:::If we were to find the full version of this book [https://www.lannoo.be/sites/default/files/books/issuu/9789401450850.pdf] we might be able to have a cite for this spelling. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 09:37, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[schalk#rfv-sense-notice-nl-|schalk]] (Dutch) ==
 
RFV-sense of "(Outdated) A knave, servant.". Not in the WNT, etymological dictionaries suggest this didn't outlast Middle Dutch. The definition is unclear, too.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  17:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
: It's listed here [[http://etymologiebank.ivdnt.org/trefwoord/schalk1]], and I can find uses in Google Books [[https://www.google.com/books/edition/De_Nieuwe_taalgids/s9UmAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22een+schalk%22+nederlands&dq=%22een+schalk%22+nederlands&printsec=frontcover#spf=1607726536460]] (search "een schalk" "nederlands"). [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 22:46, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
:: But the first link doesn't give "servant" for modern Dutch.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  08:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
::: Clearly archaic, but in early modern Dutch it seemed to have been used in at least some religious texts, in phrases such as "Heer, ik ben uw '''schalk'''" (Lord, I am thy servant) and in compounds such as God'''schalk''' (God's servant = priest) [https://books.google.be/books?id=a0MHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=%22heer,+ik+ben+uw+schalk%22&source=bl&ots=Xqe3jUdqTJ&sig=ACfU3U23rVPjLKH5x_QLVPDEDI50HMwSBw&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjFmaHd0crtAhXQ-6QKHTYWBckQ6AEwAnoECAIQAg#v=onepage&q=%22heer%2C%20ik%20ben%20uw%20schalk%22&f=false] [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 09:59, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
:::: Oh, that's certainly a valid use. But I'm curious where those 19th-century writers got it from. The Vorstermann-, Deux-Aes- and Statenvertaling all use "knecht" [https://dbnl.nl/tekst/_sta001stat01_01/_sta001stat01_01_0620.php] [https://dbnl.nl/tekst/_deu001deux01_01/_deu001deux01_01_0605.php] [https://dbnl.nl/tekst/_vor003vors01_01/_vor003vors01_01_0659.php] and it seems "schalk" was very pejorative in the sixteenth and early seventeenth century. So my guess is that is was from an eighteenth-century (maybe late seventeenth-century) Psalm translation that had been published separately.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  16:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
::::: The book ''Antiquitates Germanicæ'' linked to above is an 18th-century text; possibly later writers, who do not quote more than this single phrase, copied it from that text. It has somewhat the nature of a mention; in particular, how can we be sure that the unidentified (rhyming?) translation of the Book of Psalms was Dutch and not Middle Dutch? If the term ''schalk'' came from a Middle Dutch psalter it was not the 1360 translation, which has ''O Heere, ic ben dijn knech, ic ben cnecht, dijnre dierne sone.'', and also not the 1483 psalter linked to from {{w|nl:Middelnederlandse psalters|Middelnederlandse psalters}}, which has ''O hee want ic dijn knecht bin Ick bin dijn knecht eñ ſone dijnre diernen.''  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 19:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 
::::: Without exception each use of ''schalck(en)'' in [https://books.google.com/books?id=EMhkAAAAcAAJ&pg=SL4791-PA153&dq=schalcken%7cschalck&hl=en this Bible concordance] from 1645 has a sense of depravity, extending to priests (''Want beyde Propheten ende Priesters zijn ſchalken''). I find it hard to imagine a contemporaneous sense of pious submission. Interestingly, the word is also used as an adjective (''Exempelen eeniger ſchalke menſchen'').  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 20:31, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
:::::: Yes, I also noticed the adjective, it seems quite common from the 16th up to the 19th century. I have personally never seen or heard the adjective ''schalk'' before this month, but the more clearly marked adjective ''schalks'' is still a very current word. However, it does seem like the meaning of ''schalk'' (adj.) was rather more negative.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  09:35, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-fa-|]] ==
 
Persian. I can't find this term in any reputable dictionary. -- 22:13, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
: [[User:Victar|@Victar]]: [https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/hayyim_query.py?page=933] --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 08:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
:: [[User:Victar|@Victar]]: Repeating the call. Do you still insist on the verifications? I won't be able to add citations in Persian, I am afraid, need native speakers. I have found the term in another dictionary [https://archive.org/details/dictionaryenglis0000unse/page/1012/mode/2up English-Persian Persian-English] (it requires registration and this dictionary can be borrowed for an hour). --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 03:03, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
:::{{ping|ZxxZxxZ|Dijan|Qehath}}  Anyone? --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 00:41, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
:I found it only in [[w:Amid dictionary|Amid dictionary]]. It's a relatively smaller Persian dictioary containing words found in the late Persian literature. The Amid dictionary of the [https://www.vajehyab.com/?q=%D8%B1%D8%B3%D8%AA Vajehyab] website has cited a couplet (I guess it is based on the revised edition of the Amid Dictionary). --[[User:ZxxZxxZ|'''Z''']] 07:08, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[Imme#rfv-sense-notice-de-|Imme]] {{g|f}} ==
 
German. Sense: a swarm of bees. --[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 14:30, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
:[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]]: If you just looked into the darn standard references instead of the Duden which covers only the last century you wouldn’t need to request. Especially impudent if the sense is explicitly labelled ''obsolete''. Here a selection of '''attestation-based''' dictionaries: [https://fwb-online.de/lemma/imme.s.0mf?q=Imme&page=1 FNHDWB], [https://drw-www.adw.uni-heidelberg.de/drw-cgi/zeige?index=lemmata&term=imme DRW], [http://www.woerterbuchnetz.de/cgi-bin/WBNetz/wbgui_py?sigle=DWB&lemid=GI00199 Grimm]. [http://www.woerterbuchnetz.de/cgi-bin/WBNetz/startGlobalSearch.tcl?stichwort=Imme Etc.]. With varying spellings of course, but we wouldn’t want to have the word under {{m|de|Yme}} etc. either and as a rule we unify, if you didn’t know. Case closed, newb without user page? [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 15:01, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
::Grimm: It's "imme, m.". Different gender (and also different capitalisation). Also Grimme covers more than [[New High German]].
::DRW:
::* Examples have "ein immen", "ain imp", "ein unverfolgter impen", "ein imme", so often have other forms and where the gender is revealed without any doubts , it's masculine.
::* Meaning: "Bienenstock und -schwarm" (bee-hive and bee-swarm), that's different from the entry. (Is it even ''both bee-hive and bee-swarm'' (a single sense) or either ''bee-hive'' or ''bee-swarm'' (two senses, though sometimes/often hard to distinguish?)
::* DRW's quotes are incorrect as can be seen by the ''1709 Mutach'' quote for ''Impen'' at [[Talk:Imme#Citations]]. ("Normalization" in a quote makes the quote incorrect - a correct quote keeps spelling including capitalisation of the original work. In case of ''Impen'' also the page-number is wrong: It's 41 and not 40.)
::* "I Bienenstock und -schwarm" with "den hochflugk der impen lassen wir" looks like it could be wrong too: It could be a feminine singular genitive ''der impen'' of ''imp/impe/impen'' = "swarm of bees", but also a plural genitive with the second sense "bee".
::* DRW also includes OHG, MHG and MLG, so many quotes are insufficient for ''German''.
::FWB (= Frühneuhochdeutsches Wörterbuch, this is the abbreviation used there and not "FNHDWB"):
::* Sense "1. Bienenschwarm, Bienenstock" with "sehet an die immen, die machen das honig aus der edelsten manna aller blumen" looks like it could be wrong too: it's ''immen pl. = bees'', so rather an example for sense "2. Biene".
::"Etc.":
::* Adelung doesn't have this sense. "Im Friesischen Ihme, in andern gegenden Ympe, wo es auch einen Bienenstock bedeutet" refers to Frisian (East Frisian Low German or Frisian Frisian?).
::* BMZ and Lexer are for [[Middle High German]].
::* ElsWB, PfWB are for dialects which aren't part of ''German'' in The Languages of David J. Peterson.
::-[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 15:36, 21 December 2020 (UTC) & [[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 00:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
::: Because of the grammar of the Early New High German texts, in many cases it is not clear which gender the quotes have – you do not seem to understand the grammar, “ein imme” can also be feminine back then; especially in Bavarian areas also “ein immen” –; in addition to what FNHDWB says that in many attestations it is not clear if a swarm of bees or bees as individuals are meant. However I see from some quotes there clearly that the meaning of an individual bee has also been masculine. So a solution is to change to masculine and have a feminine POS as alternative form because the feminine is only a modern perversion of some poets and it does not matter whether it has recently been used more often as feminine since it is not often at all; or give {{g|m}} in the head and then {{g|f}} immediately after. In any case the way you requested here is to be reprehended since someone dealing with it and not knowing where to search German could have, because of nobody answering, just deleted the sense while at most a gender switch would have been appropriate. And no, capitalisation is irrelevant, New High German nouns get added capitalized even if they died out before capitalisation of nouns was a thing, and those liberal writers who do not follow the capitalization rules in modern times are treated as if they have written their texts capitalized regularly, because otherwise it’s confusing. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 17:41, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
:: Can you point me to the rule that says we unify? I was under the impression it was a contentious thing, done on a language-by-language basis. And [[WT:About German]] says "The Languages of David J. Peterson includes all attested spellings", so as a rule, we don't unify German. Perhaps instead of harassing the "newb without a user page" you should check what the rules actually are?
:: Just verify the damn thing, Fay Freak. The general rules say that we need cites for any words, not cribbing from dictionaries. We can quibble about stuff after we have a suitable number of citations.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] ([[User talk:Prosfilaes|talk]]) 06:05, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
::: {{re|Prosfilaes}} Can you point me to the rule that says we do not unify and have to find every sense in every spelling in every gender three times? No, because it’s not true. The word is not “spelling”, hence unifying. I have proven it also on various places, as for example by the fact that one can attest from audio, or texts written [[scriptio continua]], etc., e.g. above under [[Project:Requests_for_verification/Non-English#baußen]], also on [[Project:Requests_for_verification/English#Huang-ch'i]] I noted that “we cannot derive from the mere entry layout practice that for alternative spelling pages entries are cloned the requirement that each such sense or even only part of speech needs three citations”. The fact that one needs to argue for certain interpretations of the law does not speak against the stance of him who argues.
::: I have shown attestations above; '''the dictionaries give quotes'''. Can you demonstrate me a rule that we need cites typed off into the page and that referring to dictionaries quoting the senses or spellings, e.g. even other Wiktionaries, wouldn’t suffice? The fact that we constantly have too little personnel and are underpaid suggests otherwise, as well as the fact that blind quotes of quotes given in other sources are avoided in science.
::: You don’t seriously suggest we should have this word under {{m|de|Ymme}} or {{m|de|Yme}} or perhaps {{m|de|ymme}} or {{m|de|yme}} because of not being quoted in the modern spelling and the particular gender and particular sense? Because “[[Project:Votes/2020-12/Bringing back wynn entries|we operate under the tyranny of entry titles]]”?
::: I have presented multiple ways of representing the word. You speak of harrassing but it is perfectly legimitate to point out that his request was unclear in concerning the particular gender so it could have lead to excessive deletion of a known sense, and a fact that one is negatively disposed towards users who do not state their language levels on their user pages, and I do not forgo to notify particularly newbs of uncomfortable truths, because they in particular have to get to know things. If “newb” is an offensive then one shall forgive me because I am not responsible for every neutral word’s meaning being ousted by connotations to an extent that we cannot communicate without a nimb of aggression. Language hasn’t been made for the internet. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 15:58, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
:::: Again, [[WT:About German]] says "The Languages of David J. Peterson includes all attested spellings". You shouldn't say "as a rule we unify, if you didn’t know" to a newb, if there are established users who would argue against it. There's a difference between arguing for a position, and informing someone that a position is the rule.
:::: Nice change in standards of evidence, if you make a claim, you don't have to provide evidence. If I make a claim, I have to demonstrate an exact rule. Have I been wasting my time on RFV when I could have just responded by "check out Google Books"? When I added cites to [[Uno]], people disagreed that some of those cites were appropriate cites: see the archived discussion on [[Talk:Uno]]. It would have been a lot harder to have that discussion had I and other people not copied the text into the article. In this case, the user has disagreed with your cites; it would be much easier to work with if the cites were here where we could read them, instead of just handwaves at dictionaries.
:::: Yes, I seriously suggest we should have this word under the spellings it's used under. As you quote a vote, you know that this is not an uncontentious issue at The Languages of David J. Peterson--[[Project:Votes/2020-09/Removing_Old_English_entries_with_wynns]] closed 9-4--and the vote you quote is very limited, as wynn can be replaced one for one with w in all cases in Old English. We shouldn't have to map from a spelling used in real life to some arbitrary spelling invented by a dictionary writer, us or someone else.
:::: You don't distinguish "uncomfortable truths" from "Fay Freak's opinions", and this is not the first time I've seen you do this. Here's an uncomfortable truth; you'd be running a chance of getting blocked on some other English Wikis, and acting like it's other people's fault and "Language hasn’t been made for the internet." is absurd when many other people manage to follow these rules and [[newb]] says "(Internet slang, sometimes derogatory)", so yes, it's made for the Internet, and it's always had that negative meaning. And while "newb" may be somewhat problematic, the fact you're asserting Fay Freak's opinions as "uncomfortable truths" that they obviously should have known (despite the fact you can't cite any place on the Wiki where they could have learned those "truths") is much more problematic. As is saying "the way you requested here is to be reprehended", which condemns the person instead of focusing on the action, say, "an RFV on a word could cause it to be incorrectly deleted." Which is itself garbage; if someone feels a word needs RFV, they should feel free to RFV it. There are points someone RFVing a bunch of words that are going to be kept could be a problem, but I'd say that's never the case for words that might get deleted; nominating words for RFV should get cites added, making them clearly attested words, and in many cases get definitions refined and separated out.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] ([[User talk:Prosfilaes|talk]]) 00:43, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
: {{ping|Prosfilaes}} I have added a few cites, though it is advisable that a native speaker looks it over.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  15:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[Dievoet#rfv-notice-nl-|Dievoet]] ==
=== [[Dievoort]] ===
 
Dutch, two senses: "(chiefly Belgium) A place name" and "(chiefly Belgium) A surname with the prefix van". The second sense exists at ''[[Vandievoet]]'' or ''[[Van Dievoet]]'' because that is how Flemish names work, the first sense does not seem attestable in use; although there are mentions of a hamlet in Ukkel (Uccle).  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  18:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
: {{ping|Morgengave}} What is your view on this?  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  18:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Lingo Bingo Dingo}} I don't know the place myself, but {{m|nl|Dievoort}} seems to be a place near Breda: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dievoort]. The place in Ukkel is indeed called {{m|nl|Dievoet}}, not ''Dietvoort''. [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 19:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[drieken#rfv-notice-nl-|drieken]] ==
 
Dutch. This could in theory be related to ''drek'', but it is absent from many dialect dictionaries and I cannot find it used (results are scannos for ''drinken'', ''drukken'', etc.).  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  13:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
: {{ping|Morgengave|Rua|Alexis Jazz}} Do you think this lemma might be something or does it seem ephemeral?  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  17:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Lingo Bingo Dingo}} Never heard of this, and it's not in the (amateur) Vlaams woordenboek, which is with its ~34000 entries quite elaborate. So I suppose if it exists (does it?), it's likely part of a Dutch-Dutch or Suriname-Dutch dialect, or slang (which could explain its non-attestation)? It's a pity that the entry creator is anonymous. [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 17:44, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Morgengave}} All right, that seems to rule out Belgian Dutch. It might be from dialectal usage in the Netherlands or a borrowing from Westlauwers Frisian or Low Saxon, but I did not find it in the [http://ewnd.ivdnt.org/boeken/zoeken eWND]. Surinamese Dutch seems very implausible to me because of the vowel change that cannot be explained as a borrowing to Sranantongo and back. That said, I'm willing to wait this one out until libraries reopen.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  18:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
:{{ping|Lingo Bingo Dingo}} Sounds familiar, but I think that's a false memory. Did some searches, all came up dry. Maybe something highly local that doesn't appear in any written text. [[User:Alexis Jazz|Alexis Jazz]] ([[User talk:Alexis Jazz|talk]]) 12:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 
= January 2021 =
== [[ankel#rfv-notice-osx-|ankel]] ==
 
Old Saxon.  This may be a reconstructed form in the wrong namespace.  Also spelled {{m|osx|enkel}}.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 21:18, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
: This seems to be two distinct senses.__[[User:Gamren|Gamren]] ([[User talk:Gamren|talk]]) 00:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
::I can't find this attested for Old Saxon. The "ankle" sense should be moved to {{m|osx|*enkil}}. I have no clue where the "hip" sense comes from... [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 16:52, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 
= February 2021 =
 
== [[angiosperms#rfv-notice-mul-|angiosperms]] ==
Translingual. Looks English, cp. {{m|en|angiosperm}}, {{m|en|sperm}}, {{m|en|-s}}. --[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 01:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:Depending on the outcome, possibly to add: {{m|mul|magnoliids}}, {{m|mul|monocots}}, {{m|mul|core eudicots}} (also cp. {{m|en|core}}), {{m|mul|superasterids}}, {{m|mul|asterids}}, {{m|mul|superrosids}}, {{m|mul|rosids}}, {{m|mul|fabids}}, {{m|mul|malvids}}. --[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 01:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
: Clades are tricky, because many of them don't have an accepted conventional taxonomic name. The taxonomists working on them give them an informal English name, and other taxonomists use them like the conventional Latin-based taxonomic names- which we treat as Translingual(language code mul) because they're used in a great many languages without being a part of the languages. These English-based names for plants are technically invalid according to the taxonomic code, but they're definitely used in taxonomic contexts.
: This particular one is odd because the clade has a normal taxonomic name, [[Angiospermae]], and there's nothing about the formation of that name that precludes it from being validly given any rank above [[superfamily]]. It doesn't seem necessary to use an English-based name in non-English usage. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 03:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:::And yet it is so used. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 06:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:: IMO, none of these are Translingual. They were all created by DCDuring, who has no training in relevant fields and seems opposed to the distinction betwen taxonomic and common names used by workers in the actual field. —[[User:Metaknowledge|Μετάknowledge]] 05:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:::Is ''angiosperms'' (and are the others) used in multiple languages? {{google books|"angiosperms" "das"}} (with {{m+|de|das||the|g=n}}), {{google books|"angiosperms" "le"}} (with {{m+|fr|le||the|g=m}}) and similar searches (with other articles, with forms of translations of ''be'', excluding ''the'') brought up:
:::* [https://books.google.com/books?id=BQZngBYd1RcC&pg=PA126&dq=%22angiosperms%22 French "les Angiosperm'''e'''s"]
:::* [https://books.google.com/books?id=3YNKCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA17&dq=%22angiosperms%22 German "Angiospermen (angiosperms): Bedecktsamer; Pflanzen, deren ..."] which is only a mentioning of the English
:::My search wasn't exhaustive, but I didn't see any non-English usage. --[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 09:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:::: If it is then it still does not mean it is translingual. In other languages there is still in principle a distinction between the native language and Translingual even if the terms look the same 100% (which they don’t, due to capitalization). [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 14:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
: Just move to English. It is formally clear here what is translingual and what English. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 14:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
: It's English. [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 15:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
::This is not a vote. That might be appropriate in RfM or RfD. There is attestation in scholarly journals for the terms being used in a manner indistinguishable from the Latinate taxonomic names. There is more abundant attestation for [[Angiosperms]]. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 05:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
::: Agreed that this shouldn't be a vote. It's how it's used that should determine what language header it goes under, not a prescriptive standard. Our Translingual section should be just as descriptive as the rest of the dictionary. [[User:Andrew Sheedy|Andrew Sheedy]] ([[User talk:Andrew Sheedy|talk]]) 06:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
:::Re "There is more abundant attestation for Angiosperms": Is there? Google Books is not case sensitive, so searching for ''angiosperms'' and ''Angiosperms'' brings up the same results. As I searched, I didn't see more for the capitalised variant. --[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 12:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
::::I found abundant attestation for Angiosperm in use parallel to Latinate taxa at Google Scholar. I searched for "clade Angiosperms". [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 17:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
::: “manner indistinguishable from the Latinate taxonomic names”. Cannot {{m|de|nachvollziehen}} such reasoning. It’s not only the manner, i.e. the context in which it is used which indicates which language something is. This is the same irrational approach that declares [[Project:Requests for verification/Non-English#de gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum|long Latin or Greek bonmots]] “Danish”. The {{m|de|Verkehrsauffassung|Verkehrsanschauung}} is unambiguous about which language it is (and one can hardly with more quotes show that something is more translingual or more English; “''eudicots''” will not look less English because there are quotes in some other language that has the same pluralization practice, so it is true it is more RfM matter and not RfV matter – though even better, somebody who is able to sharply distinguish can just move/transform such entries for he can rationally defend it). [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 13:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
::: The only use in a work not in English is a section of an unpublished Czech thesis which quotes from the English language product of the {{w|Angiosperm Phylogeny Group}} adding a few Czech words in.  Elsewhere in the thesis the word is treated as Czech, for example "angiospermní: krytosemenné rostliny, jednoděloţné a dvouděloţné" (angiosperms, plants with hidden seeds...).  This supports a borrowing or parallel formation, not a multilingual word. [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 13:24, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
:::: It's very hard to find usage, because of the huge number of false positives due to English titles in their cited references. It's also true that there are taxonomists who don't view APG clade names as valid for taxonomic use and therefore don't use them translingually. Also, this term seems to be much less common than those for which there is no validly published conventional alternative. I was able to find a few that I would argue show translingual usage. I could probably find a few more, if necessary. Most of these are in tables rather than in running text, but I would contend that such is how taxonomic names are often used. [http://repositorio.unsa.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/UNSA/9063/Bicablhc.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Here (on page 10 of the pdf)] is one of several where the APG names are contrasted with the standard classifications, but they are both treated as the same sort of thing. [http://benjamin.lisan.free.fr/projetsreforestation/Fiche-presentation-khejri.pdf This pdf] has it at the beginning, while [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Xu_Wei71/publication/332754498_From_cryptic_species_to_biodiversity_conservation_in_China_Status_and_prospects/links/5f979197a6fdccfd7b825d62/From-cryptic-species-to-biodiversity-conservation-in-China-Status-and-prospects.pdf this pdf] follows a common Chinese practice of a mixture of translingual and English glosses in parentheses throughout the text, but has a table on the 5th page (numbered 524) where the clade names are in a context that has everything else in either taxonomic Latin or Chinese.
:::: As for whether these are durably archived: the taxonomic codes, until fairly recently, explicitly required what basically amounts to durable archiving for anything taxonomic to be validly published. As far as I know, it's still very much the practice, with some online journals going so far as to print a limited number of hard copies that are placed in selected libraries to satisfy such requirements. As far as I know, theses for academic credit are all archived with the educational institution, and government publications are archived as well. I can't guarantee that all of these specific articles are durably archived, but there's a high probability that they are. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 18:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
::::* "[http://repositorio.unsa.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/UNSA/9063/Bicablhc.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Here (on page 10 of the pdf)]" - page 19 of the PDF, page 3 of the actual work, where it begins with {{m|es|[[según|Según]] APG IV||According to APG [Angiosperm Phylogeny Group] IV}} and which also has ''core eudicots''? That looks like a mentioning of APG – English? In the bibliography sections, it mentions ''Catálogo de las '''Angiospermas''' y Gimnospermas del Perú''.
::::* "[http://benjamin.lisan.free.fr/projetsreforestation/Fiche-presentation-khejri.pdf This pdf]":
::::** It doesn't look durably archived.
::::** It's mentioning English wikipedia, [http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/GBASE/DATA/PF000371.HTM FAO with APG in URL]. It could copy English stuff. "United Emirats arabes unis (Arab Emirates) (Arabe, Arabic)" also looks strange regarding the language.
:::::--[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 19:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[eudicots#rfv-notice-mul-|eudicots]] ==
Translingual. Looks English, see also {{m|en|-s}}, also as there are non-English translations. --[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 01:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]]: If it “looks English” then spare us such requests and move to English. Nothing would get lost. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 15:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
:It's an English plural noun. The taxonomic clade is [[Eudicots]]. [[User:SemperBlotto|SemperBlotto]] ([[User talk:SemperBlotto|talk]]) 19:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
::I would add a request for {{m+|mul|Eudicots}} as well, with the same reasoning.
::* [https://books.google.com/books?id=N5WwCjM27NwC&pg=PA363&dq=%22der+Eudicots%22] has "der Eudicots" (gen. pl., gender not revealed) and "die ''core eudicots''" (pl., same; with italics), but it's just one source, not sufficent.
::* [https://books.google.com/books?id=qUZSDxSGczIC&pg=PA140&dq=Eudicots] has "Der Name ''Eudicotyledonae'' (engl. ''eudicots'')", giving two reasons why it doesn't look translingual: 1. It's English. 2. There's an alternative.
::* [https://books.google.com/books?id=O-clAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Eudicots%22] has it in French, but with quotation marks and also "higher hamamelids" (with quotation marks as well) which is even more English.
::* [https://books.google.com/books?id=22elBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA140&dq=%22des+Eudicots%22] has "Les Eudicotylédones (Eudicots)", "des Eudicots", "Les Rosidées". Could also be regular French ({{m|fr|-s}}), or not?
::--[[User:幽霊四|幽霊四]] ([[User talk:幽霊四|talk]]) 19:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
:::It intuitively doesn't feel like a translingual taxonomic name, since it's not Latin. But maybe there are exceptions. I don't know enough to say for sure. {{ping|Chuck Entz}} and {{ping|DCDuring}}, experts on taxonomy. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 08:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
:::: I'm not an expert, but [[in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king]]. It's tricky, because it isn't part of the standard Latin-based [[Linnaean]] nomenclature. The {{w|Angiosperm Phylogeny Group}} uses English in the names for their taxonomic entities rather than Latin, and they're more interested in the tree structure than in assigning standard names for every rank- but they're describing things that don't have a name otherwise. I would call the result a parallel, unofficial naming system, but it's used in multiple languages, which makes it translingual. It's not ''the'' system for taxonomic nomenclature, but it has its role. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 16:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
::::It functions just the way the officially (ICZN, ICTV, LPSN, etc) sanctioned taxa do, as [[lamiids]], [[rosids]], [[eurosids]], and a score or more of other APG clade names. It is neither here nor there, but I "feel" it to be a formal taxonomic name, as much as, say, the names of species of viruses (eg, ''[[Human alphaherpesvirus 1]]'', which looks like a normal English NP, with an English adjective preceding the head). [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 16:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[kakilima beratap#rfv-notice-id-|kakilima beratap]] ==
 
Indonesian. Sent from RFD. — [[User:Surjection|'''s'''ur]][[Special:Contributions/Surjection|'''j'''ec]][[Special:Log/Surjection|'''t'''ion]] ⟨⟩ 10:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 
:See also [[Project:Requests for deletion/Non-English#kakilima beratap (2)]]. I am not sure about the orthographies of various terms, but {{m+|id|kaki lima}}, literally “five foot”, short for ”{{w|five-foot way}}”, can by itself mean the walkway under an arcade, usually housing shops. It is to be expected then that such an arcade is called a ''kaki-lima [[:id:beratap|beratap]]''. At least one dictionary lists the term; and the term is used [https://www.acehtrend.com/2020/09/27/berkunjung-ke-timor-leste-di-tengah-pandemi-1/ here]. The issue seems to be more whether this is not a good old SOP. (Aside: we also have an entry {{m|id|kaki-lima}}, whose status seems dubious to me, just like “the shop on the corner” may often be a convenience store, but does not necessarily mean that.)  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 22:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[รูปแปดด้าน#rfv-notice-th-|รูปแปดด้าน]] ==
 
Thai. Sent from RFD. — [[User:Surjection|'''s'''ur]][[Special:Contributions/Surjection|'''j'''ec]][[Special:Log/Surjection|'''t'''ion]] ⟨⟩ 10:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 
:The nominator's original concern at RFD was:
::The term for octahedron is [[ทรงแปดหน้า]] coined by the Royal Institute. No one use รูปแปดด้าน other than machine mistranslation. รูปแปดด้าน may also means [[แปดเหลี่ยม]] (octagon) that no usage either. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 06:08, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
:I find a use in a [https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/Prawat_l%C3%A6_sinlapawatthanatham_M%C6%B0%CC%84ang/pq9WAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%22%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B9%E0%B8%9B%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%94%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%99%22&dq=%22%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B9%E0%B8%9B%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%94%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%99%22&printsec=frontcover 1999 book], but we need two more, as Thai is a WDL. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 09:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[IXOYE#rfv-notice-mul-|IXOYE]] ==
 
Translingual. Created by [[User:Suzukaze-c|suzukaze-c]]; RFV suggested by {{ping|This, that and the other}}. —[[User:Metaknowledge|Μετάknowledge]] 01:53, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 
: 3 cites from Google Books, in English contexts:
:# [https://books.google.com/books?id=8QBwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA94&dq=%22ixoye%22&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwibtI_Vm97uAhWsCjQIHfH3BE4Q6AEwB3oECAkQAg#v=onepage&q=%22ixoye%22&f=false Jack Bowen, If You Can Read This: The Philosophy of Bumper Stickers]
:#:
:# [https://books.google.com/books?id=YgmeWy4jm_kC&pg=PA19&dq=%22ixoye%22&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwij7Ljkm97uAhXHJzQIHa9FCVE4ChDoATACegQIABAC#v=onepage&q=%22ixoye%22&f=false Michael Theisen, Exploring Catholicism]
:#:
:# [https://books.google.com/books?id=alvVKRQ3_eQC&q=%22ixoye%22&dq=%22ixoye%22&hl=ja&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwij7Ljkm97uAhXHJzQIHa9FCVE4ChDoATAIegQICBAC Thomas Nelson Publishers, The Safe Sites Internet Yellow Pages]
:#:
:#: (https://web.archive.org/web/20021130051023/http://home1.gte.net/ixoye/)
: —[[User:Suzukaze-c|Suzukaze-c]] ([[User talk:Suzukaze-c|talk]]) 02:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
::The last cite is part of a proper name, so I don't think we can admit that. The other two look like mentions, so ordinarily I'd reject them, but I do note that the PoS is "Symbol". Maybe this shifts the goalposts as far as the use-mention distinction is concerned... [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 03:29, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
:Seem to have Passed, AFAICT. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 17:40, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 
Misprint for ΙΧΘΥΣ, Greek for "fish" but also acronym of Ιησους Χριστος Θεου Υιος Σωτηρ, meaning "Jesus Christ God's Son Saviour". The first Christians used this, or even sometimes just a stylized fish shape, as a sign of recognition which would escape the notice of their Roman persecutors. IXOYE should be ΙΧΘΥΣ in all three numbered links above. See [[:w:Ichthys]] for details. — [[User:Tonymec|Tonymec]] ([[User talk:Tonymec|talk]]) 00:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 
:{{ping|Tonymec}}: At The Languages of David J. Peterson we are interested in how language is used in the real world, not how it "should" be used. I don't think anyone would disagree with you that IXOYE is "wrong" on some level, but if it is in use we ought to include it. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 11:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 
:Three more from Google Scholar, confirmed not scannos:
:# Pathways off the streets: Homeless people and their use of resources Wright, Bradley R. Entner.  The University of Wisconsin - Madison. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 1996
:#:
:# [https://digitalshowcase.oru.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1114&context=oracle Oracle (Sep 21, 1973)], and many more instances from the same series
:#:
:# [https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds/514/ Esther Lim, Portland State University, Nine Months]
:#:
:—[[User:Suzukaze-c|Suzukaze-c]] ([[User talk:Suzukaze-c|talk]]) 05:08, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
::I think this is OK to be honest. I don't think it's too different from the standard Catholic use of [[IHS]] to mean Jesus, where the "H" is really Greek eta. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 08:44, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
* RFV passed, AFAICT. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 17:43, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[A#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|A]] Translingual Symbol sense 5 ==
 
 
 
Is the letter "A" used ''alone'' (in any language, since this is Translingual) to refer to a paper size system? I would make a claim that uses like "the A paper size system" do not support the inclusion of this term. Please argue with me on this though! [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 10:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
:Attributively at least: ''A paper sizes.'' [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 09:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC) Still a strange thing to include in such a place in a dictionary. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 09:59, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[A#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|A]] Translingual Symbol sense 6 ==
 
 
 
I dispute that this is used translingually, even if the definition were to be worded more generally. I contend that letter grades are only or largely confined in the Anglosphere. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 10:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
: Some (if not many) [[basisschool|Dutch primary schools]] use letter grades (E-D-C-B-A) interchangeably with digits (1-10). {{w|Centraal Instituut voor Toetsontwikkeling|Cito|lang=nl}} also uses these. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 11:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
:: I think few primary schools actually use those as the actual marks rather than as a mere secondary encoding of ''onvoldoende'', ''voldoende'', ''goed'', etc. In any case, its marginal use by Dutch schools seems not much of an argument for its translingual status.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  10:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
: It is kind of likely that in some Pacific islands and African colonies this system has been taken over, without school education taking place in English. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 09:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
:@[[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|Lingo Bingo Dingo]] This is something I've noticed actually. Is "Translingual" supposed to be a catch-all for a lot of languages or all languages? Because I've seen it heavily lean Western European, especially with punctuation marks, while many other languages would not use them as such. It's truly confusing to me. [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 02:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
::@[[User:AG202|AG202]] I've always treated it as "a lot of languages" - "all languages" would be a literally impossible bar to pass. [[User:Whoop whoop pull up|Whoop whoop pull up]]  19:18, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[кыл#rfv-notice-kpv-|кыл]] ==
 
Komi-Zyrian. Seems to be dialectal Permyak rather than Zyrian (compare also {{w|Komi-Yazva|Коми-Ёдз '''кыл'''}}). [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 11:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 
:Not in [http://gtweb.uit.no/u_korp/#?lang=en&stats_reduce=word&cqp=%5B%5D&search=word%7C%D0%BA%D1%8B%D0%BB&page=0 this corpus of Komi-Zyrian]. The term may exist in {{w|Komi-Yazva}}, though I don't know whether we classify that as part of . The user who added this has since been blocked for edits with questionable sourcing. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 03:05, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[avcı sinek#rfv-notice-tr-|avcı sinek]] ==
 
Turkish. Literally "hunter fly", defined as referring to the predatory fly family {{w|Asilidae}} but the few uses I can find are not so limited.  A couple related uses refer to a species of {{w|Promachus (genus)|Promachus}}, which is in that family.  Another refers to ''{{w|Coenosia attenuata}}'', sometimes called "hunter fly" in English.  A third group of hits refers to family {{w|Chamaemyiidae}}, species of which are predatory as larvae.  So I don't think there is any more than a sum of parts here.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 19:50, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[baykuş sineği#rfv-notice-tr-|baykuş sineği]] ==
 
Turkish. Literally "owl fly".  The definition is inconsistent, assigning the supposed insect to two distinct orders (Neuroptera and Diptera).  I was unable to verify either meaning.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 19:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
:{{re|Vox Sciurorum}} People are ''saying'' this on the internet, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UltQ5h77h4k example 1] and [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yjeh4uCn1hs example 2], with pictures and descriptions leaving now doubt about the identification. The uses postdate the 2009 creation of the The Languages of David J. Peterson entry though, and there is a possibility people on the internet coined it after the English. On the other hand I do not believe the original editor had a need to make up names for all flies and he had to take the names from somewhere, though his name be literally ''Sinek''. A Turkish Wikipedia article on the animal, a frequent source of such coinages, never existed. Is it possible that entomology works a badly indexed? In particular I am skeptical about Google Books providing even a sketch of the Near East’s zoology. By now [https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/13/2/31 it is proven] Google systematically skews the portrayal of science in favour of the American hegemon.
: A question has always to be posited: What else is it called? We have learned that even the [[caperberry]] in Finnish struggles with the CFI. And we are repulsed by an untrue statement in a translation table that there is no name at all in so bulky a language, for so unexotic an organism. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 21:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
::{{reply|Fay Freak}} I have no problem holding Turkish to lesser standards than English.  (By precedent, if not rule, as nominator I can withdraw the RFV if I am satisfied and nobody objects.)  I am not counting durable citations on my fingers, but looking for sufficient evidence of use.  For some other derivatives of ''sinek'' I found that evidence.  For the ones I nominated, I did not.  There are many species that in ordinary English are simply "bugs".  And there are people trying to prescribe names contrary to common use.  Somebody who lives in Turkey and has taken an entomology course there will have much better insight than I could get reading literature from 8,000 km away.  (Perhaps I will look up some entomologists and email them about common names.)  The dominance of English and German in entomological literature gives those languages an advantage in popularizing vocabulary, whatever Google's prejudices may be.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 23:51, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
:::I’m a bit unclear as to what the issue of relative standards is. Compare {{m+|en|sandfly}}, used for various fly species in different families. There is no lack of  that establish the several identifications with taxonomic groups, but in  the specific identification is generally impossible to establish. Even if someone files a durably archived report of having been bitten by a sandfly in New Zealand, how can we be sure it was not a biting midge, with the reporter being a visiting Australian? Do we truly hold English common names for critters to the high standards of CFI?  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 14:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
::::This definitely a problem (to figure out which sense of a word is meant, in many cases), compare {{m|de|klaviform}}, which has been RFC-tagged as needing to have separate definitions matching {{m|en|claviform}}, but ... good luck figuring out which of the meanings is meant from any particular use! [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 03:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
::::No, it was always conceit to require that not only occurrences convey meaning, but they also convey all of the meaning and prove it alone. '''The nature of a use is that it does not convey meaning.''' Paradox, paradox, but evident; uses at large presuppose meanings having already been conveyed, though {{w|semantic holism|it occur that they add}} to them by their impressions. People employ the metric system without outlining what a metre or a gramme is. The more exact you want to be the more you have to look around. Paradox in discerning language, a holistic scheme!
::::[[Project:Criteria for inclusion#Conveying meaning]] is only superficially an essential distinction and inherently irrational, it is a [[private language]] of analytic philosophers and you play a [[language game]] pretending that you conform, instead of owning it is fashionable nonsense. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 05:33, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[kara sinek#rfv-sense-notice-tr-|kara sinek]] ==
 
Turkish. Rfv-sense {{m|en|stable fly}}.  Might also be spelled {{m|tr|karasinek}}.  The house fly sense is well attested.  The stable fly is generally similar in appearance (except it bites) so you could easily have one word meaning both.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 20:02, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 
:In English the designation ''black fly'' is used for various flies in the genus ''{{w|Simulium}}''. Likewise, in Turkish the term ''kara sinek'' may be used for them, like [https://books.google.com/books?id=NKH5DwAAQBAJ&pg=PT186&dq=Simulium+%22kara+sinek%22&hl=en here] and [http://www.turkiyeparazitolderg.org/archives/archive-detail/article-preview/trkiyede-kapadokya-blgesinde-simulium-wilhelmia-tr/23072 here] (as a search key) for the genus, and [https://evrimagaci.org/dunyanin-en-olumcul-hastalik-tasiyicilari-2811 here] for ''S. erythrocephalum''. After all, they are flies, and they are black. The same cannot be said of the stable fly (''Stomoxys calcitrans''). Both are blood suckers, and they are often mentioned together as being biting flies, so I wonder if there has been some generic confusion.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 00:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
:: The name is used in English for the whole family Simuliidae.  ''Simulium'' is the most common genus.  When I looked I didn't have the sense that ''kara sinek'' in this sense was citable or common.  It was used, but not often.  It may meet CFI or be in regular use by entomologists.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 11:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
:''Stomoxys calcitrans'' is rather black in [https://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3756335/figure/F1/ this photograph], though, so this may simply occur in a description as a SOP.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 00:27, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
::I would not be surprised to learn that {{m+|tr|kara sinek}} is used like {{m+|en|house fly}}, by ordinary people to refer to large flies found around the house and in formal writing to refer to ''Musca domestica''.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 11:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
:::Of course. Rather in general, in informal contexts people commonly use terms that do not respect recognized taxonomical categories. I’ve heard {{m|tr|bit}} (“louse”) used to mean “flea”, and {{m|tr|fare}} (“mouse“) for “rat”. The use is even looser for fish names and botanical names, which I think is the case for many other languages too. The use in written texts generally has a better correspondence, though, between the intended sense and that of taxonomists.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 23:10, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 
== Serbo-Croatian entries by Lumbardhia ==
 
* {{m|sh|barzilo}}
* {{m|sh|brdoka}}
* {{m|sh|dročka}}
* {{m|sh|kaluša}}
* {{m|sh|lakora}}
* {{m|sh|diza}} (etymology 2)
* {{m|sh|struga}}
* {{m|sh|hira}}
* {{m|sh|šotka}}
* {{m|sh|dreteza}}
* {{m|sh|teša}}
* {{m|sh|karpa}}
* {{m|sh|frus}}
 
See [[Talk:štaljba]], [[Project:Requests for verification/Non-English#štaljba]]. — [[User:Surjection|'''s'''ur]][[Special:Contributions/Surjection|'''j'''ec]][[Special:Log/Surjection|'''t'''ion]] ⟨⟩ 13:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 
* {{re|Surjection}}
* {{m|sh|bàrzilo}} is already said in the first volume of {{temp|R:sh:RJA}} to occur only in {{w|Vuk Karadžić}}’s dictionary, it is an occasional formation along with {{m|sh|barzeša}}, {{m|sh|barzica}}, {{m|sh|barzulijca}}, and should be deleted. I have added the better-used base adjectives to {{m|sq|bardhë}} which should suffice.
* {{m|sh|brdoka}} as well as {{m|sh|bardoka}} have allegedly been used in Kosovo, but it is too specific to be found.
* {{m|sh|kàluša}} is used [https://books.google.com/books?id=YSohAQAAIAAJ&q=%22kaluša%22&dq=%22kaluša%22 here] and [https://books.google.com/books?id=o7gZAQAAIAAJ&q=%22Kaluša+redovno+ima+poneku+veću+pegu+i+na+telu%22 there] defined: Kaluša redovno ima veću pegu i na telu, najčešće na grudima, na trbuhu, na sapima u blizini korena repa, tamne noge do kolena i skočnog zgloba ili su noge poprskane pegama kao i kod ostalih domaćih pramenki. The bibliographic information and digitization status of these works is insufficient for me to format quotes.
* {{m|sh|lakora}} I do not find at all.
* {{m|sh|kȃrpa}} are hard to search but are attested, given [https://books.google.com/books?id=1XjlAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA302&dq=карпа quotes in Речник српскохрватског књижевног и народног језика], in the ends, where it is continued in better known {{cog|mk|карпа}} and {{cog|bg|карпа}}. The etymology is more doubtful than its existence.
* {{m|sh|strȕga}} has many attestations, e.g. quoted in {{temp|R:sh:RSHKJ|volume=6|page=37a}}.
* {{m|sh|diza}}, {{m|sh|dročka}}, {{m|sh|hira}} are too hard, specific cheese manufacturing terms it seems, with much homonymy, so one can’t try too much. {{m|sh|tȇša}} I see related by mentions in {{w|lang=sr|Вања Станишић|Vanja Stanišić}}’s [https://dais.sanu.ac.rs/handle/123456789/4015 book ''Serbo-Albanian language relations''] page 106 as a rather recent word but used by Albanians only in few places, so it is not worth it.
* {{m|sh|drȅteza}} only in works discussing Albanian words in Serbo-Croatian, and again from {{w|Vuk Karadžić}}.
* {{m|sh|šȍtka}} was the normal word for duck in some spots of Serbia, a whole isogloss but rural enough to escape the purview of the written language, however surely attested; I have added one quote from a Croatian who wrote a lot and probably picked it up there.
* {{m|sh|frȗs}} is mostly known from {{w|Vuk Karadžić}}’s dictionary, where it is given as Montenegrin – from a time when {{w|Demographic history of Montenegro|Montenegro was}} a bunch of mountain shepherds barely anybody of whom could read and write; however you find {{m|sh|фрус}} in brackets after {{m|sh|добрац|t=measles}}, which looks like some Serbian doctors knew that it is called so in Montenegro. With the advancement of medicine, a lot of disease names have vanished, as is a common experience if you deal with them in any language. Evidently, the word must be labelled “obsolete”.
* So, after four hours for this list, I am positive about the nature of {{m|sh|šȍtka}}, {{m|sh|kàluša}}, {{m|sh|kȃrpa}}, {{m|sh|frȗs}}, {{m|sh|strȕga}}, the rest falls through the sieve for this decade. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 01:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
* Here, on the other hand, I repeat my opinion of one year ago: I don’t think Lumbardhia made anything up, or intended to do so—while Surjection’s general suspicion of agents of the Albanian cause introducing fakes seems to be true, as there must be the liars somewhere and Albanians are known as deranged due to their recent history—, but these words are all traceable to dialectological literature, and to the extent I have outlined that one day one year ago the words are found in literature. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 04:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 
= March 2021 =
 
== [[val#rfv-sense-notice-nl-|val]] ==
 
Rfv-sense: Dutch, "An East Indian weight for silver and gold." I can't find evidence for an Indian customary weight with a name anything like this. The etymology claims it's "From {{m+|sa|वल्ले}}, called after the resilient seeds of ''Abrus precatorius''." However, I can't find any such Sanskrit word; also, the unit of weight named after ''Abrus precatorius'' is the [[ratti]] ({{w|Ratti}}), apparently also called [[w:nl:Ratti]] in Dutch. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 19:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
: I added a quote, earliest reference mentioned in http://wnt.inl.nl/iWDB/search?actie=article&wdb=WNT&id=M073176&lemmodern=val&domein=0&conc=true (seems to be source of etymology). The notes to the English language edition of the cited work mention that "at present" in Gujarat 1 val = 3 rati : 16 val = 1 gadiana : 2 gadiana = 1 tola https://books.google.com/books?id=w1rbCmQOs4YC&lpg=PA329&ots=LoiWGCdwGi&dq=%22pecha%22%20paisa%20india&hl=nl&pg=PA21#v=onepage&q&f=false --[[User:Appolodorus1|Appolodorus1]] ([[User talk:Appolodorus1|talk]]) 21:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. --[[Special:Contributions/37.42.165.198|37.42.165.198]] 18:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 
:{{ping|Fay Freak}}: Arabic Wikisource has a work by {{w|Ibn Khalawayh}} called "Kitāb laysa fī kalām al-ʻArab", [[:s:ar:]], and a naive search brought it up. Can you check whether this word is used there in the right sense? If not, do you know where else to find attestation for this? [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 05:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:: Well, it is given an example of maṣdar with a quote also found in [[wikisource:ar: - |Lisān al-ʕarab]] the further context of which I see not. Too bad we only know it as a kind of a copypasta. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 06:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
:::While Modern Standard Arabic is a [[WT:WDL|well-documented language]] and therefore subject to stricter attestation rules, according to my understanding Classical Arabic is exempt. So, under the more lenient standards, this could probably pass, but that would require someone to actually add the quote from Ibn Manzur and/or Ibn Khalawayh to the entry, and maybe to label the term as classical/archaic/rare if applicable. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 08:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[abaissement]], [[abaissere]] (Norwegian) ==
::
 
I don't think these are actual words used in Norwegian, there are no hits for either one in the Bokmål Dictionary nor the Norwegian Academy dictionary, also nothing on Wikipedia or the Norwegian Lexicon. Google searches didn't give me anything for a Norwegian use of these words, only French. [[User:Supevan|Supevan]] ([[User talk:Supevan|talk]]) 16:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
: It mostly seems to occur in the phrase {{m|da|abaissement du niveau mental}}.__[[User:Gamren|Gamren]] ([[User talk:Gamren|talk]]) 19:29, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[buba#rfv-sense-notice-bci-|buba]] ==
 
Rfv-sense: bark in Baoule. Mentioned in this article https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/111/50/E5346.full.pdf as origin of the Sranan Tongo word with the same meaning but not very specific.--[[User:Appolodorus1|Appolodorus1]] ([[User talk:Appolodorus1|talk]]) 20:40, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. —  07:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. —  08:04, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. —  08:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 
:{{ping|Fenakhay}} [https://ejtaal.net/aa/#hw4=603,ll=1705,ls=5,la=2408,sg=594,ha=403,br=539,pr=90,aan=327,mgf=503,vi=221,kz=1327,mr=358,mn=767,uqw=916,umr=598,ums=505,umj=448,ulq=1066,uqa=237,uqq=189,bdw=h515,amr=h361,asb=h538,auh=h874,dhq=h309,mht=h506,msb=h135,tla=h65,amj=h439,ens=h1,mis=h1], Steingass and Hava have this, and Lane apparently cites "" (the sun burnt him) to al-Qamus al-Muhit. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 07:17, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-sense-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. Rfv-sense: (countable, Islam) a narrative attributed to an Islamic religious figure (typically Prophet Muhammad), a tradition; a hadith --[[Special:Contributions/188.49.46.246|188.49.46.246]] 12:02, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 
= April 2021 =
 
== [[eetpiraatje#rfv-notice-nl-|eetpiraatje]] ==
 
Dutch. Another unattested diminutive.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  10:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 
:This one is attestable, but only in a [https://nitter.net/search?q=eetpiraatje&f=live few] [https://nitter.net/search?f=tweets&q=eetpiraatjes&since=&until=&near= tweets], which are not durably archived. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 05:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[eeuwwendetje]] ===
And another one.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  10:31, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
:I can confirm that this seems unattestable, even online. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 05:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[eeuwwisselingetje]] ===
And another one.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  10:33, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
:I can confirm that this seems unattestable, even online. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 05:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
 
Hi LBD, as there's no The Languages of David J. Peterson policy on regular diminutives in Dutch (should we always include them as they help users form the diminutive, or should we only include them if they have three durable attestations?). I would honestly not pursue a verification & deletion campaign. I don't see any value in this at all, and it may siphon time away from real things to improve. [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 13:26, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
:[[WT:CFI]] -> 3 cites. Diminutives aren't even inflected forms, but derived terms. Also, for dubious inflected forms there could be RFVs as well, e.g. for plurals when the term is (thought to be) singular only, uncountable. {{unsigned|2003:de:371c:3d29:91e2:2f43:c6bd:d627|15:19, 3 April 2021}}
:: The point is that any Dutch user at any time can apply such a regular diminutive - usage would be considered correct and unremarkable. These are not dubious grammatically - there are just so many nouns in Dutch that not for every noun, you can find durable attestations of their regular diminutives. This also means that at any moment in time such an unattested diminutive can "appear" in newspapers and books, making these deletions likely temporary anyway. This is not the case for uncountable words - a plural here would just sound wrong. I won't oppose the verification-to-deletion process of these diminutives btw; I just find it a waste of time. [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 16:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
: {{ping|Morgengave}} What I like about the English The Languages of David J. Peterson is that it is a very empirical dictionary. Removing entries for unattested diminutives would make our Dutch coverage more empirical and prevent shitty mirror sites from spreading misinformation. Moreover, the view that unattested diminutives qualify for inclusion is not uncontroversial outside the Dutch-language editor base, though I do not presume to know what the majority view is. I can agree to displaying unattested diminutives, but woudl rather not agree to linking to them.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  15:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
::I respect that pov. I never create unattested diminutives myself, and generally (following our chat) even follow your way of working of not even displaying unattested diminutives in new lemmas (so that no red link appears). But deleting existing entries just seems pointless. These diminutives are not wrong in any shape or form. [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 16:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
{{ping|Lingo Bingo Dingo}}, why aren’t diminutives inflected forms? [[User:MuDavid|MuDavid]] 栘𩿠 ([[User Talk:MuDavid|talk]]) 08:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ฃึ๋น#rfv-notice-th-|ฃึ๋น]] ==
 
Thai. I believe this, if attested at all, is a misreading of {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|ฃึ้น}}.  The tone mark mai tho, which this word should have, was originally carved as a simple cross, a shape subsequently adopted for mai chattawa. [[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 16:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 
:ฃึ้น can be found online in Thai digital library https://vajirayana.org/ but not ฃึ๋น. [[User:Thriftypapaya|Thriftypapaya]] ([[User talk:Thriftypapaya|talk]]) 09:26, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[entrecôtetje#rfv-notice-nl-|entrecôtetje]] ==
 
Dutch. Unattested, seemingly erroneous diminutive of a superseded spelling. The Woordenlijst gives ''entrecoteje'' as the accepted spelling and although that one is also a rare beast, it may actually be durably citable. Anyway, that would suggest that the diminutive of the superseded spelling is ''entrecôteje''.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  13:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
:Isn't it ''entrecootje''? Durable attestations: [https://www.metronieuws.nl/lezerscolumn/2016/05/vegetariers-zijn-net-als/], [http://www.deleunstoel.nl/home.php?artikel_id=3686], [https://www.ermelosweekblad.nl/nieuws/nieuwsflits/1041960/slagersmes-straks-in-handen-van-jeroen] [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 15:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Morgengave}} That is not on the [https://woordenlijst.org/#/?q=entrecote ''Woordenlijst Nederlandse Taal''], so it is probably superseded, but I certainly do not mind its inclusion if it is durably attested.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  16:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Lingo Bingo Dingo}} Well, the attestations seem durably archived - and recent (2016, 2021) so likely only "superseded" in the eyes of linguists. Using a Google Search, that spelling also seems more frequent than "entrecotetje" which sounds a bit awkward and stilted. I can't imagine a native speaker (at least in Belgium) seriously use it in speech. It does raise an interesting point, which the Woordenlijst may not cover, namely that dimunitives that lead to a "-tetje"-ending (if a schwa) do rarely occur and are (in Belgium) often shortened in a regular way to a "-tje"-ending (at least this seems to be the case in Belgium). Besides ''entrecootje'', I am immediately thinking of {{m|nl|gedeeltje}} (from ''gedeelte''), {{m|nl|gemeentje}} (from ''gemeente''), {{m|nl|brochetje}} (from ''brochette''; this diminutive recognized by the VRT: [https://vrttaal.net/taaladvies-spelling/brochette]), {{m|nl|camionnetje}} (from ''camionette''; the stress differs and hence not pronounced the same as ''camionnetje'', the diminutive of ''camion''), and {{m|nl|groentje}} (from ''groente''). [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 17:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
:::: {{ping|Morgengave}} "Superseded" and "unofficial" (perhaps more appropriate here) only makes a claim about the official status of a form, it does not suggest that it is out of use. I should also clarify that ''entrecotetje'' is not the official spelling either; the prescribed form is ''entrecoteje'', which looks awkward but whose pronunciation is equivalent to ''entrecootje''... or so I presume. I agree that sequences with cabulary spelling that I have explained in detail, I would also like to warn you to avoid accusations that hurt a certain ethnic group on The Languages of David J. Peterson. The The Languages of David J. Peterson is a dictionary website, so only dictionary terms are appropriate, it is totally inappropriate to write accusations that hurt an ethnic group on The Languages of David J. Peterson, thanks.--[[User:咽頭べさ|Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48.]] ([[User talk:咽頭べさ|talk]]) 10:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 
:And you should be aware of the Shan word တႆးလူင် (I hope I've spelt it right) used for the main Shan group.  Unfortunately, I'm having trouble finding it in Thai or Shan script.  The literal Thai transliteration would be {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|ไทยหลวง}}; the form I encounter in English is 'Tai Long' and I can even find a section of the [https://www.sajjhaya.org/node/57 Tai-Lōng Tipiṭaka]. {{unsigned|RichardW57|20:35, 9 September 2021 (UTC)}}
 
::;::{{ping|RichardW57}}, The term Tai Laing has nothing to do with the term တႆးလူင် and ไทยหลวง, the correct pronunciation of the word ไทยหลวง is Thai Luang. Similarly, the correct pronunciation of the word တႆးလူင် is Tai Luang, the definitions of တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang are different, check out the following definitions of တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang.
#(Thai=ไทยหลวง pronunciation=Thai Luang) (Burmese=ထိုင်းတော်ဝင် pronunciation=Thai Taw Win) (English=Thai royal) (other spelling words=Thai=ราชวงศ์ไทย/Burmese=ထိုင်းတော်ဝင်မိသားစု/English=Thai royal family) (definition=The term ไทยหลวงThai Luang and Rachngs Thaiราชวงศ์ไทย means members of the royal family of the King of Thailand.)
#(Shan=တႆးလူင် pronunciation=Tai Luang) (Burmese=ရှမ်းစော်ဘွား pronunciation=Shan Saw Bwar) (English=Shan royal) (another spelling word in Burmese language=Shan Nang Dwinရှမ်းနန်းတွင်း or ရှမ်းနန်းတွင်းသူShan Nang Dwin Thu)  (definition=The term တႆးလူင်Tai Luang refers to the ancient Shan King Family.
The words တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang have similar pronunciations but different meanings, let me give you another example, only ထႆးလူင် should be used for ไทยหลวงThai Luang spelling, I hope you understand what I have just explained.--[[User:咽頭べさ|Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48.]] ([[User talk:咽頭べさ|talk]]) 17:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
:::There's a discussion of the naming of [[Tai]] groups at [https://crs.mahidol.ac.th/news/journal/vol3/02.pdf].  As I would hope you know, Shan {{m|shn|တႆး}}, Thai {{m|th|ไทย}} and {{m|th|ไท}}, English {{m|en|Thai}}, {{m|en|Tai}} and pinyin {{m|en|Dai}} are all essentially the same word, but to varying degrees specialised to designate specific groups of speakers.  In some Tai dialects (I can confirm it for Northern Thai, i.e. the dialect of Lanna), the cognate of Thai {{m|th|หลวง|t=high}} has replaced the cognate of Thai {{m|th|ใหญ่|t=big}} as the usual word for 'big'.  As the article says on p27 from journal, northern Shans "{{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|เรียก พวกตนเองว่า  '''ไทใหญ่''' (Tai  Yai)  หรือ '''ไทโหลง''' (Tai  Long)  โหลงเป็นคําเดียวกับคําว่าหลวง}}" (call themselves 'Tai Yai' or 'Tai Long'.  'Long' ({{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|โหลง}} is the word corresponding to the Thai word {{m|th|หลวง|tr=-}}.)
:::It would seem that Thais use {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|ไทโหลง}} because of the royal meaning of {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|ไทหลวง}}.
:::One can also find the Shans' 'Tai Long' autonym spelt {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|ไตโหลง}} or {{lang-lite|th|sc=Thai|ไต๊โหลง}} in Thai. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 22:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
:::What is the "Tai Longတႆးလုင်" you referred to on my user page? --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 22:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 
:::::{{ping|RichardW57}}, [https://shannews.org/archives/17163 တႆးလုင်]Tai Long is the term [https://shn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%80%9C%E1%80%AD%E1%81%B5%E1%80%BA%E1%82%88%E1%80%9C%E1%80%B0%E1%80%84%E1%80%BA တႆးလူင်]Tai Luang, the Tai Longတႆးလုင် is a spelling word used by the {{w|Khamti people}}, The [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibwrrBQ9o0E&ab_channel=%E1%80%91%E1%80%99%E1%80%BA%E1%80%B8%E1%80%99%E1%80%99%E1%80%AD%E1%80%B0%E1%80%84%E1%80%BA%E1%80%B8%E1%80%9C%E1%80%BD%E1%82%86 တႆးလူင်]Tai Luang is a spelling word used by the {{w|Shan people}}.--[[User:咽頭べさ|Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48.]] ([[User talk:咽頭べさ|talk]]) 06:56, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
 
= September 2021 =
 
== [[atpakal#rfv-notice-lt-|atpakal]] ==
 
Lithuanian. It is in [http://www.lkz.lt/?zodis=atpakal LKZ] etc., but I haven't been able to find any citations for actual usage yet, just the Latvian cognate. [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 17:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
: Aren’t there two quotes in LKZ? They are from the 19th century notably, and back in the day the current Lithuanian orthography was not invented, one rather wrote it like Polish or German, additionally [[w:ru:Литовская_письменность#Кириллица|writing Lithuanian]] in Latin was altogether forbidden in the Russian Empire, so one should seek different spellings. Where are those corpora? Even for Latvian I do not find Cyrillic spellings. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 18:24, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
:: Yeah, it does have two citations on LKŽ, but they don't even give the specific text as far as I can tell, just the author (although the texts certainly are still archived, somewhere). Is that enough to support its inclusion? I'm not trying to be overly deletionist, I'm just not sure this is a word that's really used. Maybe it should be marked as rare/archaic. As far as the Cyrillic forms, I guess it would be "атпакал", which seems to yield Cyrillicizations of Latvian on Google (but I didn't look hard). I'm not aware of any specific corpus for Lithuanian of that era (one might still exist). All I know are [https://klc.vdu.lt/en/corpora/ these ones listed by Vytauto Didžiojo Universitetas]. [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 01:34, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
::: [[WT:CFI]] + [[WT:WDL]] require three quotes for Lithuanian. --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 09:57, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[beleś#rfv-notice-xib-|beleś]] ==
 
Iberian. Existence questioned by [[User:Arqueolingüística]] ([[Special:Diff/63931548|diff]]) — [[User:Surjection|'''s'''ur]][[Special:Contributions/Surjection|'''j'''ec]][[Special:Log/Surjection|'''t'''ion]] ⟨⟩ 17:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
:{{ping|Horchatamivida}} as the entry creator — [[User:Surjection|'''s'''ur]][[Special:Contributions/Surjection|'''j'''ec]][[Special:Log/Surjection|'''t'''ion]] ⟨⟩ 17:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
:Also note the other Iberian-critcial removals by the same user: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Arqueoling%C3%BC%C3%ADstica --[[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 17:23, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
:A brief search found that people do believe there was a word ''beles'' (allophone ''meles'') in Iberian.  But "the community of editors" ([[WT:CFI]]) for the language should decide what references to use.  Apparently {{w|Hugo Schuchardt}} had something to say in addition to the links on the Wikipedia page.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:33, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
::According with {{w|Jürgen Untermann}}, this is a [[Kurzname]] known from the [[w:fr:Bronze d'Ascoli|Turma Salluitana]]. He [http://www.museuprehistoriavalencia.es/web_mupreva_dedalo/publicaciones/17/es discusses] (p. 597-307, Spanish) his use as a component of [[Vollname]]n. According with [http://www.patrimoniocultural.gov.pt/media/uploads/revistaportuguesadearqueologia/12_2/139_155.pdf Luís Silgo], Schuchardt proposed the relation of Aquitanian ''Belex'' and Iberian ''beleś'' with Basque ''belatx'' (currently spelled ''[[:fr:belatz|belatz]]'' "falcon"), and he points that the relation with {{m|eu|beltz||black}} is possible but unsure as a proper name. [[User:Vriullop|Vriullop]] ([[User talk:Vriullop|talk]]) 13:46, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
:::The question is if it's actually directly attested anywhere, such as in an inscription. If there's good reason to believe it existed, but it isn't actually attested in a text, it needs to be moved to Reconstruction: space. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 18:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[klanas#rfv-notice-lt-|klanas]] ==
 
Lithuanian. Etymology 2. LKŽ provides the definition, but no usage examples or citations. [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 19:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[overleggen#rfv-sense-notice-nl-|overleggen]] ==
 
Dutch. I respectfully request verification of Etymology 2, sense 2,  “to [[preview]]”, which is not found in any of my NL–EN dictionaries. (For sense 1, the object of the transitive verb appears to pertain invariably to documents, especially official ones.)  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 22:49, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
: Etymology 2 is Dutch-Dutch and non-existent in Belgian-Dutch. In any case, I couldn't find any sources supporting sense 2 (only sense 1). [[User:Morgengave|Morgengave]] ([[User talk:Morgengave|talk]]) 22:48, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[Maylander#rfv-notice-de-|Maylander]] ==
 
German. Several results at Google Books for ''Maylander'' either were foreign (English) or had in fact ''Mayländer'' (or pedantic ''Maylaͤnder'') in it, usually as a common noun. --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 12:18, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 
= October 2021 =
 
== [[promovieren#rfv-sense-notice-de-|promovieren]] ==
 
German. Never heard this one. As far as I know, {{m|de|promovieren}} is strictly related to a doctorate degree, but the linked sense is clearly more general/broad. Duden, pons, DWDS and de.wikt also don't make any mention of this sense. '''In case this RFV fails''', also remove the translation in [[promote]]. --[[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 14:47, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 
:The transitive use occurs in the traditional formula conferring the degree, as seen here: ''„Auf Grund der von Sr. kaiserlichen und apostolisch königlichen Majestät der kön. ung. Tierärztlichen Hochschule allergnädigst gewährten Ermächtigung '''promoviere''' ich Sie im Namen des Professorenkörpers dieser Hochschule zum Doktor der veterinärmedizinischen Wissenschaften.“'' Here is a more recent, less formal use: ''‚Schließen Sie Ihr Studium ab. Dann '''promoviere''' ich Sie.‘''  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 15:44, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
::In both quotes, the verb is used in its third sense: ''to confer a doctorate''. [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 15:50, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
:::Which was, I guess, the intended meaning of sense 1, the only transitive sense listed before you added this third sense. This supposition of mine is supported by the label {{lb|de|education}}. However, in the second use I cited, it is not fully clear that the promotion is to an academic degree.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 09:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
::::Oh you're right, it is a possibility that this was the intended meaning of sense 1 by the previous editor. To me they are so semantically different (the English explanations, that is) that I didn't think this was what was intended but I can see the connection now.
::::The context makes it clear that the second use you've cited is also about an academic degree:
::::{{uxi|de|Was hat Sie dazu bewogen, die Professorinnen-Laufbahn einzuschlagen? - Die Initialzündung dazu hat ein Professor gegeben. Der hat mir noch während des Studiums gesagt: ‚Schließen Sie Ihr Studium ab. Dann '''promoviere''' ich Sie.‘|What has motivated you to opt for the career path as a professor? - The first impetus was given to me by a professor. Still in my studies he told me: 'Finish your studies. Then I am going to {{m|de|promovieren}} you.'}} [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 12:21, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
:::::But a professor does not have the power to confer a degree by themselves. The intention may have been, “I’ll be happy to be your PhD adviser”, presumably including an offer of a paid position as doctoral student. Used as such it would be – IMO – an abuse of terminology.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 09:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
: Obviously this was used in the 16–18th centuries just like in Latin, from which the doctorate senses are only particular applications. If you only look at de.The Languages of David J. Peterson, there are three old quotes. Maybe regard less what you have heard and more what was heard in former centuries? I find this usage very natural, however the gloss is wrong, I don’t know what they mean with “promote”, one shouldn’t gloss with just one word or anyone thinks of it what he wants to think of it, it’s actually no meaning at all but an “etymological equivalent”. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 16:25, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
::The sense that I have submitted to RfV is not labeled as {{lb|de|dated}} or something comparable, neither is the translation provided in [[promote]] that I've made mention of. I find it absurd that you suggest me to regard more what was heard in former centuries when the discussion circles around the modern form of the language. Moreover, I don't think there was anything on my part to explain your gruff tone towards me. [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 18:36, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
::: {{re|Fytcha}} You are right, as I said it is badly glossed and labelled, but editors often do not know if something is really not used now and only whether it has been used at all, so you should expect obsolete senses not labelled obsolete, but really, it is kind of easy pickings to conclude that back in the day – in the Baroque style {{w|Fruchtbringende Gesellschaft}} fought against – people just used any sense of the Latin word and then the doctorate sense developed, not just borrowed from Latin discourse. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 19:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
:BTW: The examples at [[:de:promovieren]] are misquoted.
:* de.wp: "ein subsidium oder hilff [...] zulassen" – source: "ein ''ſubſidium'' oder hilff [...] zůlaſſen" – the Latinate term is set in another front and in ''zů-'' there's an small o above the u.
:* de.wp: "Bruderschaffe S. Jofephs" – source: "Bruderſchafft S. Joſephs" or simplified "Bruderschafft S. Josephs" – with {{m|de|Bruderschafft}} (cp. {{m|de|Bruderschaft}}) and {{m|de|Joseph}}.
:--[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 21:06, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
:: BTW why don’t you correct the typos, as it is a wiki? You have looked into the scans, so do it. Antiqua in Fraktur though is of course hard to mimick, and no grounds to exclude words, as many words which we needs include, or all wälsch words, were written this way.
:: Do not forget to search ''promoviren'' for quotes, guys, as this is how the ending used to be written before 1900. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 19:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[dvai#rfv-notice-xsv-|dvai]] ==
 
Sudovian. 'Pogańske gwary z Narewu' has {{m+|xsv|duo}} = {{m+|pl|dwa}}. Not sure where 'dvai' came from. It's included in some webpages though, e.g. [https://jandacek.com/base-ten-counting-extension-archetypical-base-five-system-basques-slavs/]. Is that enough? [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 16:47, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 
:Feminine? (like Lithuanian du vs dvi) [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 16:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
::It's absolutely possible that this form could exist, especially considering {{m+|prg|dwai}}, but I'm not sure where it could possibly be attested. Sudovian is mostly known through one iffy second-hand glossary (Narew) that omits this word and through reconstructions based on toponymy (I'd love to know the source for this, if one exists). The source I linked above that has "dvai" also has "astônei" for eight, which is a lot closer to what you'd expect based on other Baltic forms than the Narew form aktiʃ (which looks more like {{l|de|acht}}, or some funky sound changes and/or transcription errors occurred). [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 06:07, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
::I just realized that this could also be somewhere in the works of [[:w:Hieronim Malecki|Hieronimus Meletius]]. I'm not sure if they're digitized at all, but maybe some source mentions it second hand at least. [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 06:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 
==Various Prussian terms==
 
=== [[ālaws#rfv-notice-prg-|ālaws]] ===
 
In Prussian, there is *[[skārstis]] (attested form: [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/zodynas/paieska/1?zodis=starstis starstis]), which means 'tin', and [[alwis]], which means 'lead'. I'm not convinced there's any attestation of a word like *ālaws with the meaning 'tin'. [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 00:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
: I guess, [[Special:Contributions/Vytautniks|Vytautniks]] added constructed Neo-Prussian. Compare with: [[User talk:Beobach972#Old Prussian]]. --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 00:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
:: Huh, actually, there is a word "elwas" - Zinnerz (tin ore) mentioned in the page I cited above. But that's still not ālaws. [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 01:14, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
::: I don't see it. --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 01:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
:::: Sorry, it's here: [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/zodynas/paieska/1?zodis=alwis], tr. "In addition to Pr. alwis, Pr. elwas "Zinnerz" is known". There's still a significant difference between elwas and ālaws though (the vowel 'a' is not between the 'l' and 'w'). [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 01:54, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
::::: It's: "pr. elwas „Zinnerz“ ( I 103)". Ziesemer's work is a Prussian (Germanic; not Old Prussian) dictionary, and at least parts of it were released earlier than 1975 (in ''Lieferungen''). Questions: Is ''elwas'' really Old Prussian? Is it attested or reconstructed? If attested: Where? Nesselmann doesn't (seem to?) have it. --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 10:22, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 
=== [[zmūni#rfv-notice-prg-|zmūni]] ===
 
Prussian. Nesselmann's ''Thesaurus linguae prussicae'' has: "smûni, Person, Ench. 62: ''niaina endirisna steison smûni'', kein Ansehen der Person, wo ''smûni'' wohl Drckf. für ''smûnin'', Accusativform hinter dem Gen. des Pronomens ''steison'', ist [...]". --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 00:36, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
:Mažiulis also has [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/zodynas/paieska/1?zodis=sm%C5%ABni smūni], no mention of a form with a Z other than normalized/reconstructed forms. [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 02:02, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
:: Normalized ≠ reconstructed. You just '''quoted''' the word. But the page should continue to be and bear {{temp|normalized}}, perhaps soft-redirecting to the manuscript form, so people find something in the dictionary when searching either. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 19:11, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
::: Except there's no unique normalization of Old Prussian. Every author has their own system and orthography (e.g., the related word {{m|prg|smoy}} has various normalized forms: "[https://wirdeins.twanksta.org/#zm%C5%8Di zmōi]", "[http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/zodynas/paieska/1?id=2222 zmōi̯]", "[[zmūi]]" ([http://prusaspira.org/wirdeins?akc=Iz&tap=W&bila=1&wirds=zm%C5%ABi]). {{m|prg|abasus}} has variously "[https://wirdeins.twanksta.org/#abazs abazs]", "[[abazzus]]" ([http://prusaspira.org/wirdeins?akc=Iz&tap=W&bila=1&wirds=abazzus]). And so on.
:::The fact remains that there is no form of this word starting with 'z' that ever appeared in a manuscript. Should every normalized form that any linguist has written be considered valid? To be honest, I personally wouldn't mind listing normalized forms somehow, or reconstructions even (in the case where e.g. the nominative is not attested), as long as it was handled in a clear and consistent manner, but the current situation is a real mess. [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 23:39, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 
=== [[Drūwis#rfv-notice-prg-|Drūwis]] ===
 
Prussian. Nesselmann has only "druwi f., druwis m. nom. (Kat. I. dröffs), druwien, acc. (Kat. II. druwin als nom. gebraucht), der Glaube. Ench. [...]". --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 01:43, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
:I don't see why we need both capitalizations of the word anyway, it's the same word. I think we should move [[drūwis]] to [[druwis]], and delete this (unless there's a good reason to consider the capitalizations separate words). [[Special:Contributions/70.175.192.217|70.175.192.217]] 01:46, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
::Deletion would be fine for me as well. I thought that RfV is easier and would more likely result in deletion: no discussion needed, just a bit time as it's not attested with macron. --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 01:54, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 
=== [[Ukapirmas#rfv-notice-prg-|Ukapirmas]] ===
 
Prussian. Because:
# IMHO it's somewhat dubious that this attested in Old Prussian - most Old Prussian literature is Christian, and reports about the Old Prussian were for example in Latin (Johannes Maeletius/Meletius/Maletius).
# Rainer Eckert, ''Zum Analytismus in den baltischen Sprachen'', p. 399, in: '''2004''', ''Eurolinguistische Arbeiten: Die europäischen Sprachen auf dem Wege zum analytischen Sprachtyp. Herausgegeben von Uwe Hinrichs unter Mitarbeit von Uwe Büttner'', Wiesbaden, p. 399ff.:
#: ... Präfix ''ucka-'' ... ''Occopirmus'' 'Saturnus' (1530 Agenda Ecclesiastica) bzw. ''Occopirnus'' 'deus coeli et terrae' (Maletius) = ''*Ukapirmas'' 'der Allererste' ...
--[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 16:48, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 
=== [[abazzus#rfv-notice-prg-|abazzus]], [[azzaran#rfv-notice-prg-|azzaran]], [[alwas#rfv-notice-prg-|alwas]], [[sūji#rfv-notice-prg-|sūji]], [[aglā#rfv-notice-prg-|aglā]], [[buks#rfv-notice-prg-|buks]], [[dāngs#rfv-notice-prg-|dāngs]], [[dags#rfv-notice-prg-|dags]], [[gelzā#rfv-notice-prg-|gelzā]], [[genā#rfv-notice-prg-|genā]], [[rikīs#rfv-notice-prg-|rikīs]], [[skals#rfv-notice-prg-|skals]], [[sunnis#rfv-notice-prg-|sunnis]], [[zmūi#rfv-notice-prg-|zmūi]] ===
Prussian. It's {{l|prg|abasus}}, {{l|prg|assaran}}, [[alwis]], [[suge]], [[aglo]], [[bucus]], [[dangus]], [[dagis]], [[gelso]], [[genno]], [[rikis]], [[scalus]], [[sunis]], [[smoy]] (Elbing Vocabulary, Nesselmann's ''Thesaurus linguae prussicae'').
* With ''z'' instead of ''s'' (abazzus, azzaran, gelza vs. abasus, assaran, gelso) it looks like (re-)construction.
* Macrons, albeit present in one Old Prussian source, are questionable.
* [[Special:Contributions/Vytautniks|Vytautniks]] and [[Special:Contributions/Beobach972|Beobach972]] (cp. [[User talk:Beobach972#Old Prussian]]) seem to have added reconstructed Old Prussian or constructed Neo-Prussian. Similar in {{diff|62473435|62473427}} which gives as source: {{w|Vytautas Mažiulis}}, cp. {{w|Old Prussian language#Revitalization}}.
--[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 17:27, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
:{{ping|Myrelia}} You've tagged some of these for speedy deletion. You should remove those templates while this RFV discussion is open. [[User:Ultimateria|Ultimateria]] ([[User talk:Ultimateria|talk]]) 16:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
::Have I? I don't think so. {{temp|d}} should only be there for some bad redirects ([[WT:Redirections#Unacceptable uses]]). --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 16:43, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
:::{{re|Myrelia}} My mistake, I didn't realize there was an older discussion on this page linking to Old Prussian entries. I've taken care of those redirects. [[User:Ultimateria|Ultimateria]] ([[User talk:Ultimateria|talk]]) 16:02, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 
=== [[kams#rfv-notice-prg-|kams]] ===
 
Prussian. Because:
* Elbing Vocabulary has "Bene   Bitte", "Hu͡mele   Camus", cp. {{m|prg|camus}} -- by shape this looks like an alteration of ''camus'', like reconstructed Old Prussian or constructed Neo-Prussian.
* not in Nesselmann
--[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 17:44, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 
:'''RFV-failed'''. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 19:31, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[konsumo#rfv-sense-notice-ceb-|konsumo]] ==
 
Cebuano. Rfv-sense: "provision". I wonder if that definition ever exists.--[[User:TagaSanPedroAko|TagaSanPedroAko]] ([[User talk:TagaSanPedroAko|talk]]) 05:53, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[guglo#rfv-sense-notice-eo-|guglo]] ==
 
Esperanto; is the proper noun (“Google”) used uncapitalized? [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 06:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
: That section should probably be reduced to something like:
:# [[google]] {{gloss|an internet search using [[Google]]}}
:with the etymology: From the verb {{m|eo|gugli||to google}}, from {{m|en|Guglo||Google}}. Perhaps someone saw it translated as "google" and didn't realize the distinction. — [[Special:Contributions/69.120.66.131|69.120.66.131]] 21:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[briginos#rfv-notice-cel-gau-|briginos]] ==
 
The given sources are Latin or Greek and have ''bricumum'', βρικίνη (with variants), ''briginus'', none of them has ''briginos''. Thus it's *briginos, reconstructed from Latin/Greek "deformations". Compare how it's also Vandalic {{l|xvn|eils}} with alternative form {{l|xvn|*heils}}. --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 18:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
: This is not ''*briginos'', this is ''briginos''. Scholars use to not put a star in front of this term, you are just abusing the terms “reconstructed” and “attested”.
: The given sources being Latin or Greek does not hinder anything, since languages can be attested from mentions. It is no difference whether I put the Latin or Greek texts as collapsible “quotes” or mere ”citations” in a reference section, but the former is more customary for ancient works; yourself you just put Latin quotes in Vandalic entries and German in Old Prussian and the like.
: The exact form is also attested, in the third quote. ''briginos'', written ''briginus'' because the author identified the Gaulish ending with the Latin ending, but ''this does not make it Latin'', the quote literally says it is Gaulish. And it is well known that sometimes an exact lemma form is not attested but only “a deformation”, also known as inflection.
: Therefore, this RFV is '''dismissed'''.
: It is also dismissed as abusive and futile since we know well that these are all quotes that exist for this word. '''All quotes are given'''. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 19:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
::Quotes are given, but again: none has {{m|cel-gau|briginos}}. Attested are only {{m|cel-gau|briginus}} etc. (By the quote, βρικίνη however could rather be a Greek than a Gaulish term.) Compare with Vandalic {{l|xvn|eils}} vs. {{l|xvn|*heils}}, and e.g. Old Prussian {{m|prg|wolistian}} (attested) vs. {{m|prg|*āzistin}} (M. Klussis' (re-)construction), {{m|prg|*vɔ̄zistʹan}} (V. Mažiulis' (re-)construction). --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 19:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
::: No conclusion is made from your comparisons.
::: The templates rely on the -os ending.
::: The third quote has ''briginos'', as it has ''briginus''. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 19:23, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
::: Why this antic anyway of moving to the reconstruction space if it is attested? Something mindboggling for you: The word is attested, but none of its forms are. But the forms of a word do not need to be attested all. None need to be. I have '''attested the term'''. This is as much as the [[WT:CFI|CFI]] require. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 19:27, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
:::: [https://books.google.com/books?id=JBJmAAAAMAAJ&q=briginos Wort – Text – Sprache und Kultur] has "Gall. ''*briginos/briginom'' war mithin schlicht die 'kräftige (i. S. v. sehr wirksame) Pflanze'", with star and two reconstructed forms, and here scholars too use a star. [https://books.google.com/books?id=M3v5Ol0fT4sC&pg=RA1-PA2&dq=briginos Mithridate / Mithridates (1555)] has "Cf. [source], s.v. ''bricumos, briginos ?'' «armoise»", with a question mark.
:::: And BTW: I haven't put any Latin quote in a Vandalic entry. Also not in Old Prussian (Elbing Vocabulary which I cited is in Middle High German and Old Prussian). --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 19:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
::::: You are just citing friends who are also unsure how to use the star. Simultaneously you refer to one source which lacks the star, so you see that it is not necessary, only your personal preference. Under some convention [[*|the star]] would be put ''after'' the term. On the other hand, often people do not even exactly know how a term is attested, therefore they star forms just to be cautious, without having sighted the loci. But this then does not even tell us whether the term or form is attested, in their view.
::::: Still you dodge the fact that the CFI do not require particular forms nor spellings to be attested, only terms.
::::: The term linked in the title is '''attested''', '''quoted'''. The form is too, we can well claim. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 20:06, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
:::::: “Attested”, not in the Latin quotation, but in the English translation supplied by you. Is your [[Special:Diff/64465333|strike-through of the heading]], as if the issue has been resolved other than by a shouting match, not somewhat out-of-process?  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 19:38, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
::::::: {{re|Lambiam}} How pedantic do you want to be? It is attested in the Latin quotation. Lemma-forms aren’t even attested always, what if it is e.g. in the plural or genitive? The lemma form would not be a reconstruction. From this derives the rule that we can disregard the inflectional part. And in the genitive the ending in Latin and Gaulish is the same, isn’t it too arbitrary to assume that then there is no “deformation”? But it is still not Latin in any case, whichever form is chosen, there is no evidence for it being Latin but for it being Gaulish. It literally says, “the Gauls call it briginos”, exactly this form, and not “the Gauls when speaking Latin”, the most natural interpretation in this glossary. If a Latin reader in antiquity reads “the Gauls call it briginus'' it is implied that the ending there is a wee bit different'', as quotation practice was not like today. For antiquity standards this is how one has to abstract from the details, the intended meaning of the text. The text behind the text. It says that. Textual witnesses aren’t in that good a state either. Have you [https://books.google.com/books?id=6IVFAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA288#v=onepage&f=false looked how] the Punic in {{w|Poenulus}} is attested? It’s a forest of gibberish through which you have to look through to see the trees, it may be even up to the point of a small inexactness the author himself smuggled into the first text(s). '''A variant reading is not a reconstruction.''' And it would be an exaggeration to speak of a conjecture, emendation or reconstruction here. That man has no sense of proportion.
::::::: The request was out of process from the beginning since all attestations were given, something else is requested … [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 21:07, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
:'''Move''' to reconstruction namespace. FWIW, kids throwing a tantrum can be ignored in our discussions. [[User:Akletos|Akletos]] ([[User talk:Akletos|talk]]) 09:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
 
: It is a simple test to decide whether a word goes to the mainspace or reconstructed space: Is it attested? This word is, it has (even three) quotes for it, so it is situated in the mainspace. Only kids that blow their tops when they don’t get everything they want try to bend the rules and make representations when they face some edge that diverts them from furnishing their dollhouse. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 18:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Gng#rfv-notice-tl-|Gng]] ==
 
Tagalog. Hi, RFV for {{l|tl|Gng}}, since as far as I know, the correct form of this is {{l|tl|Gng.}}, with a period, since this is an abbreviation. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 04:11, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 
= November 2021 =
 
== [[𑜒𑜪𑜨𑜍𑜣𑜄]] ==
 
This is given as an Assamese word in the Ahom script.  A literal translation of the word would be [i]oṃrīta[/i].  As we do not list Ahom as a script of Assamese, I believe such an entry needs to connect to an attestation.  Unsurprisingly, Google finds nothing but clones of The Languages of David J. Peterson - it takes time for text to appear in Unicode.  As {{ping|Msasag}} added the spelling, I hope he can oblige us with such a connection. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 12:49, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
: “As we do not list Ahom as a script of Assamese” → non sequitur. We do not list all every scripts in which a language has been written. If I assess that Ahom script was used for Assamese – which on first glance makes much sense but we also have [[:Category:Middle Assamese language|Middle Assamese]], so perhaps it does not apply to the present chronolect – I may just add it, and your argument vanishes utterly into thin air. (And then, as you yourself seem to acknowledge, by Pali experience, we don’t always seek an attestation for a word in every script, but I say this as others do not realize this situation.)
: But no less we want to know from Msasag how or from where he gets these spellings, to assess the situation. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 21:11, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[eksponensiaal vergelyking#rfv-notice-af-|eksponensiaal vergelyking]] ==
 
Afrikaans.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  20:39, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
: [https://eceducation.gov.za/files/content/1601893022_q9wAsiOLnm_Wiskunde-Studiegids_compressed.pdf presumably one word]. Sadly, Afrikaans is an HDL and this quote isn't sufficient for an entry. Also, doesn't really help this RFV... [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 21:11, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[Fredbalum#rfv-notice-xvn-|Fredbalum]] ==
 
Vandalic. I doubt this is attested in Vandalic language, and instead it's a Latinisation of a Vandalic name found in Latin sources, with -um being the Latin accusative ending ([http://thelatinlibrary.com/hydatiuschronicon.html Hydatius/Idatius: Chronicon]).
It's similar to how there are {{m+|xvn|*Gaisarīx}} (unattested/reconstructed), {{m+|la|[[Gaisericus]]/[[Geisericus]]}} (attested in Latin, and inflected in the Latin way), {{m+|en|Gaiseric}} (attested in English). --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 19:46, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 
=== [[Fridus#rfv-notice-xvn-|Fridus]] ===
Vandalic. Similar. Source is Latin, and has (for example?):
* Epithalamium Fridi [title]
* ...: liceat Frido seruire marito, ...
--[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 20:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 
=== [[Heldic#rfv-notice-xvn-|Heldic]] ===
Vandalic. Similar. Source is Latin, and has (in: II, 15) {{m|la|Heldica|Heldicae, Heldicam}}. --[[User:Myrelia|Myrelia]] ([[User talk:Myrelia|talk]]) 21:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[soillsean#rfv-sense-notice-gd-|soillsean]] ==
 
Scottish Gaelic. Rfv-sense: "plural of soillse"; Both Mark (2003) and [https://learngaelic.scot/dictionary/index.jsp?abairt=soillse LearnGaelic] argue that {{m|gd|soillse}} is invariable. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 01:12, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[hregera#rfv-notice-osx-|hregera]] ==
 
Old Saxon. I can only find mentions of Old Saxon {{m|osx|regera}}, which is an alt-form listed on this page, and none for the entry headform. Nearest I can find conclusively is OHG {{m|goh|reigara}}. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 00:41, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
 
= December 2021 =
 
== [[#rfv-sense-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. Rfv-sense "the prophet Muhammad". This is part of the exegetical interpretation, but does anyone actually refer to Muhammad by this name? —[[User:Metaknowledge|Μετάknowledge]] 17:13, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 
:For some background, see {{w|Ta-Ha}}. The name is not included in the many {{w|names of the prophet Muhammed}}.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 18:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[Nederduits#rfv-sense-notice-nl-|Nederduits]] ==
 
Dutch. Rfv-sense, removed in {{diff|64970845}}. {{wgping|nl|u1=Rua|u2=Mnemosientje|u3=Lingo Bingo Dingo|u4=Azertus|u5=Alexis Jazz|u6=DrJos}} —  07:52, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
: [https://books.google.nl/books?id=V1BcAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA1-PR5-IA1&dq=Nederduits&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRq_-nkej0AhUI_KQKHU3RDPcQ6AF6BAgLEAI#v=onepage&q=Nederduits&f=false], [https://books.google.nl/books?id=dLhmAAAAcAAJ&pg=PP767&dq=Nederduits&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRq_-nkej0AhUI_KQKHU3RDPcQ6AF6BAgJEAI#v=onepage&q=Nederduits&f=false], [https://books.google.nl/books?id=_2NhAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA497-IA1&dq=Nederduits&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRq_-nkej0AhUI_KQKHU3RDPcQ6AF6BAgFEAI#v=onepage&q=Nederduits&f=false], [https://books.google.nl/books?id=L5JnAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Nederduits&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Nederduits&f=false] all meaning Dutch. See also the name "{{w|Nederduitsch Hervormde Kerk}}". [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 10:46, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
:{{u|Svartava}}, no idea. {{ping|Rua}}: any comment as you added it? [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Nederduits&diff=next&oldid=8860496] and [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Nederduits&diff=24308412&oldid=20888683]. [[User:Alexis Jazz|Alexis Jazz]] ([[User talk:Alexis Jazz|talk]]) 12:34, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
:: Here's some more, including one in which it refers to Afrikaans: [https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=BczFdsxLdTkC&hl=en], [https://books.google.nl/books?vid=KBNL:UBA000035377&redir_esc=y&hl=nl], [https://books.google.nl/books/about/Taalkundig_Magazijn.html?id=eyJJAAAAcAAJ&redir_esc=y], [https://books.google.nl/books/about/De_Nederduitsche_taal_in_Zuid_Afrika_her.html?id=l_M-AAAAcAAJ&redir_esc=y]. This seems obvious enough. —[[User:Rua|Rua]] ([[User talk:Rua|mew]]) 19:26, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
:::{{u|Thadh|Alexis Jazz|Rua}}, can anyone add the citations in the entry under the sense "(obsolete) Any continental West Germanic language that is neither High German nor Frisian, thus including Dutch as well as Low German"? —  13:57, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[anh hai#rfv-sense-notice-vi-|anh hai]] ==
 
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense "''(slang) the police''". Tagged by [[Special:Contributions/2405:4800:529f:7c5b:9d30:7682:67c5:4ba]] but not listed ({{diff|50063568}}). Compare also the ongoing RFD: [[Project:Requests_for_deletion/Non-English#anh_hai]] --[[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 12:29, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[-σσω#rfv-notice-grc-|-σσω]] ==
 
Is this really an Ancient Greek suffix? 1. re: The definition of the term "suffix": It's not attached to the stem (or another analysable morphological entity), but the outcome of regular sound change involving the closing consonant + a suffix -jō (or of a surface filter operating for a longer period of time; I don't know if this would make any difference). 2. re: Its productivity in Ancient Greek: Can it be shown that there are words formed with -σσω in Ancient Greek rather than in one of its pre-stages? There are candidates for this in the "Derived terms" section (e.g. [[φαρμάσσω]], [[ἱμάσσω]]). --[[User:Akletos|Akletos]] ([[User talk:Akletos|talk]]) 12:41, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
:I think this not a suffix, just like ''-ssus'' in {{m+|la|fissus}} is not a suffix but the result of a phonological process at play in {{suffix|la|findo|alt1=fi(n)d-|tus}}. If this is deleted, the same fate should befall {{m|grc|-ζω}}, {{m|grc|-λλω}}, {{m|grc|-πτω}} and {{m|grc|-ττω}}.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 10:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
::@[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] @[[User:Erutuon|Erutuon]] Perhaps the content of these entries can at least in part be transferred to [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:Ancient_Greek_verbs_with_a_progressive_iota_or_yod_marker Category:Ancient Greek verbs with a progressive iota or yod marker] (and the cat. be renamed?). [[User:Akletos|Akletos]] ([[User talk:Akletos|talk]]) 20:02, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[bomba#rfv-notice-id-|bomba]] ==
 
Indonesian. Moved to RFV from an RFD: [[Project:Requests_for_deletion/Non-English#bomba]] --[[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 15:21, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
:''{{small|Also copying over the rationale of the original poster:}}
The word is almost never used in Indonesian. [https://corpora.uni-leipzig.de/en/res?corpusId=ind_mixed_2013&word=bomba ind_mixed_2013 corpus from Leipzig] did "attest" the word but [http://repository.tufs.ac.jp/handle/10108/92899 keep in mind that the corpus is mixed with Malay], but if it's not a Malay word then the word is a proper noun or not widespread enough.
 
[https://corpora.uni-leipzig.de/en/res?corpusId=ind_news_2019&word=bomba News] [https://corpora.uni-leipzig.de/en/res?corpusId=ind_news_2020&word=bomba corpora] didn't show anything.
 
[[User:Mahali syarifuddin|Mahali syarifuddin]] ([[User talk:Mahali syarifuddin|talk]]) 14:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. Basion --[[Special:Contributions/2A02:9B0:4058:6BC1:340C:D9E7:B447:F669|2A02:9B0:4058:6BC1:340C:D9E7:B447:F669]] 13:37, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 
== [[pindoramygûara]] ==
 
Not sure if it is an [[:Category:Old Tupi language|Old Tupi]] term or a [[:Category:Nheengatu language|Nheengatu]] one. --[[User:TongcyDai|TongcyDai]] ([[User talk:TongcyDai|talk]]) 04:48, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 
:The use of circumflex on vowels is an Old Tupi feature, developed by Antônio Lemos Barbosa (much after Old Tupi became extinct) and used by Eduardo de Almeida Navarro on his grammar book. So, it’s certainly not a Nheengatu term. ''Pindorama'' is also not attested on Tupi literature; we don’t know how Tupi people called the land they lived in, just as we don’t know how they called their own language, even though some people coinned the term ''abá nhe’enga'' inspired by Guarani ''avañe’ê''. [[Special:Contributions/2804:14D:5C32:614F:A0F0:57F0:E533:C63F|2804:14D:5C32:614F:A0F0:57F0:E533:C63F]] 14:54, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Esperanto. If the verb is intransitive, these forms should not exist. --[[User:TongcyDai|TongcyDai]] ([[User talk:TongcyDai|talk]]) 20:16, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 
:I agree, these forms are incorrect and meaningless. [[User:Mutichou|Mutichou]] ([[User talk:Mutichou|talk]]) 19:54, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 
* '''RFV failed'''. —[[User:Mx. Granger|Granger]] ([[User talk:Mx. Granger|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Mx. Granger|contribs]]) 15:44, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[brinar#rfv-notice-sq-|brinar]] ==
 
Albanian. IP marked it for speedy ({{u|Br00pVain}}). —  06:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
: {{ping|Lumbardhia|Bolt Escargot|Etimo}} any thoughts? [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 14:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
:according to the online lexicons: http://m.fjalori.shkenca.org/, https://fjale.al/brinar, and https://fjalorthi.com/brinar,  brinar is an accepted word for a cuckold in the albanian lexicography. seems to be derived from the word ''bri'' (brinë in Gheg), a euphemism for a woman donning "horns" for her husband. [[User:Lumbardhia|Lumbardhia]] ([[User talk:Lumbardhia|talk]]) 15:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[дзевяць тысяч#rfv-notice-be-|дзевяць тысяч]] ==
 
Does not meet criteria for inclusion: is a numeric consisting of two words more than 100. --[[User:Jarash|Jarash]] ([[User talk:Jarash|talk]]) 19:25, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 
:{{re|Jarash}} Should be sent to [[WT:RFDN]]. [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 00:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
::There're also [[six thousand]], [[nine thousand]], [[níu þúsund]] - they show the correct spelling (with space or not?) and the formation (9 * 1000, not 90 * 100). --05:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
:::I think maybe the inclusion criteria for numbers are a bit too restrictive. I'm pretty sure we used to make exceptions for numbers above 100 that were sufficiently "interesting". Obviously that is in the eye of the beholder but 10,000 seems it should qualify. Cf. {{m+|ru|де́сять ты́сяч}}, which also exists (and given the complexity of Russian numbers, should arguably exist to help users correctly decline the number and its complement, if any). BTW {{m+|en|ten thousand}} qualifies regardless as it is a translation hub. [[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] ([[User talk:Benwing2|talk]]) 04:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 
= January 2022 =
 
== [[rajah#rfv-notice-tl-|rajah]] ==
 
Moved from [[Project:Requests_for_deletion/Non-English#rajah|RFD]]. Reason for deletion: ''English term of the already existent Tagalog "ladya" and "raha"''. --[[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 23:32, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[uçurcu#rfv-notice-tr-|uçurcu]] ==
 
Following some mild edit warring in [[astronaut]], I've went ahead and created this article so I can RFV it. Pinging {{ping|İtidal|MhmtÖ|123snake45}}. --[[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 03:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 
:Ah, I just realized this should probably have been [[uçurucu]]. So just a {{tl|misspelling of}}? On the same note, what about [[fezagir]]? That one has also been the target of edit warring. --[[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]] ([[User talk:Fytcha|talk]]) 03:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
::Turkish has both a suffix {{m|tr|-ci}} and a variant {{m|tr|-ici}}. The latter is attached to the stem of causative verbs ({{m|tr|anlatıcı}}, {{m|tr|canlandırıcı}}, {{m|tr|çökertici}}, {{m|tr|parlatıcı}}, {{m|tr|sağaltıcı}}, {{m|tr|uyuşturucu}}), and tends to form words that are primarily adjectives, so the neologism ''uçurcu'' is IMO more plausible than ''uçurucu''. The suffix ''-ci'' is usually attached to a noun, though, and although the participle ''uçur'' can grammatically be used as a noun, it is not in actual use as such. (Compare the words {{m|tr|çıkarcı}} and {{m|tr|dönerci}}, in which the first component is a participle that has an independent existence as a noun.) As to ''fezagir'', one of the ambitions of President Erdoğan is to send a Turk into space to kick off the Turkish National Space Program, and wouldn’t it be nice if they then could refer to this space voyager with an ur-Turkic term, instead of one with (blech) Greek roots. At the end of a lengthy speech, in which he revealed that astronomy and trigonometry had been invented by Turks, Erdoğan said: “Since a compatriot of ours will enter space, it is now necessary to find a Turkish counterpart for the words ‘astronaut’ or ‘cosmonaut’. From here, I call on our linguists and say, come, let us find a Turkish name for Turkish space travelers. Let our 83 million citizens too participate with their original ideas in this quest.” This led to many suggestions, such as ''semanot'', ''göknot'', ''gökoğul'', ''gökbey'', ''evrenot'', ''gökalp'' and ''cacabey''. {{w|Serdar Hüseyin Yıldırım}}, the administrator of the {{w|Turkish Space Agency}}, proposed the term ''fezagir''. That is, as far as I see, the status of ''fezagir'' on sources we accept for attestation: mentions as a proposal for a neologism.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 17:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
::when i saw the "uçurcu" i thought it was an ungrammatical form of uçurucu, neither of them used for astronaut nor meaningful so i undid the edit. Then i learned that the translation dictionary of Pamukkale University does have the words "[https://pauctle.com/entr/soz/space/ uçur]" and "[https://pauctle.com/entr/soz/astronaut/ uçurcu]". I dont know how does "uçur" means "universe, space" (aorist of uçmak which is intransitive of "to fly" is uçar "he/she/it does fly, something that flies") or where did they found the word but both of the words doesnt exist in the offical dictionary.
::As for fezagir, Lambiam wrote how it came up, they probably took the word from Uzbek and proposed but nobody uses it as much as i know. [[User:MhmtÖ|MhmtÖ]] ([[User talk:MhmtÖ|talk]]) 10:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
: How do we label Turkish words proposed as replacements for foreign borrowings, used three times per CFI, but not in common use?  I don't like ''nonstandard'' here because some of the words were proposed by a government committee to create and possibly enforce a language standard.  I would not be surprised to find some newspapers did use the government's proposals; at least one newspaper published periodic lists of coinages saying they would henceforth use them to replace Ottoman words.  Yet most of those words did not enter common use.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 20:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-fa-|]] ==
 
Tagged as speedy {{diff|65240931||here}} by [[User:Optional]]. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 15:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[hund-#rfv-sense-notice-ang-|hund-]] ==
 
Old English (“{{n-g|prefix used at the beginning of numerals from 70 to 120}} / {{m|ang|hundseofonta|'''hund'''seofonta}} ― decade seventh”); tagged by [[User:Glésan|Glésan]] on 15 March, not listed: “Can the second sense be verified? What is the source of hundseofonta?”. [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 13:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Rixe#rfv-notice-de-|Rixe]] ==
 
German; tagged by [[User:LinguisticMystic|LinguisticMystic]] today, not listed: “Are you sure that it is a legit German word? I couldn't find it in any reference books.” [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 13:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
:After a fairly involved search the only thing I could turn up was a mention in [https://books.google.co.uk/books?newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&id=EYsTAAAAIAAJ this journal], but it's glossing the same quotation from Steiner ("Das Kind wird dann zum ''Rixen'', ein österreichischer Ausdruck für einen langaufgeschossenen, mageren Menschen"). Otherwise it's just scan errors for [[Nixe]], or [[Rixen]] as a surname (or brand derived from a surname). If it was still in use in Austria I'd expect to see ''some'' evidence of it online. Inclined to say RFV-failed but might be good to get an opinion from a native German-speaker: {{ping|Jberkel|Fytcha}}? (Actually I see this was also discussed under ''rixig'' below, and it doesn't seem like there's been any movement since. The ''rixig'' citation is also from the same source by Steiner.) —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 17:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
::{{re|Skunkassociation}} Are you familiar with this term? I have first hand experience with the disparity between widespread spoken use and attestation (cf. [[#häsch_du_morn_scho_öppis_vor]]) but if it is used neither in print nor in speech, deletion appears to be the only pathway. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 09:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
:::No, I'm not familiar with this term. It's probably obsolete. It might be worth a try to search for spelling variations, e.g. Rigse, Rigsn, Richse, Richsn, etc., or changing i to e. -- Addendum: https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/search?query=all%3Arixen&startPage=10 [[User:Skunkassociation|Skunkassociation]] ([[User talk:Skunkassociation|talk]]) 14:09, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[rixig#rfv-sense-notice-de-|rixig]] ==
 
German; tagged by [[User:LinguisticMystic|LinguisticMystic]] today, not listed. [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 13:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 
: {{ping|Hamaryns}} as the creator.
: {{wgping|de|u1=Matthias Buchmeier|u2=-sche|u3=Atitarev|u4=Jberkel|u5=Mahagaja|u6=Fay Freak}} I'm not finding anything at all. Anyone want to have a go at it before I close it as failed? Pretty funny that they have both been FWotD; [[:Category:Words of the day that were later deleted]]. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 10:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
:: There is a ''Österreichisches Wörterbuch'', but it is behind a paywall. – [[User:Jberkel|Jberkel]] 10:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
::: {{w|Österreichisches Wörterbuch|That}} is a Duden-measure dictionary, apart from it not containing quotations, why would one expect anything interesting there? They are marketing scams from which there is nothing good to expect, all the regard they have they get for {{w|regulatory capture}}. Very naïve to expect that all words that exist one can also find at least mentioned somewhere. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 11:15, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
:::: I'd expect Austrian-specific terms to be in there, for a start. But maybe I'm hopelessly naïve. – [[User:Jberkel|Jberkel]] 11:30, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
::::: Not everything labelled “Austria” is “General Austrian”. There is a lot that has only been fashionable for a certain time and only in the capital, Vienna being the capital of {{w|Austrian Empire|one of the greatest Empires}}, or even in territories lost to Austria. And of course they slight the recent monarchic past to focus on more progressive vocabulary. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 11:48, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
:: There is a [https://www.psp.cz/eknih/index.htm Czech-Slovak corpus including Austro-Hungarian parliamentary debates], which is so deep in the deep web that search engines fail to show words from its texts, such as {{m|de|honigeln}} = {{m|de|Honig ums Maul schmieren}}  [https://www.psp.cz/eknih/1901skc/1/stenprot/016schuz/s016009.htm 1902-07-21] also [http://musilonline.at/musiltext/der-mann-ohne-eigenschaften-2/moe2-teil-2-100-109/ employed] by Robert Musil, as [http://www.mobileread.mobi/forums/showthread.php?t=218013&page=4 a reader found]. Search engines are fibbing, but I don’t know how. Do you find where the full text search for the database is, {{ping|Fytcha}}, finding results even for normal German words? [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 11:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
::: {{re|Fay Freak}} That page can potentially be crawled and then indexed offline, but I'm not finding anything online to search it. FYI the reason why you can't search it isn't because search engines are fibbing but rather because the site admin explicitly disallowed it: [https://www.psp.cz/robots.txt robots.txt] (last line: ). — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 11:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
:::: Is the reason to do so not that they have an own full-text search which I just failed to fathom behind all the [https://fulltext.psp.cz/ tools] on the site? I mean why does one exclude if the purpose of the website is to make texts accessible? Too bad I am not a search engine spammer using “bad bots” infamous to ignore robots.txt (Majestic-12?) to best find language material. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 12:02, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
:: {{m|de|Rixe}} and {{m|de|rixig}} each have one citation, but German is a WDL so they need 3. If they get deleted, don't forget to move the cites to Citation: namespace first, please! —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 11:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
::: Probably was not only used by Steiner though, but the internet is slanted, as in the example above, so it has the three uses in permanently recorded three independent instances, which we don’t find. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 11:15, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
::: {{re|Mahagaja}} Perhaps it can be converted to Bavarian if we are reasonably sure that the German term is a borrowing from Bavarian. The quote is of course undoubtedly German but the term has to have come from ''somewhere''; to give a comparable case, {{m|de|Bünzli}} is obviously borrowed from Alemannic for morphological reasons but even if the Alemannic one cannot be cited, it should be created and retained as long as we can cite it in German. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 11:46, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[terewîl#rfv-notice-kmr-|terewîl]] ==
 
Northern Kurdish: ''bird'' - nothing at ku.wikipedia or anything that isn't auto-translation site [[User:Br00pVain|Br00pVain]] ([[User talk:Br00pVain|talk]]) 22:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[senem#rfv-notice-kmr-|senem]] ==
Northern Kurdish: nothing at ku.wikipedia or anything that isn't auto-translation site [[User:Br00pVain|Br00pVain]] ([[User talk:Br00pVain|talk]]) 22:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
: Try looking for inflected forms like ''senemî''.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 00:23, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
: This appears, in Arabic script with French transliteration, on page 270 of the 1879 ''Dictionnaire kurde-français''[https://archive.org/details/dictionnairekur00justgoog]:  ", sanám, idole".  Per LDL rules the Northern Kurdish editing community should decide which sources are acceptable. [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 00:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[çexdar#rfv-notice-kmr-|çexdar]] ==
Northern Kurdish: nothing at ku.wikipedia or anything that isn't auto-translation site [[User:Br00pVain|Br00pVain]] ([[User talk:Br00pVain|talk]]) 22:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[xerûze#rfv-notice-kmr-|xerûze]] ==
Northern Kurdish: nothing at ku.wikipedia or anything that isn't auto-translation site [[User:Br00pVain|Br00pVain]] ([[User talk:Br00pVain|talk]]) 22:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-kmr-|]] ==
Central Kurdish: nothing at ku.wikipedia or anything that isn't auto-translation site [[User:Br00pVain|Br00pVain]] ([[User talk:Br00pVain|talk]]) 22:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
: Page 441 of the 1879 ''Dictionnaire kurde-français''[https://archive.org/details/dictionnairekur00justgoog] has " her-dàim, toujors".  This is likely a more northern dialect, the dictionary being prepared largely in eastern Anatolia.  A modern Northern Kurdish dictionary has ''her dem''.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 00:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Benzoid#rfv-notice-de-|Benzoid]] ==
 
— [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 19:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-fa-|]] ==
 
Might be archaic but I would like to see evidence that it's not made up. --[[User:Optional|Optional]] ([[User talk:Optional|talk]]) 01:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
: [https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/K%C4%ABt%C4%81b_i_Lab%C4%81b_Al_alb%C4%81b/kvoR_x2P_w8C?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A8+%D9%84%D8%BA%D8%AA&pg=RA2-PA32&printsec=frontcover] [https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Boorhani_qa%E1%B9%ADi%E1%BB%A5_a_dictionary_of_the_P/UKdEAAAAcAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A8+%D9%84%D8%BA%D8%AA&pg=PP14&printsec=frontcover] --[[User:Rishabhbhat|Rishabhbhat]] ([[User talk:Rishabhbhat|talk]]) 12:20, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ꠢꠣꠉ#rfv-notice-syl-|ꠢꠣꠉ]] ==
 
Removed out of process ({{diff|65350610}}). {{ping|Msasag}} as the editor who added that ({{diff|59569716}}). — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 01:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[isang daang porsyento#rfv-notice-tl-|isang daang porsyento]] ==
 
{{ping|TagaSanPedroAko}} The English entry of this exists because it has a figurative meaning, while I think in Tagalog it's just the literal meaning, which makes this entry SOP. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 11:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] I can't answer this straightforward, but it's hard to tell if an loan translation of an English term is SOP. [[User:TagaSanPedroAko|TagaSanPedroAko]] ([[User talk:TagaSanPedroAko|talk]]) 11:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
:: {{re|TagaSanPedroAko}} It's pretty simple. If the only definition of "isang daang porsyento" is "one hundred percent", then that's SOP. If you look at the entry {{m|en|one hundred percent}}, it's referring to the figurative meanings of the term. And also, it's not a loan translation. It's just Tagalog. We didn't need English to enter the Philippines for us to get "isang daang porsyento". We got "porsyento" or "porsiyento" from Spanish. And 100% or "cien porciento" is just "isang daang porsiyento" in Tagalog, similar to if we replace "isang daan" with any other number. If we need "isang daang porsyento" as an entry to know that that's 100% in Tagalog, then we also need "limampung porsiyento", "sampung porsiyento", and "limang porsiyento". --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 12:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] I'll be find with that, but have you found any attestation that follows the English's figurative sense? [[User:TagaSanPedroAko|TagaSanPedroAko]] ([[User talk:TagaSanPedroAko|talk]]) 13:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
:::: {{re|TagaSanPedroAko}} Technically, I see some, but all of them are translations of English books into Tagalog, where probably the translator just translated word-for-word, giving us this scenario of "isang daang porsiyento" being used with the same figurative meaning as the English phrase. But I can't find any independent usage from that. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 13:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[googol#rfv-notice-ms-|googol]] ==
 
=== [[#rfv-notice-ms-|]] ===
Malay. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 22:29, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[googolpleks#rfv-notice-ms-|googolpleks]] ==
 
=== [[#rfv-notice-ms-|]] ===
Malay. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 22:44, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ab#rfv-notice-rom-|ab]] ==
 
I couldn't find this word on ''Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum'' by Boretzky and Igla, ''Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik'' by Marcel Courthiade, or [http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ ROMLEX]. --[[User:YukaSylvie|YukaSylvie]] ([[User talk:YukaSylvie|talk]]) 02:21, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 
:Added {{diff|1225516||here}} by [[User:Drago]]. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 03:22, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[fflwyr#rfv-notice-cy-|fflwyr]] ==
 
Moved over from RFD ({{diff|60062384}} by [[User:Llusiduonbach]]): [[Project:Requests_for_deletion/Non-English#fflwyr]] — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 02:32, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[iskul-bukol#rfv-sense-notice-tl-|iskul-bukol]] ==
 
{{ping|TagaSanPedroAko}} Looking for attestation of this definition. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 09:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] I'll be fine removing sense in question, but how would you translate this sentence: "Maputi ka pa di ka tulad ng mga kaklase mong iskul-bukol." Is ''iskul-bukol'' here slow learner, or a student who doesn't place importance on academic performance (I don't know what term can express that)? [[User:TagaSanPedroAko|TagaSanPedroAko]] ([[User talk:TagaSanPedroAko|talk]]) 09:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
:: {{re|TagaSanPedroAko}} Maybe the general definition of the term "iskul-bukol" is someone who doesn't care about academic performance and generally a slow learner? Because the term alludes to the TV show, so it must be characteristics of what the show is about. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 09:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] I can agree to that, but I'm not a ''batang 90s'' nor one who watched it. Again, any idea about translating the sentence I provided? I can say ''iskul-bukol'' often connotes having more time hanging out with friends, focusing on sports, playing games, engaging in romantic relationships, getting involved in vice, etc.. [[User:TagaSanPedroAko|TagaSanPedroAko]] ([[User talk:TagaSanPedroAko|talk]]) 09:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ĉipo#rfv-notice-eo-|ĉipo]] ==
I only know the word [[ĉipa]], which means "cheap". I have never seen this word. {{User:Robin van der Vliet/Signature}} 14:40, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 
==[[Kartoffeldeutsch#rfv-notice-de-|Kartoffeldeutsch]]==
 
Tagged by [[Special:Diff/93.234.196.139]] but not listed. {{ping|Fay Freak}} as the creator. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 04:12, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
: {{re|Fytcha}} IP is a notorious barrator, normal readers do not request verification of terms included with quote. I could not see other occurrences in the beginning, which only made it more believable that this term was used in {{w|German New Guinea}}, in addition to being added in contrast to the usual meaning of the slur [[kartoffeldeutsch]] and the Danish [[Kartoffeldeutscher]]. {{m|en|Potato German}} is not found anywhere either for Unserdeutsch, but note the obsolete spelling of the nightshade “potatoe–german” in the article, evidently copied from some archival record.
:The Languages of David J. Peterson’s “look into Google Books” method to decide about ATTESTEDness is already demonstrated squarely fictitious, you can’t even find the official name of [[North Macedonia]] or corresponding demonym in Macedonian there, so it did not ring any alarm, rather this was my reasoning. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 04:29, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 
:'''Solved''', moved it to Unserdeutsch, so [[WT:LDL|LDL]] criteria apply. See, now we can have it anyway. It’s an interesting entry for our readers even without one being decided about a particular language it would be. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 02:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
:In the interview [https://www.br.de/nachricht/unserdeutsch-kreolsprache-neuguinea-100.html] the term ''Kartoffeldeutsch'' is used only as literal translation of ''potatoe German'' for the German speaking recipients of the broadcast, comparable to our |lit= parameter in certain templates. That shouldn't even count as a mention. As long as there aren't other citations this should be '''delete'''d. [[User:Akletos|Akletos]] ([[User talk:Akletos|talk]]) 10:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
::Ah, so you think the actual term is {{m|en|Potato German}} (normalized) and it should be '''deleted''' as German but moved to English? But how come it is in English if it is in research about Unserdeutsch? Seemingly because ''Kartoffeldeutsch'' is used only as a literal translation of ''potatoe-German'' but that itself is already a translation of {{clq|en|uln|notext=1|Kartoffeldeutsch}} (owing to speakers having moved to Australia). So even though you be right about it being used only as a literal translation comparable to our {{temp|lit}} this is twice-translated and the mention of an Unserdeutsch word (as it is all part of [https://www.deutschland.de/de/topic/politik/deutschland-europa/unserdeutsch-die-einzige-deutsch-basierte-kreolsprache that research grant] about Unserdeutsch, a language but discovered in the 1970s). So it should be '''converted''' to Unserdeutsch. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 12:49, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
:::The chain of transmission of this term and the temporal distance is very long: (A broadcaster reports that) a researcher says that in an interview an Unserdeutsch speaker told them that decades ago a nun had said... Nobody should base any assumptions on such shaky evidence without further corroborating data. [[User:Akletos|Akletos]] ([[User talk:Akletos|talk]]) 16:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[uchito#rfv-notice-rom-|uchito]] ==
 
Romani. This word is not listed on ''Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum'' by Boretzky and Igla, [http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ ROMLEX], or ''Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik'' by Marcel Courthiade. --[[User:YukaSylvie|YukaSylvie]] ([[User talk:YukaSylvie|talk]]) 01:40, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[didandel#rfv-notice-rom-|didandel]] ==
 
Romani. I can only find the form {{m|rom|dindalel}} on ''Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum'' by Boretzky and Igla (page 65a) and the Gurbet and Kalderaš dictionaries on [http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ ROMLEX]. --[[User:YukaSylvie|YukaSylvie]] ([[User talk:YukaSylvie|talk]]) 02:04, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[💜#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|💜]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense: (Internet) feminism. Not found on [https://emojipedia.org/purple-heart/ Emojipedia] nor [https://www.dictionary.com/e/emoji/purple-heart-emoji/ dictionary.com]. They seem to agree on a K-Pop sense though. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 17:22, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
:This is real. Started around 2018 when purple was declared the [https://www.internationalwomensday.com/Activity/11302/Purple-is-a-great-color-and-back-in-2018-saw-it-reign-most-popular official colour] of International Women's Day. It's used by feminists of all stripes. Not to be confused with "💜🤍💚", which has emerged in the last year among [https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1416731725082865673 gender-critical feminists], based on the colours used by the {{w|Women's Social and Political Union}} (a historical UK suffrage group). Anyway, this can be cited off Twitter, if that counts. [[User:WordyAndNerdy|WordyAndNerdy]] ([[User talk:WordyAndNerdy|talk]]) 23:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
:The entry was deleted out of process. I recreated it with three Twitter quotes for the feminism sense (and added a BTS sense). [[User:Einstein2|Einstein2]] ([[User talk:Einstein2|talk]]) 15:47, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Barbie#rfv-notice-tl-|Barbie]] ==
 
{{ping|Mayon V}} Hey I'm tagging you as you were the one who added this entry into The Languages of David J. Peterson. This is a request for verification according to The Languages of David J. Peterson's entry inclusion criteria. Thanks. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 12:46, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 
:Cebuano and Tagalog. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
= February 2022 =
 
== [[craven#rfv-sense-notice-enm-|craven]] ==
 
Middle English {{m|enm|craven}} appears to only mean "to ask, demand, crave"; the ME form for "defeated" is apparently {{m|enm|cravant}}. [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 04:12, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Proteacea#rfv-notice-mul-|Proteacea]] ==
 
Translingual. Most of the entry could be taken are referring to [[Proteaceae]] a long-established plant family. Almost all Google Books hits are for ''Protoeaceæ'' (ie, ae ligature). If we are to have an entry we need citations. I've spent time looking, but haven't exhausted BHL or similar sources. So far each alleged hit for ''Protoacea'' turns out to have the ligature on close inspection. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 01:05, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
:I have removed a specious reference to the 1911 ''Century Dictionary'' ({{R:Century 1911|Proteacea}}). The entry there is for , analyzed as .  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 11:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
::I have emended the entry based on my readings of material at BHL. Although I have not added citations they are available as snippets from the BHL link provided. Is this good enough? [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 14:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[maski#rfv-notice-rom-|maski]] ==
 
Romani. ''Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum'' by Boretzky and Igla, ''Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik'' by Marcel Courthiade, and [http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ ROMLEX] only list variants of {{m|rom|morthǐ}} as the Armenian loanword for "skin". --[[User:YukaSylvie|YukaSylvie]] ([[User talk:YukaSylvie|talk]]) 08:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[korca#rfv-notice-rom-|korca]] ==
 
Romani. I can only find the form ''skorca'' for "bark (of a tree)" on ''Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum'' by Boretzky and Igla and the Kalderaš dictionary on [http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ ROMLEX]. --[[User:YukaSylvie|YukaSylvie]] ([[User talk:YukaSylvie|talk]]) 02:41, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[walkien#rfv-notice-enm-|walkien]] ==
 
This particular form doesn't actually appear to have existed in Middle English, as {{m+|ang|wealcian}} was conflated with {{m|ang|wealcan}} from very early in the Middle English period. [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 08:38, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== vrót, a listed alternative form of Old Norse [[rót]]  ==
 
Can we get a reference for this? I was unable to find it listed in any Old Norse dictionary.[[User:RubixLang|RubixLang]] ([[User talk:RubixLang|talk]]) 13:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[noro#rfv-notice-rom-|noro]] ==
 
Romani. I can only find the form ''noros'' on the Ursari dictionary of [http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ ROMLEX]. --[[User:YukaSylvie|YukaSylvie]] ([[User talk:YukaSylvie|talk]]) 04:08, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[shanshel#rfv-notice-rom-|shanshel]] ==
 
Romani. I can't find some form of this word on ''[http://A%20Comparative%20Dictionary%20of%20Indo-Aryan%20Languages https://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/soas/]'' by Ralph Turner, ''Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum'' by Boretzky and Igla, ''Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik'' by Marcel Courthiade, or on [http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ ROMLEX]. --[[User:YukaSylvie|YukaSylvie]] ([[User talk:YukaSylvie|talk]]) 09:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[sura#rfv-notice-rom-|sura]] ==
 
Romani. I can't find this word on ''Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum'' by Boretzky and Igla, ''Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik'' by Marcel Courthiade, [http://romani.uni-graz.at/romlex/ ROMLEX], or a Google Books search. --[[User:YukaSylvie|YukaSylvie]] ([[User talk:YukaSylvie|talk]]) 02:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[jambangan#rfv-notice-ceb-|jambangan]] ==
 
Cebuano.
 
=== [[jambangan#rfv-notice-tsg-|jambangan]] ===
[[File:Samboangan 1734.jpg|thumb|This not proof enough?]]
Tausug.
 
Both marked as speedy {{diff|65900776||here}} by [[User:Obsidian Soul]] with the rationale: "''See Wikipedia entry on [[Zamboanga]]. jambangan is folk etymology.''" {{ping|Carl_Francis|DCDuring|Apisite}} as the editors of that page. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 14:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
:All I know is that the spelling is used as specific epithet for a single species of gecko found in the area of [[Zamboanga]]. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 15:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
:{{ping|Fytcha}} Both of the entries are unsourced. I have sourced the Wikipedia entry on [[w:en:Zamboanga City]] extensively, including [https://web.archive.org/web/20141219070051/http://e-journal.um.edu.my/filebank/articles/2708/Rodney%20Hanafi%20Maria%20-%20THE%20SAMA-BAJAUS%20OF%20SULU-SULAWESI%20SEAS%20PERSPECTIVES%20%20FROM%20LINGUISTICS%20AND%20CULTURE.pdf this paper which actually identifies the etymology of "Samboangan".] Both of those entries are folk etymology which date back to the 1960s (apparently believed enough as to include the [https://reptile-database.reptarium.cz/species?genus=Cyrtodactylus&species=jambangan herpetologists who named the gecko in 2008]). Still doesn't make it true though. The old name is Samboangan. Not Jambangan. Tausug isn't even relevant. Carl Francis is clearly a Cebuano-speaker (like I am). Zamboanga was a Subanen/Sama-Bajau settlement, not Tausug.
 
:I don't understand why a speedy on an unsourced entry is this difficult on The Languages of David J. Peterson. Even when ''I'' provide sources.--[[User:Obsidian Soul|Obsidian Soul]] ([[User talk:Obsidian Soul|talk]]) 10:47, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Obsidian Soul}}: That's because The Languages of David J. Peterson is based on usage, not authoritative references. Whether the etymology is right or wrong has no bearing on whether the word in question actually existed. On the other hand, even an ironclad, fully-referenced etymology based on the word wouldn't save the entry if the word wasn't actually attested- it would go in the Reconstruction namespace.
:: If it can't be shown that the word is attested, and an incorrect etymology is the only evidence that the word existed, then the entry will be deleted. Pinging {{ping|Austronesier}}, who would know more about the sources available. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 12:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Chuck Entz}} And where is the attestation for "Jambangan"? Here are some of the numerous attestations of "Samboangan" in contemporary [https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=kMxwjoSn0pYC&dq=Samboangan%20historia&pg=PP33#v=onepage&q=Samboangan%20historia&f=false Spanish], [https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=cyQDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA459#v=onepage&q&f=false British], [https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=FfxSAAAAcAAJ&vq=Samboangan&pg=RA1-PA61#v=snippet&q=Samboangan&f=false German], and [https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=bc80uQF_asMC&q=Samboangan&pg=PA37&redir_esc=y#v=snippet&q=Samboangan&f=false French] colonial-era records. I can give you more.
 
:::Jambangan ''is'' a word in Malay (apparently "water jar", "pot", or "vase" from what I can tell). But it is not the old name of Zamboanga like these entries claim.--[[User:Obsidian Soul|Obsidian Soul]] ([[User talk:Obsidian Soul|talk]]) 16:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
::The etymology {{m|ms|jambangan}} > ''Zamboanga'' is obviously rubbish; it is naively based on the Z-spelling of the initial consonant, and doesn't work for a couple of reasons. But I won't elaborate on it here, since this is a Rfv, which does not hinge on a bad (but popular) etymology. (It would only be relevant in a translingual entry [[Cyrtodactylus jambangan]]).
::The Tausug entry looks good, see [https://www.webonary.org/tausug/ga71b694e-5b31-4e91-98a1-f1d0ccf2af8d/?lang=en this entry] in the online version of the ''Tausug-English Dictionary: Kabtangan Iban Maana''. Tausug has borrowed heavily from Malay, and I assume that this borrowing precedes the emergence of the folk etymology of ''Zamboanga''. I have no idea if any Cebuano speaker has {{m|ceb|jambangan}} in their native or nativized lexicon, but I doubt it. But ''if'' it is attested in Cebuano usage, we just need to clarify the (wrong, but influential) etymology, and not to delete the entry (NB: ''if''). –[[User:Austronesier|Austronesier]] ([[User talk:Austronesier|talk]]) 20:47, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
::PS: {{m+|ms|jambangan}} means "flower-pot", "flower-stand", "a moveable flower-bed", "receptacle for growing plants" (per Wilkinson's ''Malay-English Dictionary''). –[[User:Austronesier|Austronesier]] ([[User talk:Austronesier|talk]]) 20:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Tachometer#rfv-sense-notice-de-|Tachometer]] ==
 
German. Rfv-sense: [[odometer]] — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 16:49, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 
* '''RFV-failed'''.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:52, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ar-|]] ==
 
Arabic. --[[Special:Contributions/2A01:E0A:B69:5160:242C:2020:97A9:DCCE|2A01:E0A:B69:5160:242C:2020:97A9:DCCE]] 13:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
: One will find quotes relating to occupations in Persia and farther east; noting the references I added. This will be about the same level as “Arabic” {{m|ar||}}. {{m|ar|| /  /  / }} in the quote at {{m|ar|}}. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 17:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense:
# a [[superscript]] [[t]]
This is a phonetic symbol for a pre-stopped consonant, not a superscript- different Unicode block. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 04:18, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 
:The Unicode block does not determine intended use. Unicode's data file does. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 05:13, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 
So, what are we looking for here? It would be easy to find Tweets or other Web resources using this character as a superscript t, but our policy toward online sources is that a discussion is required to admit them. If I find a digitized copy of an offline document (e.g., book or journal article) with a superscript t in it, that only shows that superscript t exists, not that this particular Unicode character is used to represent it. Usenet has some: [https://groups.google.com/g/linux.debian.bugs.dist/c/poEF0BEpUeA/m/Z4d9VSp1AwAJ example] (if I find two more like that, is that sufficient?). [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 06:42, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense:
# a [[superscript]] [[d]] {{rfv-sense|mul}}
Another pre-stopped consonant. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 04:25, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 
:Unicode note that U+1D48 is intended for use as superscript [https://www.unicode.org/Public/UCD/latest/ucd/UnicodeData.txt here]. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 05:05, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
:: All I see is <super> followed by the code for another character. What data in a data file means is dependent on the file structure. What does being in that field mean? Show me the file structure. Saying that this is a superscript form of "d" is not the same as saying that it's '''''intended for use as''''' a superscript. As for what letters in that block are, see page 296 of [https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode13.0.0/ch07.pdf this pdf], where it says:
 
::Or better yet: [[w:Modifier letter]]. The purpose of these characters is to modify the phonetic value of a neighboring phonetic symbol/letter in a phonetic transcription. They coincidentally have the form of superscripts, but they aren't intended to be used as superscripts except in an extremely specific context.
 
::I'm not saying they can't be used to represent superscripts in documents where you're only interested in the appearance, but they aren't the same thing. An entry with a Roman [[C]] in a Russian word instead of Cyrillic [[С]] may be visually identical to the all-Cyrillic spelling, but it's completely wrong for an online dictionary. Whenever we find something like that, we either move it to the correct spelling or delete it on the spot- no RFD necessary. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 06:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
:::Note Table 14 in section 5.7.3 of Unicode's Character Database [https://unicode.org/reports/tr44/ here]:This refers to decomposition mapping, which (in simple terms) is referring to where one or more characters are equivalent to another one, perhaps with some kind of modification.
:::Where you say "All I see is )
 
:The term occurs in the heading of an official German regulation published in the ''Bundesgesetzblatt'' 2021 Vol. I nr. 62, page 4077, as short (!) for ''Besondere Gebührenverordnung des Bundesministeriums der Finanzen zur Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht''. This should be considered a proper noun, the [[WT:NSE|(nick)name of a specific entity]]. Since the regulation provides for a convenient abbreviation of the short name, ''FinDAGebV'' (see used [https://books.google.com/books?id=OS9lEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA486&dq=FinDAGebV&hl=en here]), I guess we won't be seeing many uses of the term.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 11:41, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
:Confirmed in so far it occurs in neither Beck Online nor Juris. However this is a hot word since the regulation is in effect since 01.10.2021. On the other hand it must have been applied somewhere and thus the FinDAGebV must be ''on record'' at some authorities somewhere, as if there are laws someone follows them, in Germany. A written abbreviation is enough since the short name Finanzdienstleistungsaufsichtsgebührenverordnung is how the abbreviation FinDAGebV is pronounced. Chinese pronunciations themselves aren’t supposed to occur in writing either yet pinyin gets entries. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 18:49, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Siemens#rfv-notice-hu-|Siemens]] ==
 
[[WT:BRAND]]. [[User:Binarystep|Binarystep]] ([[User talk:Binarystep|talk]]) 03:57, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Helen#rfv-notice-tl-|Helen]] ==
 
Tagalog. “Borrowed from {{bor|tl|en|Helen}}. {{given name|tl|female|from=English}}”. Tagged by [[Special:Contributions/122.2.99.81|122.2.99.81]] (“Not a Tagalog name Should be Elena”), not listed. [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 07:35, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Barbie#rfv-notice-ceb-|Barbie]] ==
 
Cebuano. “From {{bor|ceb|en|Barbie}}, the name of a fashion doll. {{given name|ceb|female|from=English|A=a}}”. Tagged by [[Special:Contributions/122.2.99.81|122.2.99.81]], not listed. [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 07:35, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[-pela#rfv-notice-bi-|-pela]] ==
 
Bislama. Also RFV'ing [[yumitripela]], [[yumipela]] and [[mipela]]. These all seem like Tok Pisin to me rather than Bislama, where I couldn't find any evidence of an alternative ''-pela'' to the widely used ''-fala'', neither in Crowley's grammar nor in [https://bislama.org/images/dictionary/BislamaSpellingDictionary-BI-EN-v1.1.pdf the Bislama spelling dictionary], nor generally online. Pinging {{ping|Hippietrail|Metaknowledge}} as creators of the pronoun entries and the suffix entry respectively. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 22:38, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 
:Maybe it was just a mistake. The entries were created a very long time ago, and perhaps the sources we had at the time were also wrong.  I assume loaning is unlikely, right?  The languages are spoken near each other, but both on islands. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 18:27, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ܥܟܒܝܬܐ#rfv-notice-aii-|ܥܟܒܝܬܐ]] ==
 
I could not find evidence of this word anywhere in Assyrian Neo-Aramaic, only in other Aramaic languages.{{unsigned|Shuraya|01:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)}}
 
= May 2022 =
 
== [[Aas]] ==
 
Impossible to web-search.
 
* Imagine German, Ety 2 genitive "poo-poo" was automatically created by templates. I sincerely doubt that it can be attested, because the genitive is rare in colloquially speech and even more so in children that have not yet acquired the morphology, and even more so in writing.
* Surely /ˌaˈʔa(s)/ should not be spelled ''Aa(s)'', what's usually /a:/. Who takes the time to create literally children shit entries and then doesn´t source their shit? The Further Reading only concerns Ety 1. [[Special:Contributions/141.20.6.200|141.20.6.200]] 12:16, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
:How else would it be spelled? [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 21:35, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
::{{re|Soap}} Is that a rhetorical question!? Standard German orthography does not recognize a glottal stop. Nonstandard spelling may be arbitrary, eg. ''I-Aah''  for the sound of the donkey and I think ''IA'' as well.
::Pinging [[User:PseudoSkull]] who added this and may be able to confirm that it was or wasn't created "automatically". [[User:ApisAzuli|ApisAzuli]] ([[User talk:ApisAzuli|talk]]) 01:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
::: {{ping|ApisAzuli}} I didn't add anything to this entry according to the page history, nor do I recall doing anything with it. [[User:PseudoSkull|PseudoSkull]] ([[User talk:PseudoSkull|talk]]) 02:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
::::Oh shoot, right, thanks for the heads up. It was [[User:SemperBlotto]] (who has apparently the same voice of reason in my head). [[User:ApisAzuli|ApisAzuli]] ([[User talk:ApisAzuli|talk]]) 06:19, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
:::: I've no idea. [[User:SemperBlotto|SemperBlotto]] ([[User talk:SemperBlotto|talk]]) 09:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
: {{ping|ApisAzuli}} [https://www.dwds.de/wb/Aa DWDS gives the genitive singular as Aa]. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 11:47, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
::the Duden says: genitive singular ''Aa'' or ''Aas'' ([https://www.duden.de/deklination/substantive/Aa_Kot]) --[[User:Scripturus|Scripturus]] ([[User talk:Scripturus|talk]]) 19:36, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Ermin#rfv-notice-enm-|Ermin]] ==
 
Middle English. Chaucer supposedly used this to mean "an Armenian". It seems likely he was just talking about [[ermine]]. (What need would he have had to specifically refer to Armenians in any case, I wonder?) [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 11:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 
:The term occurs as a proper noun (“king Ermin”) in the metrical romance ''{{w|Beves of Hamtoun (poem)|Sir Beves of Hamtoun}}''. Ermin is king of Armenia. I have not found where Chaucer uses the term.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 13:50, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
:[https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme/AGZ8233.0001.001/1:4.8.8?rgn=div3;view=fulltext Here] you go. In the form ''Ermyn''. [[User:Vahagn Petrosyan|Vahag]] ([[User talk:Vahagn Petrosyan|talk]]) 17:30, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
::@[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]], @[[User:Vahagn Petrosyan|Vahagn Petrosyan]] Thanks, I should have looked [https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/middle-english-dictionary/dictionary/MED14343/track?counter=1&search_id=16167808 here] first. Are you both okay with the entry being moved to {{m|enm|Ermyn}}? I know Webster had the habit of modernising spellings, but I don't understand why MED lemmatises it as "Ermin" when this form doesn't seem to be attested. Am I missing something? [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 12:40, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
:::I don't know anything about Middle English and how it should be normalized. [[User:Vahagn Petrosyan|Vahag]] ([[User talk:Vahagn Petrosyan|talk]]) 13:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[अम्बा#rfv-notice-ne-|अम्बा]] ==
 
Nepali.
 
As only cited as a 'translation', presumably of [[guava]], let's see some evidence that it is a real Nepali word rather than a dictionary or Wikipedian's invention. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 07:20, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[marcosin#rfv-notice-tl-|marcosin]] ==
 
{{ping|103.36.18.252}} Make an account btw if you wanna edit. This word needs to satisfy the criteria of The Languages of David J. Peterson of word inclusion. Try to find published articles that use this word. Thanks. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 10:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[patriotismas#rfv-notice-lt-|patriotismas]] ==
 
Lithuanian. Should be [[patriotizmas]]. If this form is attested it's probably a rare misspelling. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 00:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[साङ्‍वा#rfv-notice-ybi-|साङ्‍वा]] ==
 
Yamphu.  This is given under a Yakkha header but with a Yamphu language code and reference. The given reference [https://www.webonary.org/yamphu/page/2/?s=bird&search=Search&key&tax=-1&search_options_set=1&match_whole_words=1&displayAdvancedSearchName=0&lang=en] has two Yamphu words for "bird": {{m|ybi|सोङा}} and {{m|ybi|सोङ्‌वा}}, but not {{m|ybi||साङ्‍वा}}. So is this actually Yakkha, or a Yamphu typo, or a dialectal variant, or ...? {{ping|Hk5183}} [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 02:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
: The third possibility is that this was supposed to go at {{m+|ybi|सोङ्‌वा}}, but the contributor was distracted by the similarity of the spelling (सो vs सा) into adding it to the wrong entry. Looking at their edit history, it was halfway into over an hour of creating nothing but Yamphu entries (the Yakka page creation was 9 days eatlier). By the way, {{ping|This, that and the other}}: you seem to have your language codes switched. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 06:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
::Thanks, I have fixed the codes here. The two codes couldn't be any closer... [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 07:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[⚤#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|⚤]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense: "Heterosexual". Plausible, but I'd like to see citations. For what it's worth, Emojipedia calls it the "Bisexual Sign". [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 07:44, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
* '''RFV-failed'''.  No citations have been added in six months and the three pre-existing citations mean three different things, two of them opposite to each other.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 
; [[⚪#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|⚪]]
The Unicode standard does mention it: [https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Unicode_Standard_5_0/Yn1UAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=%E2%9A%AA+asexual&dq=%E2%9A%AA+asexual&printsec=frontcover] (not sure it counts as a use technically). Would still be good to have quotations of use, I think, as we generally require them for emojis. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 07:56, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 
:Unicode annotation for both. Both also in e.g. D.R. McElroy (2020) ''Signs & Symbols of the World: Over 1,001 Visual Signs Explained.'' The only question would be which of several Unicode rings corresponds to the intended meaning, but that's where the Unicode annotation comes in. Plausible some might use it for bisexuality, since there is no Unicode character for that, but sure you didn't confuse it with ⚥, which is botanical bisexuality? Also, these are not emojis. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 08:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
::The white circle displays as an emoji for me, the interlocking gender signs do not. I guess Emojipedia has entries for some symbols that aren't technically emojis. And I am certain they are referring to this character and not another with their "Bisexual Sign" label: [https://emojipedia.org/interlocked-female-and-male-sign/]. Twitter has [https://twitter.com//search?q=%22is%20%E2%9A%A4%22&src=typed_query&f=live results for both meanings, apparently a slim majority of "bi"]. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 16:19, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
:::With some hopefully better refs, we could definitely add the bi meaning to ⚥, then.
:::The white circle displays as an emoji for me too, and badly, but then whichever font my  browser is choosing for these things is screwy. There are a number of symbols, such as the signs of the zodiac, which are not inherently emojis but have emoji alts. This is one of them. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 17:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 
:There's a whole previous 2016 discussion at [[Talk:%E2%9A%A4]].  "Bisexuality" apparently refers to a botanical meaning in this context, not an LGBT meaning. [[User:AnonMoos|AnonMoos]] ([[User talk:AnonMoos|talk]]) 22:41, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
::"Bisexual" in the botanical context (hermaphroditic "perfect" flowers or plants) are represented by ⚥. Unicode only has "heterosexuality" for this character. If we only have Emojipedia as a ref, I'm afraid this fails. I'll rv. myself and remove it, pending someone finding a RS. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 05:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
::I found something similar in Nixon & Düsterhöft (2017) ''Sex in the Digital Age'', p. 150, where they say,
::"Another common symbol used within bisexual spaces are the interlocking male and female gender symbols. These symbols are taken from the astrological symbols for Mars and venus and intertwined to signify men attracted to men, men and women attracted to each other, and women attracted to women. This symbol is frequently shown in black, but is also commonly shown in pink, blue and purple."
::There is no illustration, but the wording suggests they mean the quadruple symbol [[File:Bisexuality symbol (bold, color).svg|33px]] rather than ⚤. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 05:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 
; [[☼#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|☼]]
Alt symbol for 'sun', but not sure ever used in astron, astrol. or alchem. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 17:18, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 
* '''RFV-failed'''.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[tandayag#rfv-sense-notice-tl-|tandayag]] ==
 
{{ping|Stricnina}} For the word {{l|tl|tandayag}}, I can't find the adjective sense you put in any dictionary or source. Could you source it? Thanks! --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 14:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[briga#rfv-notice-cel-gau-|brigā]] ==
 
Gaulish: Is there any evidence that this existed as a distinct word? It appears to be the same as the element {{m|cel-gau|-briga}}, which is said in sources such as [[Template:R:cel:EDPC|Matasović 2009]]:77 to be only attested as part of compound toponyms. So, this should be moved to [[Reconstruction:Gaulish/briga]]. — [[Special:Contributions/69.120.66.131|69.120.66.131]] 22:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
: Btw, see [[WT:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October#Latin toponyms from Iberian|this discussion]] for some related info, such as Latin toponyms with this "suffix" that were borrowed from Celtic, some of which should probably be listed in the event that a reconstruction page is created. Note that these are {{m|la||-brīga}} in Latin, with long ''ī'', unlike the short ''i'' currently transcribed at [[briga#Gaulish|brigā]] (which might just have been a baseless assumption on the part of the entry creator). — [[Special:Contributions/69.120.66.131|69.120.66.131]] 22:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[አስራአንድ#rfv-notice-am-|አስራአንድ]] ==
 
Amharic. There is [[ዐሥራ፡አንድ]] and [[ዐሥራንድ]], but I can't find any evidence of this exact spelling. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 10:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[wrength#rfv-notice-enm-|wrength]] ==
 
This form doesn't appear to exist in Middle English, which only knows the form {{m|enm|wrengðe}} (the word is a Early Middle English hapax). [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 05:55, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
: It's difficult to know if you're referring to the use of '''th''' in the spelling, or the lack of final '''e''' (or both). The nominative form, which would be used as the The Languages of David J. Peterson headword, could potentially be {{m|enm|wrengð*}}, {{m|enm|*wrengþ}}, {{m|enm|*wrength}}, {{m|enm|wrengðe}}, {{m|enm|*wrengþe}}, or {{m|enm|*wrengthe}}. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 22:14, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
::If the nominative originally lacked final ''-e'' (which is by no means certain), there's a good chance that it would've been levelled in from the oblique cases by the thirteenth century, making it formally identical to them. As a result, there's no justification for having a seperate entry (and if we did decide to create one, it should be located at {{m|enm|wrengð}}, as assuming that a scribe who uses <ð> in one place would use it elsewhere is the most parsimonious option). [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 02:47, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
:::I've no qualms about an entry as {{m|enm|wrengð}}, but we should leave {{m|en|wrength}} as a redirect. It's used with that spelling in references and other listings, and it's useful as a first-stop shop for individuals trying to locate it (i.e. looking it up and not realising that th = ð, or others not knowing where to find ð on their keyboard). How do we handle interchangeable bookstaves currently for Middle English ? like u~v, y~ȝ, w~ȝ, gh~ȝ, etc. I always change a fricative 'u' to v in all my edits automatically, and use 'u' solely as a vowel. In English headwords, we do not use ſ for s, but show s only; and in Old English we abandoned using ƿ for w, although ƿ is really more correct. Doing this for Middle English would be a departure from that logic, but if consensus dictates, then I have no problem with it. Also, we do show non-attested spellings for transliterations, like ''[[liufs]]'' for ''[[𐌻𐌹𐌿𐍆𐍃]]''. {{m|en|wrength}} could be argued to be a "transliteration" of sorts for {{m|enm|wrengð}}. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 19:14, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
::::To be clear, I don't think we should create a entry at {{m|enm|wrengð}} (in fact, I'm saying we shouldn't, as the nominative might've got the final vowel levelled in). As for creating a entry at {{m|enm|wrength}}, my main qualm with that idea is that we currently lack any policies for handling such modernised forms; I believe there was some discussion about creating a template {{temp|modernised form of}}, but I'm too unwell to go around digging it up. By the way, I wouldn't say there's a urgent need for a {{m+|enm|wrength}}, given that we have a ModE {{m|en|wrength}} that has a nice link to {{m|enm|wrengðe}} in the etymology. [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 14:30, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
:::::In the absence of policy we have consensus. I agree, there's no need for a Middle English ''wrength'' (now removed), the modern form suffices. As to the modernised spelling, I have created {{m|enm|wrengthe}}. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 19:41, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Merkels Fachkraft#rfv-notice-de-|Merkels Fachkraft]] ==
 
German. 19 results on Google and 0 on Google Books. [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 19:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
: {{re|-sche}} I assure no cap it is extremely common in speech, in certain circles to understand, but suppressed due to taboo, however also understood when e.g. people talk about certain incidences to journalists. (It naturally has become rarer though since the Scholz government, if it is not just my impression because of my digital detox.)
 
: ''But'' have you searched ''the plural''? Apparently not. The singular is rare since the talk usually goes about collectives (hence even the singular is found collectively in the instances on the web), ''perhaps'' it should be moved and I believe this a misunderstanding. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 20:15, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 
:: Well this is problematic since the usual way to talk about one is ''[[einer von Merkels Fachkräften]]'' but this is hardly a bearable pagetitle. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 20:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 
:::Ok, I see a few hits for the plural (btw both book hits and many web hits are just the plural, not ''einer von ~''). As far as the POS, would it work to move this to ''[[Merkels Fachkräften]]'' (pl.), and view ''einer von Merkels Fachkräften'' as ''[einer] [von] [[[[Merkels Fachkräften]]]]''?  But whether this idiomatically, lexically means what the entry says is also very questionable, compare e.g. , , are these idiomatic two-word phrases to be defined as "Russian soldier invading Ukraine" or is it better to view them as sarcastically using and quoting the specified person's word? [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 21:13, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
 
:::: Good analogy, if {{m|en|the boys}} is valid then {{m|de|Merkels Fachkräfte}} should be the entry page, although you see a few times there is a singular, I don’t know whether this should teach us anything. I of course leaned upon towards it being lexicalized. It was odd to observe how e.g. {{m|en|electric Jew}}, German {{m|de|Elektrojude}}, also was just a sarcastic figure and then because one repeated after another ''with some regularity'' it was a set term. It is the same criterion by which one decides whether something has passed from one language into another: As long as people dont take over the term {{m|en|she-bagging}} from their consumed German content into German it is not German but English and the German quotes stay ranged under English since you can arbitrarily borrow anything from a foreign language into your speech if you can rely upon people sharing the same language background, for instance when programmers talk to each other, and three people perpetrating an innovation independently from their language community does not make a word. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 00:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:Since ''Merkels'' is a definite determiner, ''Merkels Fachkraft'' should refer to one  instance (compare ''{{w|Halley's Comet}}'' – one cannot say *“a Halley’s Comet”) or be an uncountable noun phrase, like ''A. Vogels Echinaforce''. In cases where a count noun has an eponym component, the German solution is the join them into one word, like {{m|de|Bunsenbrenner}}, possible hyphenated, as in ''{{w|lang=de|Bessemer-Verfahren}}'', or to adjectivalize the name, as in ''{{w|lang=de|Leopold Carl Friedrich Merkel|Merkelsche Hauptgleichung}}''. So uses of a singular ''Merkels Fachkraft'' are not to be expected.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 19:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
:Why is the word "Eurasian" in the definition? Turkey and the Middle East (excluding N. Africa) are in Eurasia, and I would have guessed that xenophobes were against immigration from those places. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 20:59, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 
= June 2022 =
 
== [[Daisuke#rfv-notice-tl-|Daisuke]] ==
 
Tagalog.
Remove this and all Japanese surnames listed in Tagalog [[User:Kanamayanan|Kanamayanan]] ([[User talk:Kanamayanan|talk]]) 13:27, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Kanamayanan|Kanamayanan]] FYI, this is a page for requesting citations, not a page for requesting deletions. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 11:24, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== {{l|mul|Ξ}} ==
 
Translingual. The currency symbol for the cryptocurrency {{w|Ethereum|Ether}}. I'm seeing plenty of mentions on Google, but not really any actual use in anything durably archived. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 11:28, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ajp-|]] ==
 
General term [[]] is used instead. {{unsigned|AdrianAbdulBaha|13:15, 6 June 2022 (UTC)}}
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ajp-|]] ==
 
South Levantine Arabic. Unattested in the dialect. {{unsigned|AdrianAbdulBaha|13:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)}}
 
== [[кундья#rfv-sense-notice-mdf-|кундья]] ==
 
Moksha. Rfv-sense, multiple senses: "(in compounds) community, group, corps"; "(taxonomy) kingdom"; "(mathematics, set theory) field". These look like they were copied from the Finnish cognate, {{m|fi|kunta}}, right down to using the same compound examples. To be fair, there are exactly two non-durably-archived internet hits for "ломанькундья" other than the The Languages of David J. Peterson entry itself, but they are in Russian apparently mentioning the word. Nothing for "кевгундья". [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 07:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 
:I think this is a word used only by language purists. [https://books.google.nl/books?id=2bliAAAAMAAJ&q=%D0%BA%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%8C%D1%8F&dq=%D0%BA%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%8C%D1%8F&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwin-Or655r4AhVOqaQKHa4yBoIQ6AF6BAgDEAI this book] seems to state that the term isn't used at all currently (a Russian borrowing is used instead), and I couldn't find any durable cites for the derived terms either. The etymology that was given in the entry until I removed it just now isn't helping the credibility of the page's contents either. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 07:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[sinniht#rfv-notice-ang-|sinniht]] ==
 
Old English.  From RFDN:
----
Old English. The Bosworth-Toller affirms that the actual word is {{m|ang|sinnihte}}, a neuter ja-stem. The genitive singular in -es and the fact that its never attested in its endingless form (very common even for oblique cases of {{m|ang|niht}}) point to this conclusion. [[User:Hundwine|Hundwine]] ([[User talk:Hundwine|talk]]) 22:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
:'''Keep''', send to [[WT:RFVN]]. --[[User:Astova|Astova]] ([[User talk:Astova|talk]]) 21:46, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
----
[[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 07:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
::This is not an alternative form. This is the nominative form, and {{m|ang|sinnihte}} is the oblique singular. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 04:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
:::{{m|ang|sinniht}} is feminine; {{m|ang|sinnihte}} is neuter. These are 2 separate but related terms, which appear to show some conflation or overlap. {{m|ang|sinniht}} though is valid. I've expanded the entry. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 04:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Таусень#rfv-notice-mdf-|Таусень]] ==
 
Moksha. There doesn't really seem to be any evidence for this being a word in Moksha - the quote could equally well be talking about the practice rather than the word itself (and is apparently just one out of many theories regarding its origin). (Note that if the quote is indeed talking about the practice, then the existing quote on the page is a ''mention'', which would not count.) — [[User:Surjection|S]]  19:29, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 
:In any case I believe it should be lower-case. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 21:06, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
:Does anyone know how to track down "Moksha journal, 1973, Issue 6, pp. 71-72"? (E.g. the original name of the journal would be useful information for improving verifiability, even if it's behind a paywall.) [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 05:25, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[very good, walay lugod-lugod#rfv-notice-ceb-|very good, walay lugod-lugod]] ==
 
Cebuano. If anything the expression is probably {{m|ceb|walay lugod-lugod}}, but I can't even find this. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 10:05, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Bulan Jatidiri#Malay]] as a translation of [[Pride Month#rfv-t-notice-ms-|Pride Month]] ==
 
RFV-t. 0 hits on Google Books, Google Scholar and Google Groups. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 17:09, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[👌#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|👌]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense:
# {{lb|mul|alt-right}} a [[dogwhistle]] for [[white supremacy]].
The hand gesture this represents was promoted as a white supremacist symbol by a massive 4-chan hoax, but has arguably been adopted by at least some actual white supremacists.
 
This entry, however, is for the Unicode character. Has this been involved in the above?
 
As a side note: would it be better to describe the hand gesture in the entry as an "alleged" dogwhistle? And, given that this has been sold very hard to the mainstream, as well, does this qualify as a true [[dogwhistle]]? [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 23:28, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 
:I have absolutely seen this used first-hand numerous times as a dogwhistle, and it's also important to note that the real hoax was the pretence that it was always just a joke and never a real dogwhistle. The whole point of that was to prevent people from being taken seriously when they pointed it out (i.e. an elaborate version of the "I was joking" defence).
:In any event, it would be good to get this cited. I'll have a look shortly. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 01:05, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 
:This did start out as a 4chan false-flag campaign intended to paint their ideological opponents as perpetually-offended types. But they've functionally [[make fetch happen|made fetch happen]]. The OK sign is now [https://www.adl.org/resources/hate-symbol/okay-hand-gesture listed] as a hate symbol by the ADL, although the entry notes there are still many benign usages. [[User:WordyAndNerdy|WordyAndNerdy]] ([[User talk:WordyAndNerdy|talk]]) 04:46, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
::Turkish courts believe the circular hand gesture – somewhat unavoidable when hastily buttoning your jacket – implies any bystanders are made out to be gay.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 14:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] @[[User:WordyAndNerdy|WordyAndNerdy]] I have provided 8 cites from Twitter plus three references, including the original 4chan thread and a particularly good article by SPLC which explains usage. I've made sure that all of them are archived at the Internet Archive and so on. Hoping that this can be a good test of the new policy. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 22:05, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
::Those seem fit for purpose. Thanks for taking the time to dig them up. I'd suggest removing the links from the quotations though per [[WT:QUOTE]]. When I cited the crab emoji, I [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=The Languages of David J. Peterson%3ARequests_for_verification%2FNon-English&type=revision&diff=59774988&oldid=59774838 suggested] that, of all the social-media platforms, Twitter would be the most valuable addition to our toolbox. It's widely-used, freely viewable for almost everyone, and has advanced and easy-to-use search functionality. Plus it's currently the largest platform I know of that indexes emojis. I cited the crab emoji almost two years ago. The nomination is [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Project:Requests_for_verification/Non-English#%F0%9F%A6%80 still open]. I can't imagine a better illustration of how The Languages of David J. Peterson's systemic aversion to change is impeding our ability to document language. [[User:WordyAndNerdy|WordyAndNerdy]] ([[User talk:WordyAndNerdy|talk]]) 02:45, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 
: '''Cited'''. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 18:59, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:The SPLC and ADL and various other websites say that the specific reason for this symbol is that in addition to looking like the letters "OK" (supposedly), it also looks like the letters "WP" for '''''w'''hite '''p'''ower'' (the spread fingers looking like W and the circle being the loop of the P, with either the index finger or wrist serving as the stem of the P), which would be good to mention in the entry. [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 18:17, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 
===CFI-mandated discussion===
:
:''Ends January 27, 2023, 23:59 (UTC)''
:Under discussion: the "alt-right" sense under [[👌#rfv-sense-notice-mul-]]
:Citations: on the entry itself
 
These citations aren't durably archived, so we technically need to have a discussion lasting two weeks to decide whether they are sufficient attestation. Anyone care to comment? [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 22:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 
* I would not cite this from a single web site, from a dozen or a hundred of the millions or billions of tweets.  It's barely above the reliability of quoting something you heard on the subway.  (Citing 4chan is like quoting fragments of overheard conversation.)  Are there any reputable journal articles by socioligists or linguists on this?  Not columns in Slate or lists of things SPLC disapproves of.  A reviewed paper by somebody who took a data dump and did the research to find out this is a phenomenon, taking care to distinguish the real life hand gesture from the emoji. Otherwise it is OK if we only document the OK symbol as meaning OK.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 
. One comment saying current sourcing is insufficient, none saying it's sufficient. The discussion was advertised on [[WT:BP]], and the explicitly set two week time period is up, so that's that for now. If anyone wants to improve the sourcing in the ways proposed by Vox we can reconsider this someday. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 20:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 
:I didn't actually realise this discussion was happening. Can we reopen it? Because I don't think the above critique is particularly fair: 4chan was not the only source provided, and there are numerous other tweets of a very similar nature to be found very easily. Asking for evidence that one knows doesn't exist (and which goes well beyond that which we provide for most terms) does not justify dismissing the evidence provided. In particular, dismissing the SPLC as "disapproving" of it is completely unjustified and, quite frankly, feels politically motivated. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 20:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
:{{pb}}
:Also, on a procedural note, I don't think this should have been closed as RFV failed without taking into account the initial discussion. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 20:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
::Fair enough. How about extending the discussion another two weeks? In my defense, I did publicize the discussion in the most prominent place I could think of, and even posted about it again yesterday to remind anyone who was procrastinating commenting. I assumed there just wasn't any interest. Maybe we need a separate noticeboard for such discussions so people know they're happening?
::I'm not sure about counting comments outside of the explicitly set up discussion; that doesn't seem to be the standard applied in [[WT:Votes]] and other venues, where you have to show up to the formal discussion to count. But I do see your point. It we were to count the comments above the subsection, then the result would be 2-1, which would pass. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 21:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
:::To be clear: I'm not blaming you at all; I think there's still quite a lot of confusion of how this policy works, as we've had everything from fully-formalised votes to ordinary discussions. My understanding was that we'd settled on something in the middle. Particularly given the bulk of the above discussion happened quite a while ago, I think it's fair to say that the things said there were said under the assumption that they would be taken into account. Thanks for reopening it, anyway. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 21:32, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Theknightwho}}: I would certainly agree that the policy is confusing and that it has been applied in very different ways. Thanks for understanding. I've bumped up the closure date for 👌. Btw, do you think the closure of 🦀 was okay, or should that discussion be extended as well for similar reasons (esp. lack of exposure)? [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 21:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
:::::I think it probably should (though I wouldn't have anything to add to it). Giving it a read, the outcome feels as though it's in line with the prior discussion, but it would be good to get more voices involved in the formal discussion if we're going to use this format. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 21:58, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
::::::Getting more people to comment would be ideal. The problem is that I can't force people to comment. I could ping random people (probably annoying, and could be accused of bias if those people are known to be approving or disapproving of online sources) or repost it to BP/TR (arguably spammy given that I've already done that). In going through the RFVN backlog there are likely to be other such cases and it would be good to know how to handle them, though. There are already a couple other such sections on this page, my feeble attempt at resolving ancient discussions that are going nowhere, and in those cases I used {{tl|wgping}} for the language in question. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 22:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
:::::::Just going to add that the SPLC is on [[w:Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources|Wikipedia's list of perennial sources]] here, specifically in relation to the subject of extremism. There have been no less than  discussions as to whether it should remain there. As above - it's difficult to take a curt dismissal of it seriously. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 18:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
::::::::Closing this as '''RFV passed''', on balance, taking account of both parts of the discussion. The one comment against fails to understand how primary sources work: 4chan is cited as the origin, not for its (un)reliability as a news source. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 00:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[tunga#rfv-notice-tr-|tunga]] ==
 
{{small|''Moved here from RfD.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 08:09, 17 June 2022 (UTC)''}}
 
This word doesn't exist in Turkish. [[User:Dohqo|Dohqo]] ([[User talk:Dohqo|talk]]) 06:16, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
:According to Turkish Language Association's Kişi Adları Sözlüğü (Personal Names Dictionary) it means: 1. Görkemli, kuvvetli, muazzam. 2. Yiğit, kahraman. 3. Rütbe, unvan.4. Bir tür kaplan. {{unsigned}}
:Not in {{tl|R:tr:OTK}}.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[upsila#rfv-notice-mul-|upsila]] ==
 
Translingual; has {{temp|rfdef}} and a single scholarly cite as a specific epithet in [[ichnology]]. I could not find another at Google Scholar among the numerous hits for "upsila", not at the Catalog of Life. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 15:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
: This was added over a decade ago by [[User:Doremítzwr]], who was somewhat fixated on minor historical peculiarities and apparently quite ignorant of taxonomy. Given that at least one of the taxonomic codes mentions "an arbitrary sequence of letters" as one type of taxonomic name, we should be more selective of which [[specific epithet]]s we create entries for. After all, there are literally millions of species, and in some disciplines taxonomists are desperately trying to come up with unique names for thousands and thousands of them.
: I would propose that we don't include a specific epithet if it isn't used in a certain number of [[binomial]]s, with possibly some kind of loophole for names that make their way into other terms. Perhaps also a few could be allowed for well known species, but I'm not sure how we would decide on application.
: This reminds me of misspellings, where we disallow rare ones. A specific epithet used in only one [[species name]] would only be looked up by someone who already knew the species name- aside from etymology, there's basically nothing they could learn from an entry here. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 18:23, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
::Fine with me. The number 3 seems like one possibility and is not entirely arbitrary, echoing RfV as it does. There are probably some peculiar ones that might have some linguistic interest (humor, etymology etc.) that don't have three binomials in which they are used (eg [[humbugi]]), but I'd be willing to sacrifice them. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 01:36, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
::: Such cases could be documented at the binomial (''[[Ba humbugi]]'' is more interesting than just "''humbugi''" anyway). [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 03:50, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
::The etymology may be worth having.  More relevant is being told whether it is an adjective, which is relevant for professionals when assigning to a new genus in accordance with the principle of the instability of binomial names.  Unfortunately, we also list genitives as adjectives, which is rather unhelpful.  Has policy in this matter been decided?  Two offenders I found straight off were [[boisei]] and [[darwinii]].  --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 09:17, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
:::We have etymology at [[upsila#English]]. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 19:32, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
:Elsewhere I find this ichnospecies referred to as ''Psilonichnus upsilon'', also while referring to “Frey ''et al.'' 1984”, as in the quotation with ''P. upsila''. The bibliographic reference is somewhat ambiguous; it could refer to [Frey, R. W. and Pemberton (1984), “Trace fossil facies models”, in Roger G. Walker (ed.), ''Facies Models''], or – more likely in view of the ''et al.'' suggesting more than one co-author – [Robert W. Frey, H. Allen Curran and S. George Pemberton, “Tracemaking Activities of Crabs and Their Environmental Significance: The Ichnogenus ''Psilonichnus''”,  ''Journal of Paleontology'' vol. 58, no. 2, March 1984, pp. 333–350.] The latter uses ''P. upsilon'', so the epithet ''upsila'' appears to belong to the ichnospecies ''Oopsadaisy'', whose  primary substrate is formed by reference works such as dictionaries.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 11:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
::I think it is a memorospecies until we delete it. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 13:54, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
::Frey et al., or perhaps the genus, appears to be typified by ignorance of Greek and Latin.  In one paragraph, I see ''P. tubiformis'' (m. or f.), ''P. upsila'' (f.), and ''P. lutimuratus'' (m.), though surely ''Psilonichnus'' is neuter!  Shades of ''Tellus Tertius''! --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 09:59, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
* Hits at BHL are for [[Upsila]] (place) and the plural of ''[[upsilon]]'' ("hook") in a single 1852 journal. Nothing at the Catalog of Life or the Index of Organism Names for the epithet. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 17:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Seedelsbierich#rfv-notice-stq-|Seedelsbierich]] ==
 
Saterland Frisian. Pinging {{ping|OriginReboot}}. I could find a lot of mentions, and the term seems to be in used over at Saterland Frisian Wikipedia, but both SW and Piet Kramer's dictionary use forms containing ''-äi-'' instead (''Säidelsbíerig'' and ''Säidelsbierich'' respectively, as is expected), and I couldn't find any durably archived attestation of this spelling. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 00:15, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
:It's the official Saterland Frisian name, cp.:
:* [https://www.saterland.de/portal/seiten/saterfriesische-sprache-900000015-22001.html saterland.de], [https://www.saterland.de/portal/seiten/seelter-sproake-900000131-22001.html saterland.de]: "Bereits die Ortseingangsschilder der vier Gemeindeteile Sedelsberg (Seedelsbierich), Scharrel (Skäddel), Ramsloh (Roomelse), und Strücklingen (Strukelje) sind zusätzlich mit dem saterfriesischen Namen beschriftet"
:* [https://books.google.com/books?id=p1xtEAAAQBAJ&pg=PT289&dq=Seedelsbierich Niedersachsen erlesen]: "Heute ist Seeltersk in Saterland zweite Amtssprache: Die Ortsschilder sind zweisprachig: Ramsloh (Roomelse), Scharrel (Skäddel), Sedelsberg (Seedelsbierich) und Strücklingen (Strukelje)."
:* [https://www.nwzonline.de/cloppenburg/kultur/zehn-jahre-seeltersk-garantie_a_3,0,3613023106.html nwzonline.de]: [picture]
:--[[User:Amicus vetus|Amicus vetus]] ([[User talk:Amicus vetus|talk]]) 16:50, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[खरोष्ठी#rfv-sense-notice-sa-|खरोष्ठी]] ==
 
Sanskrit. Rfv-sense: [[Kharoshthi]].
 
So far as I am aware, it is an assumption rather than a good guess that the Sanskrit word refers to the script known as [[Kharoshthi]] in English.  Any Sanskrit examples of usage in this sense would be from the last two hundred years.  (On the other hand, the cited quotation is the ultimate known source of the English word.)
 
I think the word may actually have two senses - whatever script it meant in the original sense (if it isn't a word like [[jabberwocky]]), and the Kharoshthi script as known today.  However, we don't have a quotation for the latter!  --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 14:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[gecielfe]] ==
 
{{movedfrom|WT:RFDE}}
Old English.
: This is attested <<Ðæt ic hæbbe hnesce litlingas, and '''gecelfe''' cý mid me - ''that I have tender children and incalving cows with me'' >>. Also found here [[http://koeblergerhard.de/wikiling/index.php?query=gecielfe&f=ae&mod=0]]. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 05:04, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
::There is also the entry at {{m|ang|ġeċealf}}, which is/is not the same term (?) [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 05:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
----
Based on the similar terms {{m|ang|ġeēan}}, {{m|ang|ġefearh}}, and {{m|ang|ġefol}} and the lack of i-umlaut in all of these, this word was actually ''ġeċealf''. [[User:Hundwine|Hundwine]] ([[User talk:Hundwine|talk]]) 01:12, 7
January 2022 (UTC)
:{{ping|Hundwine}} Per Clark Hall ''A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary'', the form is ''geċealfe'' "great with calf" sourced to GenC 33:13, where GenC is explained in the intro as "Crawford's Heptateuch" version of the poem of Genesis. [[User:Benwing2|Benwing2]] ([[User talk:Benwing2|talk]]) 07:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
:'''Keep''', send to [[WT:RFVN]]. --[[User:Astova|Astova]] ([[User talk:Astova|talk]]) 21:46, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
----
{{ping|Hundwine|Benwing2|Astova}} [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 08:12, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[achichiltik]] ==
 
The two Nahuatl languages mark this terms as noun and adjective respectively, is that correct? --[[User:TongcyDai|TongcyDai]] ([[User talk:TongcyDai|talk]]) 11:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[חנות משכונות#rfv-notice-he-|חנות משכונות]] ==
 
{{movedfrom|WT:RFDN}}
Hebrew. Apparently incorrect. --[[User:Huckerby980|Huckerby980]] ([[User talk:Huckerby980|talk]]) 12:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
* '''Keep'''. It's used in the press occasionally, although בית עבוט is more common. --[[User:Amire80|Amir E. Aharoni]] ([[User talk:Amire80|talk]]) 10:51, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
*:Should we have an entry for {{m|he||משכונות}} by itself? I can't quite figure it out; could it be cognate to {{m|he|מִסְכֵּן}} (compare {{m+|mxi|משכון}})? From the uses it seems to have three meanings: (1) pawn (security for loan); (2) pawn shop (perhaps by shortening of {{m|he|חנות משכונות}}); (3) neighbourhood. Cases of the last one are probably misspellings of {{m|he|משכנות}}.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 09:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[tropatuts#rfv-notice-tl-|tropatuts]] ==
 
{{ping|Princeipeazul}} Could you provide attestation for this based on The Languages of David J. Peterson entry guidelines? I can't find this in any published source. It kinda needs to be to be tracked in The Languages of David J. Peterson. Thanks! --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 14:36, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
:Well, we've got [[tropa]] listed as meaning a group of friends in Tagalog, so there's probably something to this, but there's clearly a mistake somewhere.  If it were a typo for something like [[tropatita]] i could see this being a diminutive coined in Spanish and then loaned, or even coined natively using familiar patterns .... but although the letters are close I get the impression that no such word exists, and that anywhere it appears on Google search results is an example of the two separate words [[tropa]] + [[tito]] spelled bunched together as in hashtags. Alternatively, there may be a connection with [[patutsada]], created by the same author, and with the same six letters in a row.  [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 21:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
:: {{re|Soap}} It's obvious that it's related to "tropa". The issue is attestation. So many variations of Tagalog slang come and go but they don't stick. Probably this is one of them. Without attestation, it can't be an entry in The Languages of David J. Peterson. By the way, the IPA template you put is wrong, when "ts" is at the end of a Tagalog sentence, it doesn't produce a /tʃ/ sound but a /ts/ sound. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 00:11, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[brahmaloka#rfv-sense-notice-pi-|brahmaloka]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: [[Brahmaloka]]
 
It seems unlikely that a Pali word would refer to a specifically ''Hindu'' concept, which is what The Languages of David J. Peterson claims ''Brahmaloka'' to be.  Additionally, Theravada Buddhism appears to have about 20 different ''brahmaloka''s. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 20:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[llayang]] ==
 
{{movedfrom|WT:RFDN}}
This is a {{w|Pattani Malay}} word. - [[User:Patnugot123|Patnugot123]] ([[User talk:Patnugot123|talk]]) 18:01, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
: Why should it be deleted? Can't it just be turned into a Pattani Malay entry?  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  10:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
:{{ping|GinormousBuildings}} can you respond to Patnugot123's request by demonstrating that this is in use as a Malay word, or whether it belongs to the distinct [[:CAT:Pattani Malay language|Pattani Malay language]]? [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 12:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 
= July 2022 =
 
==[[tyan#Azerbaijani]]==
 
{{movedfrom|WT:RFDN}} 10:56, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 
Unattestable. [[User:Allahverdi Verdizade|Allahverdi Verdizade]] ([[User talk:Allahverdi Verdizade|talk]]) 13:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 
:To be checked: [https://twitter.com/laninamistica/status/1340346376299941890]. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 04:31, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 
* '''RFV-failed'''.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Ilahi]] ==
 
Indonesian and Malay. Rfv-sense: "my God" (interjection). Added by @[[User:Munmula|Munmula]] under their old account (@[[User:Alumnum|Alumnum]]) at [[ilahi]] on 22 May 2019. -- [[User:NameName233|NameName233]] ([[User talk:NameName233|talk]]) 12:50, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ielfþone#rfv-notice-ang-|ielfþone]] ==
 
Old English. All I'm seeing is {{m|ang|ælfþone}} ([https://bosworthtoller.com/614 Bosworth-Toller]). [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 00:39, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 
:I created an entry for ælfþone. "ielfþone", along with "ielfiġ" originally appeared on this page: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ielf#Derived_terms
 
"ælfþone" is in the Mercian orthography.
 
[[Special:Contributions/2602:306:CEC2:A3A0:A07C:91F6:D2CC:EC3A|2602:306:CEC2:A3A0:A07C:91F6:D2CC:EC3A]] 00:46, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[♂#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|♂]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense: {{tq|{{lb|mul|botany|obsolete|nocat=1}} biennial (the orbital period of Mars is 2 years)}}
 
As an aside, I assume the part about the orbital period of Mars is the etymology of the sense, but I'm not certain. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 23:30, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 
:You can find “♂ Biennial” and “♃ Perennial” [https://books.google.com/books?id=EDAXAAAAYAAJ&pg=PP14&dq=Biennial+Perennial&hl=en here], as well as “☉ Annual”, thus extending the correspondence between the plant’s longevity and the astronomical object’s orbital period, undoubtedly the origin of the association of these symbols with plants. “♄” is also listed, but as simply meaning “Shrub or Tree” – all of which, however, are perennial anyway. Likewise [https://books.google.com/books?id=xP4CAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR20&dq=%22Herbaceous,+perennial%22+Biennial&hl=en here] and [https://books.google.com/books?id=GH8CAAAAYAAJ&pg=PP10&dq=biennial+perennials&hl=en here], although the latter has a toppled Jupiter in the table; later uses in the book are upright).  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 14:52, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
::Thanks. Taking the three sources together, I'd suggest that we amend [[♂]] to read {{tq|biennial plant}} for the sake of consistency. All three sources seem to give a mix of noun and adjective glosses for these symbols, and they're not consistent with each other when it comes to the same symbol. Given that they're not used within running text, it doesn't really matter which style we choose, but {{tq|biennial plant}} is more elegant than {{tq|Of a plant, binennial.}} [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 15:17, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[♃#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|♃]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense: {{tq|{{lb|mul|botany|obsolete|nocat=1}} herbaceous perennial plant (the orbital period of Jupiter is 12 years)}}
 
Not sure how the two halves of the sense relate to each other, to be quite honest. I guess herbaceous plants live longer than 2 years (see [[♂]]) but less than woody plants (see [[♄]])? [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 23:35, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[♄#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|♄]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense: {{tq|{{lb|mul|botany|obsolete|nocat=1}} woody perennial plant (the orbital period of Saturn is 30 years)}}
 
Also unsure how the two halves of the sense relate to each other, but I assume it's to do with woody plants living longer than herbaceous ones (see [[♃]]). [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 23:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ᠨᡇᡇ᠍ᠷ]] ==
 
Written Oirat. Using proper formatting this is: {{m|xwo|ᠨᡇᡇ᠍ᠷ}}
 
Moved from RFDN. {{u|HeliosX}} wrote: "As far as I may be concerned about transliterating the [[w:Clear script]], these orthographies are all false and, due to this, the entries shouldn't be kept." {{u|LibCae}}, the entry's creator, responded: "The first variant was attested in Pozdneyev’s printed dictionary (although it’s not enough unless we find it in a manuscript). Should we keep the spelling for a while?"
 
tl;dr can it be attested in a manuscript? [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 04:54, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[fyxen#rfv-notice-ang-|fyxen]] ==
 
Old English. This seems to be unattested and should be moved to {{m|ang|*fyxen}}; the ''OED'' dutifully prepends a asterisk to it in its entry for {{m|en|vixen}}, and it is absent from both Bosworth-Toller and the ''Dictionary of Old English''. To avoid confusion, it's worth noting that a adjective {{m|ang|fyxen|t=related to foxes}} does actually appear to be attested. [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 17:11, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Hundwine|Hundwine]] do you have any observations before I close this as RFV-failed? [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 01:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[unz]] ==
 
Old Norse. [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=unz&diff=prev&oldid=67972295 This edit] by {{user|Xact}} added some extra information, but did not really follow the The Languages of David J. Peterson format, and I cannot verify the content because I cannot read the language of the book in the link. --[[User:Kc kennylau|kc_kennylau]] ([[User talk:Kc kennylau|talk]]) 00:48, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 
:It looks like the info is right based on the reference, but they should have made a new L3 header for the noun instead of sticking it in the etymology. The quotation from the c. 1500 manuscript ("AM 625 4") is shown in the panel on the right of the reference, but someone more knowledgeable should confirm it I guess. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 00:55, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[]] ==
Arabic. Rfv-senses: "to be [[revealed]] or [[divulged]], to become [[known]]", "(of a secret) to leak out". There was an edit war over whether to include these intransitive senses, in addition to the transitive sense of "to [[reveal]], to [[divulge]], to [[disclose]]", which is currently the only one that remains. To be clear, I was not involved in the edit war.
 
FWIW, Wehr lists all these intransitive senses as well as the transitive ones, almost verbatim: [https://ejtaal.net/aa/#hw4=111]. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 03:08, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
: See my response above. —  03:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
: [[w:ar:|Abu Al-Haytham Ibn al-Tayyihan]] said {{lang-lite|ar|sc=Arab|}}‎ [http://alwalaa.com/detail.cfm?inttopicid=437]‎ --[[Special:Contributions/2001:16A2:E950:3402:28B9:7B80:EB65:4073|2001:16A2:E950:3402:28B9:7B80:EB65:4073]] 09:49, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[яліты#rfv-notice-be-|яліты]] ==
 
Belarusian. Tagged but not listed. Original tag said:
 
added on 12:54, 16 July 2022 by {{user|Jarash}}. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 12:43, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 
:The word '''ялі́ты'''-''таў'' appears in this dictionary: [https://archive.org/details/Janka_Stankievic.Bielaruska_rasijski_Vialikalitouska_rasijski_slounik.pdf/page/356/mode/2up?q=%D1%8F%D0%BB%D1%96%D1%82%D1%8B].  I added three citations from other sources, but two of them are non-ideal: a LiveJournal post and a Yiddish–Belarusian dictionary (where it appears as one of the glosses for {{m|yi|ביצה}}). You can find more on bnkorpus.info and archive.org by searching for the lemma form, but the hits are mostly mentions. I find that it's not that easy to search for attestations in Belarusian since Google Books is lacking. The same applies to some other Eastern European languages. Maybe some leniency is justified. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 01:07, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[frain#rfv-sense-notice-enm-|frain]] ==
 
Middle English. Rfv-sense: "question". This purported sense seems to be a erroneous extrapolation from {{m|ang|fræġn}}; there's no trace of it in the ''MED'' or ''OED'', and I don't see any evidence  of any attestations that these two dictionaries've missed.  [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 06:26, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
: Removed. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 09:15, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Leasnam}} Can you confirm that everything in [https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme?type=simple&rgn=full+text&q1=frain&cite1=&cite1restrict=author&cite2=&cite2restrict=author&Submit=Search this search] is using it as a verb? I can't parse some of these passages, e.g. "þe frain" in isolation could either mean "ask thee" or (hypothetically) "the question", "hir frain" could mean "ask her" or (hypothetically) "her question". I'm guessing it's the verb in all cases, but I just wanted to check. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 06:44, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
:::I wasn't able to find any clear noun uses of ''frain'' [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 03:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
::::I also searched for ''frein'', ''freyn'', and ''frayn'' and came across this which looks like it might be a noun, here [[https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme?didno=AJT8128.0001.001;rgn=full+text;size=25;sort=occur;start=1;subview=detail;type=simple;view=reslist;q1=frayn]] - the very first instance where it says ''And at þaim gaue þair fader '''frayn''''' - if I'm reading this correctly (which I hope I am) it says "And at them gave their father '''frayn''' ("question" ?)" i.e. "And their father directed a question at them", and he appears to ask a question in the very next line...but ''frayn'' is a slightly different spelling, of course, than ''frain''. [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 03:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
:::::I also should point out that ''frayn'' above doesn't appear to likely mean "ash-tree" or "bridle/rein" - two other possible renderings for this spelling [[User:Leasnam|Leasnam]] ([[User talk:Leasnam|talk]]) 03:46, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
::::::{{ping|Hazarasp}} Thoughts? [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 07:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
:::::::I'm pretty unwell at the moment, so I can't answer. [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 08:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[⋈]] ==
 
Sense 2: bowtie. Also please fix the page to point to non-English RFV if you can; I could not find instructions to do this, so it points to English RFV. [[User:Equinox|Equinox]] [[User_talk:Equinox|◑]] 15:29, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
 
:Unicode calls it that. `python -c 'import unicodedata; print(unicodedata.name("⋈"))'` prints BOWTIE. This suggests that there must be a historical reason where some people did call it bowtie. Nowadays most people just call it the natural join symbol. A Google search for this symbol only returns results with bowtie when it's on Unicode table websites.
:All in all, I would suggest '''Delete'''. This just duplicates the Unicode box to the top right. Keeping this specific definition provides no additional information. [[User:Daniel.z.tg|Daniel.z.tg]] ([[User talk:Daniel.z.tg|talk]]) 01:48, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ебати#rfv-notice-bg-|ебати]] ==
 
(Bulgarian) {{ping|ZomBear}} Hello, you just recently suggested this sense be verified, and I noticed there is no debate for this yet, so I thought to start this post. The word seems relatively legitimate to me, but is not overly common; nevertheless you can find uses of it online (not in literature) and I have heard it used as a native.
What do you think? [[User:Kiril kovachev|Kiril kovachev]] ([[User talk:Kiril kovachev|talk]]) 19:59, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
* {{ping|Kiril kovachev}} Hi. I didn't find the Bulgarian form {{m|bg|ебати}} anywhere in the dictionaries (Is this some kind of borrowing from Russian or what?). Everywhere mentioned only {{cog|bg|еба́}}. Also very interested in where did the {{cog|cu|ебати}} come from? It is also nowhere in the dictionaries. Could this vulgar word be used in the language of church services at all?... strange. --[[User:ZomBear|ZomBear]] ([[User talk:ZomBear|talk]]) 20:29, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
*:{{ping|ZomBear}} I certainly couldn't find the word in any dictionaries either. The exact etymology of {{m|bg|ебати}} is also very unclear, as the main source I usually consult for BG etymology, the [https://ibl.bas.bg/ber/ Bulgarian Etymological Dictionary], is extremely terse with their description and gives the meaning in Latin... (some sort of censorship?) ...and the term they give is еба, ебавам, etc., which are not ебати as in this entry. I can't say whether it is borrowed from Russian either, as it's got parallels in every other Slavic language you can name (just look at the descendents on [[Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/jebati]]), so pinpointing where it comes from looks very difficult. Nevertheless it is obviously cognate with all the other languages' words, and with еба in Bulgarian itself.
*:I couldn't find ебати in OCS either, and once again BER was of no help.
*:It's also pretty much impossible for it to be used in a liturgical setting, but OCS is also used to subsume Old Bulgarian on The Languages of David J. Peterson as well (as far as I know), where it would be much more apropos in a vernacular sense. We should ask the original OCS entry creator {{ping|Mladifilozof}}. So, by my account, there is no good documentation on the Bulgarian to be found, and for OCS, which I have no expertise in, I couldn't personally find any sources or uses. That said, ебати#Bulgarian still clearly seems to exist in the Bulgarian conscience, as I've found uses on social media, as well as [https://www.bgjargon.com/word/meaning/%D0%B5%D0%B1%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B8 this definition] on an online Bulgarian slang dictionary (akin to Urban Dictionary). I don't know whether The Languages of David J. Peterson's standards permit this as a valid justification for keeping the page, but to me it seems constructive to keep the word on here in the hopes it will help people who look up the word in the cases where it shows up. [[User:Kiril kovachev|Kiril kovachev]] ([[User talk:Kiril kovachev|talk]]) 10:04, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
*::@[[User:ZomBear|ZomBear]] Hello, may I hear your thoughts on the above, please? It's been almost a year, but I am even more resolute in saying that ебати, although vulgar and somewhat parochial in its usage, does get used and should constitute noteworthy Bulgarian. If you would like, I can compile a list of usages online, but even just looking up the word will turn up a healthy picking of instances, so I think we should remove the request for verification for this if you would assent. [[User:Kiril kovachev|Kiril kovachev]] ([[User talk:Kiril kovachev|talk]]) 13:53, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ey#rfv-sense-notice-enm-|ey]] ==
 
Middle English. Rfv-sense: "island". This word apparently seems to have only survived as a place-name suffix after the Old English period; the ''MED'' has no attestations of use as a independent nominal. [[User:Hazarasp|Hazarasp]] ([[User talk:Hazarasp|parlement]] · [[Special:Contributions/Hazarasp|werkis]]) 00:18, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 
= August 2022 =
 
== [[ポケットモンスター]] ==
 
Rfv-sense Pokémon". [[User:Dennis Dartman|Dennis Dartman]] ([[User talk:Dennis Dartman|talk]]) 20:48, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Dennis Dartman|Dennis Dartman]]: The sense "Pokémon" is easily verifiable in any official translation of the games of the Pokémon series. [[User:Sartma|Sartma]] ([[User talk:Sartma|talk]]) 21:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 
::See the deletion discussion, however. [[User:Dennis Dartman|Dennis Dartman]] ([[User talk:Dennis Dartman|talk]]) 23:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
 
::: {{ping|Dennis Dartman}}, the confusion is that this is not about RFV of a specific sense for this term.  (FWIW, ''[[Pokémon]]'' is the only sense currently in the {{ja-r|^ポケット ^モンスター}} entry.)  This is specifically seeking evidence that this passes [[WT:BRAND]].  ‑‑ [[User:Eirikr|Eiríkr Útlendi]] │ 21:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[University of Recto#rfv-notice-tl-|University of Recto]] ==
 
Tagalog. Needs to fit the inclusion criteria. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 00:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Feuerarm]] ==
 
An apparent calque of {{m|en|firearm}}, and synonymous with {{m|de|Feuerwaffe}} and {{m|de|Schusswaffe}}. But attestation of this word is scant (89 hits on Google, including those generated by the The Languages of David J. Peterson entry itself). It is not to be found in the usual dictionary/corpus database sources (Duden, Pons, DWDS, etc.), and the audio on the page is for {{m|de|Feuerwaffe}} (presumably copied across from that page). Can we find attestation to support this entry's existence? [[User:Voltaigne|Voltaigne]] ([[User talk:Voltaigne|talk]]) 14:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
:[https://books.google.com/books?id=6kMAAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA36&dq=Feuerarm&hl=en Here] is a use of the term with a different meaning, possibly the same as for the implied use in Strodtmann’s [https://books.google.com/books?id=Uqo7AAAAcAAJ&pg=PA310&dq=%22feuerarm'gen+Moloch%22&hl=en ''feuerarm’gen Moloch'']. Some uses in the sense of a {{m|de|Schießgewehr}}: [https://books.google.com/books?id=XeZ1AQAAQBAJ&pg=PT171&dq=Feuerarm&hl=en], [https://books.google.com/books?id=6tQuAAAAIAAJ&dq=Feuerarm&hl=en], [https://books.google.com/books?id=F1ggAQAAMAAJ&dq=Feuerarm&hl=en], [https://books.google.com/books?id=jrQiAQAAMAAJ&dq=Feuerarm&hl=en]. If (as is IMO plausible) this is a [[partial calque]] of {{m+|en|firearm}}, the German noun {{m|de|Arm}} is innocent and the etymology we give needs to be corrected.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 15:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
:I’ve changed the etymology to “{{partial calque|nocap=1|de|en|firearm}}”.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 19:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[‛#rfv-notice-mul-|‛]] ==
 
: A leading {{l|en|apostrophe}}; a form of the apostrophe when it occurs at the beginning of a word.
:: {{ux|en|{{l|en|'tis|'''‛'''tis}}, {{l|en|'nuff|'''‛'''nuff}}, {{l|en|'cello|'''‛'''cello}}, etc.}}
Translingual. I have seen leading apostrophes in both old and new books but always as [[’]], never ‛. [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 18:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ฮ̂า#rfv-notice-skb-|ฮ̂า]] ==
 
Saek.
 
No evidence is presented that this spelling has ever been used, nor any explanation of why any recorded pronunciation with the alleged meaning 'five' should be written in this extraordinary manner. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 17:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 
:This is correct written word and there are a lot of evidences. Since Seak has '''six''' tones  (or seven but one is for fixing the right tone) so they need two more tone marks. I have all Saek orthography rules, dictionaries, and lores. They are defined many years ago. [https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1zJb7G2hE6339s8IAf3njX799GfoKA6U2?usp=sharing] See Fulltext.pdf page 62 for description. If you stick only with western authors, you won't see these. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 01:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== Prematurely-created Mariupol Greek Greek spellings ==
 
[[φυκρύμ#Mariupol Greek|φυκρύμ]] and [[γιαλό#Mariupol Greek|γιαλό]].
 
Mariupol Greek.  (As will probably be obvious from the section header.)
 
I created those by transliterating the Cyrillic entries for [[фукрум#Mariupol Greek|фукрум]] and [[яло#Mariupol Greek|яло]], respectively, using the table in [[WT:GRK-MAR TR]] to convert Cyrillic into Greek script, assuming, rather naively, that this was a mechanical one-to-one conversion following the rules in the table.🤦‍♀️
 
[[User talk:Whoop whoop pull up#Mariupol Greek|I was quickly disabused of that notion.]]
 
Hence, listing the two ones I ''did'' create until advised otherwise here, to determine whether I managed to accidentally create the attested correct Greek spelling for these ones. [[User:Whoop whoop pull up|Whoop whoop pull up]]  15:28, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
: {{re|Whoop whoop pull up}} I have found and added a quote for both. Mariupol Greek seems to have a surprisingly large corpus of books published in the '30s - makes me rethink the fact that we lemmatise at Cyrillic. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 16:54, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
:: It has been brought to my attention by {{ping|Poursa0}} on Discord that this isn't Mariupol Greek, but rather Demotic. So we're back to square one. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 06:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[นกเขา#rfv-sense-notice-th-|นกเขา]] ==
 
Thai. Rfv-sense: ''Accipiter'' spp.
 
Word might mean "dove", according to Hippietrail. I looked up all five ''Accipiter'' species found in Thailand, according to Avibase, which has vernacular names in many languages, and didn't find any Thai terms. Some English vernacular names for predatory birds contain the name of their prey in their name, like [[goshawk]] and [[sparrowhawk]]. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 13:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 
:Non-domestic fowl normally prefix the classificatory word {{m|th|นก|t=bird}} to their names, as obscurely mentioned in the entry for {{m|th|เขา}}.  So Hippietrail is right about the word meaning 'dove', and googling finds plenty of confirmation for the meaning 'columbid'.  However, if one looks up นกเขา in the Thai Royal Institute Dictionary, one will find it defined roughly as ''Accipiter'', with the species ''A. trivirgatus'', ''A. badius'' and ''A. gularis'' getting specific mention.  The connection seems to be a similarity in plumage.
:: Fixed typo - spurious trailing no nu (น). --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 20:22, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
 
:The hawk seems to be normally called เหยี่ยวนกเขา, as can be seen in the Thai Wikipedia at https://th.wiktionary.org/wiki/เหยี่ยวนกเขา.  Quiet Quentin's found one book with that longer word; and I've found a newspaper website page at https://www.matichon.co.th/prachachuen/prachachuen-scoop/news_1716240 - I'm not sure how good that it is; and an example in the Bible at https://www.bible.com/th/bible/174/JOB.39.26.THSV11.  I couldn't find any examples of just นกเขา for 'hawk'. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 00:26, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[dwyngwr#rfv-notice-oui-|Some Old Uyghur lemmas]] ==
 
{{col3|oui|collapse=0
|dwyngwr
|kʾlmʾk
|mynk
|pwrqʾn
|pylmʾk
|pʾdwk
|qʾyʾ
|tnkry
|twyrkčʾ
|tʾqyγw
|tʾš
|yw"t
|ywl
|ywltwz
|ywγrwt
|ʾdkw
|ʾwlwš
|ʾwyγwr
|ʾyčmʾk
|ʾʾt
|ʾβ
}}
 
21 Old Uyghur lemmas. These were all added by {{ping|Anylai}} back in 2017/18, though all but one are unsourced. {{m|oui|ʾβ}} is sourced, but the one that's available online uses a completely different orthography. Nothing shows up on Google, from what I've been able to tell.
 
It would also be good to bring any of these that can be verified in line with the rest of the language by converting them to the Old Uyghur script. It's understandable why these weren't, though, given it was only added to Unicode in 2021. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 21:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]]: I did a few of these but I got bored. I think they all exist. One way to find citations is to go to [https://vatec2.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/vatecasp/query.htm the VATEC "corpus location query form"] and enter the term (replacing each [[ʾ|right half ring]] with a question mark, because otherwise it won't work). You then get a list of uses in texts and can click on the bolded chocolate-colored link to see the context, translation, etc. Let me know if you find one you cannot easily find attestations for using this method.
:It's also possible to search for them on Google or Google Books, replacing the right half rings with apostrophes. Unfortunately, a lot of the Google Books hits only show partial context, and there's no translation available to confirm the meaning, etc. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 03:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[хаган#rfv-notice-mn-|хаган]] ==
 
Mongolian. Not found in any dictionaries. Cognate with {{m+|en|khan}} and {{m|en|khagan}}. Appears to be a naive transliteration of {{m+|mn|ᠬᠠᠭᠠᠨ}} going by [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%BD&diff=24250433&oldid=24250269&diffmode=source#Mongolian this diff], but you can't convert between the two systems like that. The correct conversion is {{m|mn|хаан}}, which we already have an entry for. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 02:40, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[sirom#rfv-notice-cel-gau-|sirom]] ==
 
Gaulish. Needs a source or quote to show attestation. — [[User:Surjection|S]]  08:36, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[₮#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|₮]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense: {{tq|The Tether cryptocurrency, USDT.}}
 
Not seeing any uses of this as a currency symbol. Seems to be more of a branding thing. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 12:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
:I don't know but it is in Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tether_(cryptocurrency)] --[[User:Hekaheka|Hekaheka]] ([[User talk:Hekaheka|talk]]) 12:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
::It is, but just because we can source them saying it's their currency sign doesn't mean it's actually used as one. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 14:13, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[-изм#rfv-notice-mn-|-изм]] ==
 
Mongolian. Not convinced this is a suffix in Mongolian. There are borrowed terms like {{m|mn|буддизм}} and {{m|mn|коммунизм}}, but they come from Russian. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 14:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 
:Are there any native terms, namely (/possibly) neologisms, that use the suffix? How aware are speakers that this is a suffix? [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 21:34, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:: Between ''Монгол хэлний зөв бичих дүрмийн журамласан толь'' and ''Большой академический монгольско-русский словарь'' I've found 50 - all of them are Russian borrowings. However, I've found evidence of {{m|mn|цэдэнбализм||{{w|Yumjaagiin Tsedenbal|Tsedenbalism}}}}, which I suspect was coined in Mongolian. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 23:18, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
:::Tagging @[[User:Bathrobe|Bathrobe]], who may be able to comment on this. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 14:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[𣀟]] ==
{{movedto|WT:RFVCJK}}
 
= September 2022 =
 
== [[kakaq#rfv-notice-pam-|kakaq]] ==
 
Kapampangan. Created by {{ping|Fringilla}} and tagged for speedy deletion by {{ping|Ysrael214}}, who wrote: "Whoever wrote this didn't know that q is a glottal stop and not meant to be written". [[WT:APAM]] says that word-final glottal stops do not exist in the language, but this seems to be contradicted by the reference given in the entry, a dictionary containing many words ending in "q", which is employed to represent a "glottal catch". None of our other Kapampangan entries have a "q" in the orthography as far as I can tell, but I feel like this should at least wait out its 30 days. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 10:25, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] You see Kapampangan doesn't have a standard orthography as of date, more so on the date that the dictionary was written (1971). That dictionary made q to be explicit so that readers will know where the glottal stop is and properly speak the word. I moved {{m|pam|kakaq}} to {{m|pam|kaka}}, as it is the prescribed orthography by The Languages of David J. Peterson at [[Project:About Kapampangan]] (''Batiauan'' Orthography, only made 1997) or more correctly, kákâ to show pronunciation. The 'q' from that dictionary is equivalent to marking the previous vowel with a circumflex accent.
:[[Project:About Kapampangan]] is also wrong with the following:
:* Kapampangan not using glottal stops at the end of words (though it is correct that it does not use glottal stops mid-word, glottal stops disappears at the end of a word if it is used in between a sentence)
:* Circumflex accent is not used (only grave accent is not used in ''Batiauan'' orthography but circumflex is used to show glottal stop after the syllable)
:Thanks! [[User:Ysrael214|Ysrael214]] ([[User talk:Ysrael214|talk]]) 14:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
::@[[User:Ysrael214|Ysrael214]] thanks for the extensive response. I'm pinging {{ping|TagaSanPedroAko}} who wrote [[WT:APAM]] - it sounds like that page needs updating. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 00:11, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[:Category:Inupiaq numerals]] ==
 
The Inupiaq numeral system presented here is consistent with the vigesimal system of this language for small numbers, but seems rather strange for very large numbers in the millions, billions or trillions. It seems that none (except for the smallest ones) is attested outside https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iñupiaq_numerals. [[Special:Contributions/193.54.167.164|193.54.167.164]] 13:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:(@[[User:Kwamikagami|Kwamikagami]] since you added them) Honestly a very interesting number system, reminds me a lot of the Yorùbá number system. I looked for the source that's listed, "MacLean (2014) ''Iñupiatun Uqaluit Taniktun Sivuninit'' / ''Iñupiaq to English Dictionary'', p. 840 ff", but I've been unable to without buying it or going to a physical library. I did find, though, "{{cite-book|title=Iñupiatun Uqaluit Taniktun Sivunniuġutiŋit North Slope Iñupiaq to English Dictionary|author=Edna Ahgeak MacLean|year=2012|publisher=Alaska Native Languages Archives|location=University of Alaska Fairbanks}}", which seems to be a precursor to the prior source, and ''does'' have all the numbers cited. However, I don't have the energy right now to add them to every entry, so I'll leave it to y'all to decide if it's officially cited or not. [[User:AG202|AG202]] ([[User talk:AG202|talk]]) 14:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
::These are the numbers taught in schools. Though the language is moribund. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 19:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
::The large numbers certainly aren't traditional. I imagine the language was extended to cover large numbers so that it would be adequate for science and mathematics. Something all languages with large numerals have done. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 04:40, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[айморт#rfv-notice-koi-|айморт]] ==
 
Komi-Permyak. Not in Kuznecov (1946) nor Lytkin (1962), all google books results (all mentions, by the way) seem to be Komi-Zyrian. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 22:20, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== Romani Swadesh List ==
 
Hi, I am a native Romani speaker of the Lovari and the East Slovak dialects, and I can't help notice that the Swadesh list for the language is very misleading and full of errors, and should be improved upon. Firstly it lists the Swadesh list as a 'Romani' Swadesh List, when this couldn't be further from the truth. To begin with my points it should be noted that Romani isn't a standardised language, and that it's dialects feature many words from their contact languages, even basic ones such as on this Swadesh list, whereas many maintain native words for these words which this list seems to ignore, and tries to paint an image of Romani being a sole language which will be illustrated in my points.
 
Firstly, the lexemes within the list are solely confined to only one dialect, the Kalderash one, as seen by the list having words for simple concepts such as 'some' as borrowings from Romanian (which highly influenced Kalderash). This paints the image that Romani has highly borrowed words from Romanian when this is incorrect as only some dialects have, and many use native Romani terms for words such as 'some' which a simple visit to the ROMLEX linguistic database can display.
 
Secondly, the name itself is misleading. If the list is based of off Kalderash Romani words and phonology, it should be annotated so and the name of the Swadesh list should be changed to 'Kalderash Romani' or even 'Vlax Romani'. If a 'Romani Swadesh List' is created which I will discuss in my last paragraph, using native oiklitic (words before the migration to Europe) which are consisted of native Indian terms and loanwords from Armenian, Iranic and Byzantine Greek. Kalderash has unfortunately lost many native words for basic terms that the vast majority of dialects preserve, such as using 'skurto' for short in the Swadesh list, when many other dialects maintain a native 'xarno' (from Persian) which isn't featured on the list.
 
My third issue is the alphabet. It is based of off Courthiade's Romani alphabet, which has been adopted by the World Romani Congress. Now it may seem using this alphabet will be beneficiary then but I disagree, as I mentioned that Romani isn't a standardised language, and in transcription of the language and its many unintelligible dialects by Roma activists and academics, foreign scholars and daily language speakers a form resembling Pan-Vlax alphabet is used, with speakers not using letters such as 'θ' 'ʒ' and 'ç' and many using carons such as 'š' instead of 'ś' and other letters. Therefore, I suggest the language should be transcribed using the Pan-Vlax alphabet instead as come up with by Ronald Lee. The alphabet phonemically helps transcribe most dialects of Romani, and is used by Academics such as Ian Hancock, Nigla Boretzky and Joszef Vekerdi who specialise on the language, and by websites who transcribe words in the language such as ROMLEX.
 
Lastly, many of the words on the dialect lack attestation, such as the word 'pedo' for animal which isn't found on ROMLEX or any other academic resources, and many dialects use Slavic terms for 'animal' or come up with neologisms surrounding the verb 'to live'.
 
Therefore my solution is to revise the Swadesh list, which has been done for the Ossetian swadesh list which features an old and new, better and more researched list. It also features two columns for it's two main dialects, Iron and Digor, which could be used for Romani to represent it's dialects, but I would find this hard to do as some dialects are more attested than others, and instead I think using words etymologically researched by academics to be native should be used instead, in a Pan-Vlax alphabet. Therefore, I conclude that the list is in serious need of revampment and it should be redone, with sources such as ROMLEX, Nigla Boretzky's dictionary of Balkan Dialects and Vekerdi's dictionary being the main resources of word finding. [[User:Anavaline|Anavaline]] ([[User talk:Anavaline|talk]]) 17:38, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:{{re|Anavaline}} Be my guest, I'm pretty sure you're our only Romani editor at the moment. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 13:08, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
: {{ping|Anavaline}}: having borrowed forms in a list isn't wrong, per se, but in this case the lack of other data does give a wrong impression. In general, it's better to have more varieties in these than fewer, even if some varieties have gaps. With more data, it will show the kind of things that you're describing verbally here. That's the whole point of Swadesh lists. They're far from perfect, but that's what they're for. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 13:26, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[basisdemocraat#rfv-notice-nl-|basisdemocraat]] ==
 
Dutch. {{m|nl|basisdemocratie|Basisdemocratie}} is in use, but this isn't. See also [[Project:Tea_room/2022/September#basisdemocraat]]. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 09:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[daeuh#rfv-notice-za-|daeuh]] ==
 
Zhuang. Etymology 2: "seaweed; algae" and "green (as seaweed or algae)". Added by {{ping|Octahedron80}}. I could not find this in 壮汉词汇 or 壮汉英词典. It might be a misinterpretation of 古壮字字典, where {{m|za||daeuh}} is given as a syllable that can be used with {{m|za||raez}} in the word {{m|za|daeuhraez}}; it does not show any independent use of {{m|za||daeuh}}. — [[User:Justinrleung|justin(r)leung]]  14:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:I believe it is from your source gave me in 2019, where I saw sawndips, that is now unavailable. My sources do not state it either. ''daeuhraez'' might be the right word. (and how is it formed?) --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 00:10, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:I found ''daeuh''=blue (historical blue includes green) in Nong Zhuang [https://www.webonary.org/zhuangwen?s=daeuh&search=Search&key=&tax=-1&search_options_set=1&match_whole_words=1&displayAdvancedSearchName=0&lang=en] that should not be included in Zhuang; they are kind of different languages. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 00:12, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:: {{re|Octahedron80}} I wonder if all the Zhuang varieties should be put under "Zhuang" (like "Chinese") or if we should actually separate them. I've been assuming that Zhuang functions the same way as Chinese in that it is a macrolanguage with all Zhuang varieties under it (with the appropriate labels for the regions). For example {{m|za|raemx}} seems to include most Zhuang varieties. — [[User:Justinrleung|justin(r)leung]]  23:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 
:::Nong Zhuang, Dai Zhuang, Zuojiang Zhuang have more consonants and vowels than Standard Zhuang. Northern Zhuang (in Northern Tai) and Southern Zhuang (in Central Tai) are not the same group; it is obviously not able to unify. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 01:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[umpe#rfv-notice-xnt-|umpe]] ==
 
Narragansett, "string". I don't see this in ''{{w|A Key into the Language of America}}'', which is the definitive source for this language. The only gloss involving the word "string" is [https://books.google.com/books?id=wOfpAPRxlVYC&dq=string&pg=PA157 "enomphómmin"] ("to thread or string"). Where did this come from? Is it reconstructed? Is there a verifiable cognate in {{cog|wam|-}} or any other {{cog|alg|-}} language? (Was not able to find in the {{cog|wam|-}}-language ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=cu4NAAAAIAAJ&pg=329&dq=string Natick Dictionary]'', searching for 'string', 'rope', 'cord', 'thread'.) [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 02:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
:According to the edit history, the entry was created because it was mentioned in the etymology of [[[[wampumpeag]]]] and [[[[wampum]]]]. Various English texts about etymology do give ''umpe'' or ''ompe'' as a word for string [of beads] in "Algonquian", usually specifically Narragansett or Massachusett, but obviously we need to see if it actually exists (on its own) in those languages. Wikipedia points to Dictionary.com for the statement that the PA form of ''wampumpeag'' was *wa·p-a·py-aki, so we're looking for a reflex of [[Reconstruction:Proto-Algonquian/-a·py]], but while I can obviously find reflexes of the longer term *wa·p-a·py-aki / cognates of ''wampumpeag'', like Abenaki ''wôbôbi'', I haven't had time to check if there are any likely reflexes of *''apy''. It wouldn't surprise me if ''umpe'' only exists in the compound ''wampumpe-'' and not as a separate word (both *''apy'' and its reflexes seem to often exist only in compounds). [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 09:34, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
::If it's not directly attested in Roger Williams (or other colonial writings that document the language, if any exist), I think treating it in the reconstruction namespace is the way to go. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 22:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[бирмингемчүүд#rfv-notice-mn-|бирмингемчүүд]] ==
 
Mongolian. It means [[Brummies]] (as in people who live in [[Birmingham]] in the UK) - for some reason only the plural was added. Completely impossible to verify. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 01:05, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[gihgiokdienh#rfv-notice-za-|gihgiokdienh]] ==
 
Zhuang. From http://www.jiu60.com/hoiz/ , but not found in 壮汉词汇 (Sawloih Cuengh Gun). Also not found in 广西民族报. --'''[[User:沈澄心|沈]][[User talk:沈澄心|澄]][[Special:Contributions/沈澄心|心]][[Special:EmailUser/沈澄心|✉]]''' 11:56, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[chaeux#rfv-notice-zzj-|chaeux]] ==
 
=== [[cweg#rfv-notice-zzj-|cweg]] ===
 
=== [[pyaeuh#rfv-notice-zzj-|pyaeuh]] ===
Zuojiang Zhuang. [[User talk:TongcyDai#Zuojiang Zhuang|Copied from Wikipedia]]. --'''[[User:沈澄心|沈]][[User talk:沈澄心|澄]][[Special:Contributions/沈澄心|心]][[Special:EmailUser/沈澄心|✉]]''' 12:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 
=== [[koenz]] ===
Zuojiang Zhuang.  Mentioned in [[vunz#Zhuang]]. --'''[[User:沈澄心|沈]][[User talk:沈澄心|澄]][[Special:Contributions/沈澄心|心]][[Special:EmailUser/沈澄心|✉]]''' 13:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ဗၞိက်#rfv-sense-notice-mnw-|ဗၞိက်]] ==
 
Mon. Rfv-sense: Can't find any sense in Shorto 1962 that looks like "axis centre". {{unsigned|RichardW57m|12:49, 29 September 2022 (UTC)}}
 
'''Delete'''.  I think I've found the source of this entry.  Immediately below the entry for {{m|mnw||ဗၞိက်}} in Halliday 1922, there is an entry which in our style is {{m|mnw|ဗၞိဟ်|ts=Penih|t=axis, centre|pos = n.}}.  Now, I can't find another once-printed dictionary to confirm it, but Halliday gives a derived term and Dr Intobesa, in the Mon The Languages of David J. Peterson, gives it as a translation of English 'centre', so what we have is a typo and a failure to perceive commas. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 18:35, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 
{{ping|咽頭べさ}}: Is {{l|mnw|ဗဏိက်}} another spelling of the word meaning 'trade'?  You put it under this apparent typo instead. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 18:41, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 
===References===
se. --[[User:Octahedron80|Octahedron80]] ([[User talk:Octahedron80|talk]]) 02:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 
:I found the word in ไคเภ็ก [https://vajirayana.org/%E0%B9%84%E0%B8%84%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%A0%E0%B9%87%E0%B8%84-%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%90%E0%B8%A1%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%AB%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%A3%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%87%E0%B9%82%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%81%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%B0%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%A9%E0%B8%A2%E0%B9%8C/%E0%B9%91%E0%B9%90]. (ฮอกฮี is [https://th.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B8%9D%E0%B8%B9%E0%B8%8B%E0%B8%B5], transcribed from Hokkien.) Outside ไคเภ็ก: the Thai wikipedia page for นฺหวี่วา [https://th.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%BA%E0%B8%AB%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B5%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B2], and [https://www.bloggang.com/m/viewdiary.php?id=moonfleet&month=02-2008&date=02&group=18&gblog=1], [https://m.facebook.com/SapaiChinese/photos/a.289215201768100/805162716840010/], [http://heaven-sign.blogspot.com/2013/12/blog-post_30.html?m=1], [https://www.car.chula.ac.th/display7.php?bib=b1846914] (spelling?). Not sure how much this word is used (instead of cite)? [[User:Thriftypapaya|Thriftypapaya]] ([[User talk:Thriftypapaya|talk]]) 17:30, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[⚦#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|⚦]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense: {{tq|androgyne, intersex (especially when male in appearance)}}. This has been/is the target of some edit-warring which is probably best solved by adding supporting quotations. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 21:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[⚦#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|⚦]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense: {{tq|transgender}}. This has been/is the target of some edit-warring which is probably best solved by adding supporting quotations. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 21:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 
:Since we only have Unicode as support, it would indeed be good to have some supporting instances. I went through the Unicode history, and it was added in version 4.1. There were two revisions to the proposal by Michael Everson, the latest being L2/03-364 (N2663). He doesn't give an illustration for this use, only says (re. an illustration of its alchemical use) that
::''this symbol is also used now to indicate "transgendered sexuality" by some members of the LGBT community.''
:I'm tempted to delete this definition as being unsupported, except that the Unicode chart does say "= transgender". Indeed, I did delete it, only to have someone else restore it. Personally, I don't think the Unicode chart is sufficient evidence for a The Languages of David J. Peterson definition.
:PS. As evidence for the unreliability of Unicode, note that the Unicode chart used to say that [[⚥]] was "= hermaphroditic (in entomology)", based on Everson's proposal, until I pointed out the error and they changed it to "(in botany)" this year. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 21:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
::you know the unicode charts are used on dozens of wiki pages in multiple different languages, I understand its not the be all end all but still seems silly to only be making a big deal about it on this page, especially since its been in the unicode like this since 2005 with no issues. You dont think its a little weird to have its unicode symbol and link right underneath the main picture of the page while saying its not good enough?
::I'm not sure how the definition is unsupported though, a pretty quick search online shows that its not uncommon for people to use the sign as an alternative to the main transgender one. I'm not sure what kind of quote you guys want, its not like theres one voice to turn to that has the final say on this stuff, but to pretend like its not commonly used as a synonym to the main transgender symbol seems intentinally ignorant [[User:Kollie78|Kollie78]] ([[User talk:Kollie78|talk]]) 10:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
:::A [https://www.google.com/search?q=⚦&tbm=bks&lr=lang_en&hl=en Google Books search] does not turn up much. Instead of imputing intestinal ignorance to other editors, why don't you supply pointers to citable sources using the symbol in this sense?  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 07:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
::::I dont know what kind of results you're looking for, but you arent going to find any definitve source from a book on this topic, the more commonly used transgender symbol doesnt really pull up anything either from a google books search.
::::https://anunnakiray.com/all-the-gender-symbols/
::::https://twitter.com/abbychavastein/status/1099739367164260359
::::https://www.amazon.com/Transgender-Self-Inking-Stamping-Crafting-Planners/dp/B09853BBWG?th=1
::::https://www.etsy.com/listing/1037401247/male-with-stroke-sign-transgender-genderhttps://web.archive.org/web/20210601020917/http://transgendersociety.yolasite.com/history-of-transgender-symbolism.php [[User:Kollie78|Kollie78]] ([[User talk:Kollie78|talk]]) 08:09, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[tééh łį́į́ʼ#rfv-notice-nv-|tééh łį́į́ʼ]] ==
 
Navajo. An IP keeps changing this from "sea horse" to "zebra", the latter of which was removed {{diff|65554058||here}} pursuant to [[Talk:Nahatʼeʼiitsoh_bikéyahdę́ę́ʼ_biyázhí_neiyéhé|this RFV]]. They've also created [[Project:Tea_room/2022/November#correction|this tea room thread]]. Can somebody please look into the attestability of both terms? Thanks. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 02:36, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 
:Pinging {{ping|Eirikr}} as the only active user knowledgeable in Navajo (that I know of). — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 02:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
:[https://archive.org/details/TheNavahoLanguage/page/n497/mode/2up ''The Navaho Language'' (1972)] by {{w|Robert W. Young|Young}} & Morgan has this as "zebra", but it looks like it might not have a space between the components. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 02:43, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
::[https://archive.org/details/navajolanguagegr0000youn/page/704/mode/2up?q=zebra This 1980 edition], by the same authors, puts a space between the components, and gives three senses "water horse (mythological animal),  zebra, sea[-]horse". This [https://archive.org/details/navaholanguage0000robe/page/188/mode/2up?q=zebra 1971 edition] only gives "zebra". [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 02:52, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
:::Thank you, I restored the zebra sense and added the spaceless alt-form (though that may have been a mistake, I'd prefer to wait for someone knowledgeable in Navajo before doing more edits). The other IP user also pointed to additional usable sources in the tea room thread. I added an older version (1943) of Young & Morgan to the entry because that is conveniently citable off of Google Books using your script. I don't know whether there's a standard {{tl|R:nv:...}} template for this reference. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 03:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
::::I'm tempted to add {{tl|syn|nv|łį́į́ʼ noodǫ́ǫzii|lit=the striped horse}} based on [https://archive.org/details/navajolanguagegr0000youn/page/518/mode/2up?q=zebra this reference]. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 03:31, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 
* Belatedly, {{ping|Fytcha}}, thanks for the ping, but I would not have been of much help here.  I've studied Navajo, but only a little from books and audio, and I have no contacts with native speakers.  ‑‑ [[User:Eirikr|Eiríkr Útlendi]] │ 21:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[schrongen#rfv-notice-nl-|schrongen]] ==
 
Dutch, tagged by Surj. This looks supremely suspect, nothing in any of the dictionaries at either the GTB or the eWND. The speculative suggested Gaulish etymon is another red flag and so is the anomalous phonotactics. Google Books offers nothing but scannos.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  10:54, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
: Pinging {{ping|Thadh|Rua|Morgengave|030NogBeterHe|Mnemosientje}} for feedback.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  10:57, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
::{{re|Lingo Bingo Dingo}} Never heard of it. Google Books does give a German verb apparently, but that has nothing to do with Dutch. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 14:15, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
::: All German hits that I've seen are scannos of what is correctly {{m|de|schwygen}}. OCR is bad at Fraktur. Searching for finite verb forms of *schrongen gives nothing but more scannos. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 14:54, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
::{{re|Lingo Bingo Dingo}} Nothing shows up in the usual literature, the closest is a hit for the singular noun "schrong" (appears only once in 1732, seems to mean "excision") in the WNT [[User:030NogBeterHe|030NogBeterHe]] ([[User talk:030NogBeterHe|talk]]) 14:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[thân binh#rfv-sense-notice-vi-|thân binh]] ==
 
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: partisans. [[User:MuDavid|MuDavid]] 栘𩿠 ([[User Talk:MuDavid|talk]]) 03:12, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ကရေင်#rfv-sense-notice-mnw-|ကရေင်]] ==
 
Mon. Rfv-sense: Verbal senses.
 
I can't find these senses in Halliday, Stevens or Shorto.  Curiously, they are a coherent set of the senses of {{m+|my|မှိန်း}}. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 19:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Schnullerbeißer#rfv-notice-de-|Schnullerbeißer]] ==
 
German, tagged by IP, not listed. Previously in RFD, see [[Talk:Schnullerbeißer]]. [[User:Jberkel|Jberkel]] 16:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
:Listed in the www.wortbedeutung.info dictionary as part of a long list of words for someone who performs oral sex. The dictionary does not have a separate page for it, and so the much narrower definition we have does not appear. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 18:26, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
::wortbedeutung.info takes information from wiktionary, cp. [https://www.wortbedeutung.info/intern:kontakt/ Info]. --18:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC) {{unsigned|93.220.62.203}}
:::Yes, it's basically an SEO-optimized version of The Languages of David J. Peterson. I don't think there's much hope citing this one, it's obscure (and pre-Internet) slang, and the kind of subcultural texts where this might be found are usually not indexed or part of corpora. – [[User:Jberkel|Jberkel]] 19:07, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[linggam#rfv-sense-notice-tl-|linggam]] ==
 
Tagalog. Rfv-sense: Needs three attestations for this definition. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 05:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 
: To clarify: this RFV is for sense 1: lingam. [[User:Equinox|Equinox]] [[User_talk:Equinox|◑]] 19:12, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[linggam#rfv-sense-notice-tl-|linggam]] ==
 
Tagalog. Rfv-sense: Needs three attestations for this definition. This time for the definition "happy ending". --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 05:28, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[oreeginate#rfv-notice-sco-|oreeginate]] ==
 
Scots for "originate". [[User:Equinox|Equinox]] [[User_talk:Equinox|◑]] 19:11, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
 
:[https://books.google.com/books?id=cjHxyYi5issC&pg=PA186&dq=%22oreeginated%22 Here it is] in an English novel, but spoken by the character "Mr. Goodie, a Scots gentleman"; [https://books.google.com/books?id=9x4SftcItawC&dq=%22oreeginated%22&pg=PA73 another similar example], in which the word is uttered by a "Scotsman". Do we want to count these? Seems dubious. The word also appears on the Scots Wikipedia, but that might not mean much in light of [[w:Scots_Wikipedia#Controversy|the 2020 revelation]] that much of the wiki was written by non-Scots-speaking users; not that we would even want to cite Wikipedias in general. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 03:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
::I would like it if we had a policy that quoted speech within a novel does not count as attestation, since it's eye dialect at best, and there are also novels featuring small children, characters with speech impediments, and talking animals, which could allow us to flood the dictionary with entries like [[wowwipop]]  .... but there is no such policy, and we have allowed words like this before, such as [[gonnegtion]]. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 22:59, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Heyorhiya#rfv-notice-tl-|Heyorhiya]] ==
 
{{ping|Makisig Chua}} Needs attestation. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 14:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
 
:This is on tl.wikipedia, and a small number of other websites (that may have taken it from WP). There are also a handful of Twitter hits, none of which are particularly convincing. Nothing on Google Books/Scholar/Groups or Issuu. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 06:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Heorhiya#rfv-notice-tl-|Heorhiya]] ==
 
Tagalog. {{ping|Makisig Chua}} Needs attestation. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 14:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
 
:Similar to the above, didn't find much convincing evidence. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 07:31, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[egemonia#rfv-notice-lij-|egemonia]] ==
 
Ligurian. It's highly plausible that a Ligurian speaker would say {{m|it|egemonia}} if they wanted to say "hegemony", since all Ligurian speakers today are also speakers of standard Italian, and use of ''dialetto stretto'' is on the decline throughout peninsula. However, I wasn't able to find this word in the three dictionaries of Genoese that I checked: Olivieri (1851), Casaccia (1876), Frisoni & Gazzo (1910), nor was I able to find any published texts written in Ligurian that used the word. The Ligurian Wikipedia does use it, and the creator of the entry stated that this was where they got it from, but that's not sufficient attestation per [[WT:ATTEST]]. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 00:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[jabło#rfv-notice-zlw-opl-|jabło]] ==
 
Old Polish.
Not in SSp and doesn't even appear in any Middle Polish dictionary.
 
All derived terms in Old Polish come from jabłko, not jabło. The only mention of this word being Old Polish is SJP1900, which does not source it's reference. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 23:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
: Almost certain that one's wrong. It's also mentioned in Krasnowolski and Niedźwiedzki's ''Słownik staropolski'', which lists just about any word that fell out of usage as "Old Polish" (charitably speaking, it has ''different criteria than ours''). Probably an addition guided by that dictionary. If it's not in SStp, I don't know where else. [[User:Hythonia|Hythonia]] ([[User talk:Hythonia|talk]]) 10:10, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
* Source: {{R:sla:ESSJa|*ablo|41|1}} --[[User:ZomBear|ZomBear]] ([[User talk:ZomBear|talk]]) 22:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
** {{ping|ZomBear}} ESSJa is not a good source here. I usually believe ESSJa but Sławski stated that the only dictionary that mentions this word does not give the primary source. But I would keep it as word is attested in Slovincian and Old Czech. [[User:Sławobóg|Sławobóg]] ([[User talk:Sławobóg|talk]]) 23:06, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
*** {{ping|Sławobóg}} I'm not a fan of adding such words just because their supposed ancestors have descendants in other languages. Proto-Slavic *kradějь for example has a Slovincian descendant, but Polish [[kradziej]] was first attested only in the nineteenth century. We have a mention in ESSJa, but I'd like to see an actual Old Polish citation. [[User:Hythonia|Hythonia]] ([[User talk:Hythonia|talk]]) 10:39, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 
= December 2022 =
 
== [[gök#rfv-sense-notice-sv-|gök]] ==
 
Swedish. Rfv-sense: Request for verification of {{m|sv|gök}} with sense ''"penis"''. Possibly local dialect. Otherwise subject for deletion. --[[User:Christoffre|Christoffre]] ([[User talk:Christoffre|talk]]) 08:56, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:This might have some basis in fact, as it's mentioned here:
:{{quote-book|sv|pageurl=https://archive.org/details/jordenssmartaste0000lind/page/188|title=w:sv:Jordens smartaste ord|author={{w|Fredrik Lindström (writer)|Fredrik Lindström}}|publisher=Albert Bonniers Forlag|isbn=9100580368|year=2002|page=188|passage=Men även ''göken'' kan förekomma i de här sammanhangen; det finns exempel från svenska dialekter där ord för gök även har betydelsen 'penis' (notera även ordet ''göka'', 'ha samlag', som jag återkommer till).}}
:But we need to find something more substantial. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 02:13, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Блок#rfv-sense-notice-ru-|Блок]] ==
 
Russian. Rfv-sense: "Block Island". I can find use in Russian of {{m|ru|остров Блок}} and {{m|ru|Блок-Айленд}}, but does this usage extend to {{m|ru|Блок}} on its own? In a quick search I wasn't able to find e.g. "на Блоке". Also, even if this sense does exist, someone should check the animacy (the word is currently marked as animate, but place names in Russian are generally inanimate). [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 00:18, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:The Russian Wikipedia seems to have article titles for all but one of the New England islands indexed as simple titles, as seen at [[:w:ru:Категория:Острова_Род-Айленда]]. Presumably the same is true outside New England. Whether this reflects actual speech in Russian, or an idiosyncracy of the Russian Wikipedia, I dont know. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 23:59, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:Don’t these uses of “Блок” in the combination “остров Блок” count as attestations, just like in English the use of “Bali” in the combination “the island of Bali” should qualify?  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 11:32, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
::Hmm, yeah, I did find use in such contexts but wasn't sure it counted. If Russian-language editors think it should count, then I'm fine with it.
::Another example where "остров" is an essential part of the name is {{m|ru|остров Принца Эдуарда}}, and it would be weird to put that under {{m|ru|Принца Эдуарда}}. There are also {{m|ru|остров Врангеля}} and {{m|ru|остров Колгуев}}. I ''think'' {{m|ru|остров Блок}} is similar to these in that it is always preceded by остров and the word Блок itself doesn't get inflected. But I could be wrong. A dissimilarity with these other examples is that they have the name of the island in the genitive, but OTOH two of them are originally surnames, which also applies here. [[Special:Contributions/98.170.164.88|98.170.164.88]] 13:08, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[iisin#rfv-notice-bej-|iisin]] ==
 
[[w:Beja language]] "[[hippopotamus]]"
 
inflection line has it as a noun form. Contributor seems to make entries in many languages. I assume it's an LDL. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 16:29, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:I've expanded the entry. It's a noun, though it seems to be derived from a Nubian genitive form. [[User:Ivadon|Ivadon]] ([[User talk:Ivadon|talk]]) 17:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
:I'm a linguist who works on Beja. The word is real. Perhaps just as importantly, it's documented: It can be found in EM Roper's 1928 ''Tu Beḍawiɛ: An Elementary Handbook for the Use of Sudan Government Officials'' (155) and in Leo Reinisch's 1895 ''Wörterbuch der Beḍauye-Sprache'' (31). The Nubian etymology is plausible, but speculative. [[User:Pathawi|Pathawi]] ([[User talk:Pathawi|talk]]) 12:44, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[nữ cai trị#rfv-notice-vi-|nữ cai trị]] ==
 
Vietnamese. [[User:MuDavid|MuDavid]] 栘𩿠 ([[User Talk:MuDavid|talk]]) 02:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[сбиваться]] ==
 
Russian: I can't find references to either of those two meanings. The dictionaries I have available give the translations "to get lost", "to be astray". [[Special:Contributions/78.69.121.4|78.69.121.4]] 20:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
: {{re|78.69.121.4}} The senses given were right but it's hard to understand without a context and more examples. I've expanded a bit and added some usage examples for senses you may have doubts. It's a verb with many meanings. Also {{ping|Tetromino|Thadh|Benwing2}}: please see if it needs further improvement. --[[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 00:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== Various supposed Serbo-Croatian given names ==
 
Please see [[Project:Requests for verification/English#Slavic given names created by 2601:243:1400:74cf:896a:14b8:9f7f:8d7e]]. This is a cross-post because all of the entries have sections for both English and Serbo-Croatian, and the question is whether they exist at all or are completely made up. Thanks, [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 00:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ČR]], all meanings except the meaning "Czech Republic" ==
 
"ČR" is a well-established abbreviation for Česká repubilka, "Czech Republic" and this meaning absolutely prevails. The names of the other three republics do begin with the same letters in Czech language, but the frequency of the usage of those other republic names is extremely small compared to the frequency of the usage of "Czech Republic", so that the abbreviation ČR meaning "Chechen Republic” etc. would have to be explained in context. I sincerely doubt that the abbreviation "ČR" is used in the sense of Chechen Republic” etc. [[User:Amsavatar|Amsavatar]] ([[User talk:Amsavatar|talk]]) 16:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:(A helpful IP has added two cites to the sense [[ROC]] and one to the Chuvash Republic.) [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 04:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[ταῦρος#rfv-sense-notice-grc-|ταῦρος]] ==
 
Ancient Greek. Rfv-sense: “perhaps also [[ox]]”.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 08:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
:Does the fact it's used in the Septuagint to translate Hebrew {{m|he|שׁוֹר||ox|tr=šôr}} count? See e.g. Exod. 21:35, "{{lang-lite|grc|sc=Polyt|ἐὰν δὲ κερατίσῃ τινὸς ταῦρος τὸν '''ταῦρον''' τοῦ πλησίον, καὶ τελευτήσῃ, ἀποδώσονται τὸν '''ταῦρον'''}} {{...}}" in the LXX, "ox" in the [https://biblehub.com/exodus/21-35.htm vast majority of English translations] though Strong's glosses it as "ox, bull, a head of cattle" [https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h7794/wlc/wlc/0-1/]. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 13:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
:Seems this is also the case in the New Testament, without Hebrew interference: [https://biblehub.com/matthew/22-4.htm almost every translation] gives "oxen" for {{lang-lite|grc|sc=Polyt|ταῦροί}} in Matt. 22:4, cf. also [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=k8GgQqUxPgMC&pg=PA709 this reference]. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 19:12, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:I've added the quote and translation from the standard critical editions of Matthew and I've noted that Bauer's New Testament lexicon says the same thing about the word, so I'll call this '''cited'''. I've changed "perhaps" to a non-gloss note "chiefly as a sacrificial animal" per Bauer. A separate question, which might need further research, is whether the sense should be explicitly tagged as Koine. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 12:00, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 
::Thanks. A complication is that {{m+|en|ox}} has two distinguishable senses: (1) a male bovine, used as a draught animal, typically gelded – as such a hyponym of ''bull''; (2) any bovine animal – as such a hypernym of ''bull''. In Modern Greek, {{m|el|ταύρος}} is strictly a bull, so one wonders if this sense as a sacrificial animal is indeed specifically Koine.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 12:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 
::By [https://biblehub.com/leviticus/22-24.htm Lev. 22:24], a gelded bull could not be used as a sacrificial animal. Is that relevant here?  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 12:43, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Sǫʼtah Anah#rfv-notice-nv-|Sǫʼtah Anah]] ==
 
Navajo, meaning "Star Wars". The headword is given as "Sǫʼtah Anaaʼ", but the page title is "Sǫʼtah Anah". But are either of these even attested? And even if they are attested, do we really want an entry for this (cf. [[WT:NSE]], etc.)? [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 18:49, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:Apparently there is a Navajo dub of the original 1977 film, which may bolster the case for inclusion, although I'm still not sure. Which spelling did they use, btw? [https://www.geekgirlauthority.com/indigenerd-wire-preserving-navajo-language-through-star-wars/ This article] uses "Anah", but [https://www.starwars.com/news/navajo-language-star-wars-a-new-hope this one] uses "Anaaʼ" (in an image). [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 19:07, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[Υἱύς#rfv-notice-grc-|Υἱύς]] ==
 
According to [[υἱύς]], it is an early Attic form of {{m|grc|υἱός|t=son}}. But this capitalized entry is for a concept in Christianity, and Christian-era Greek is Koine, much later than early Attic. So is the u-stem form [[Υἱύς]] ever actually attested with the Christian meaning 'Son' {{gl|second person of the Christian Trinity}}? —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 21:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
:I highly doubt it is attestable for the Christian era. For that matter, though, is the treatment of {{m|grc|υἱύς}} itself actually correct? [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=rLAVAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA202 This source] lists {{m|grc|ὑύς}} and {{m|grc|ὕς}} as the Old Attic forms, {{m|grc|ὑός}} for later Attic and {{m|grc|υἱύς}} as Laconian (Doric). [https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=VA2yDQAAQBAJ&pg=106 This book] (third paragraph) similarly has Attic {{lang-lite|grc|sc=Polyt|ῡύς}}, but Doric {{lang-lite|grc|sc=Polyt|ϝͱιος}} with {{lang-lite|grc|sc=Polyt|υἱύς, υἱός}} as "normalized standard" forms. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 13:29, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:Note that the declensions shown are both of {{m|grc|Υἱός|tr=-}}. Apart from a minor alteration in the pronunciation and the inclusion of an Epic declension (which seems even more like an Epic mistake), the page is a pasted copy of the page [[Υἱός]]. Note in particular the weird “From earlier {{m|grc|υἱύς}}”. Remarkable fact: the IP who created this, created 437 new entries in a single edit session of 8 hours and 19 minutes, sometimes 5 or even 6 in the same minute (like at 11:57); quite a feat.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 13:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[reer darwiish#rfv-notice-so-|reer darwiish]] ==
 
Somali. I noticed this due to the RFV of [[Sool, Sanaag and Cayn#rfv-notice-en-|Sool, Sanaag and Cayn]] and wondered about the lack of capitalization, then noticed it gets no Books hits, and on the web capitalization is all over the place: Reer Darwiish, Reer darwiish, reer Darwiish, reer darwiish, ... [[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 22:20, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[चोदघर]], [[]] ==
 
Hindi-Urdu. Made up. —[[Special:Contribs/Svartava|Svārtava]] (''[[User talk:Svartava2|talk]]'') • 06:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:I can't find this. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 16:26, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[omm#rfv-notice-no-|omm]] ==
 
Norwegian, corresponding to {{m+|en|iff|t=if and only if}}. {{m+|da|omm}} failed RfV; {{m+|sv|omm}} looks citable. AFAICT the Norwegian term isn't easy to find, aside from one occurrence [[w:no:Bisubjunksjon|on Norwegian Wikipedia]], but maybe other examples will turn up. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 07:00, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 
== [[mağz#rfv-notice-tr-|mağz]] ==
 
Turkish.
Created by {{ping|Samubert96}}, marked for deletion by {{ping|Afb2011}}, then {{ping|Whitekiko}} added some references. Changing to RFV because you don't just mark pages for deletion like that. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 09:31, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 
:It looks like a transliteration of an Ottoman Turkish word. If it had survived into Modern Turkish, it should have become *{{m|tr|mağız}}. Neither form found in TDK.  --[[User:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 15:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
 
= January 2023 =
 
== Old Prussian terms ==
Old Prussian. Possible only (re-)constructed and not attested. --01:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[abglābti#rfv-notice-prg-|abglābti]] ===
:The attested forms may be ''abglopte'', ''abklopte'', and/or ''abgloyte''. Cf. [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/paieska/paieska/1?id=6], [https://archive.org/details/thesauruslingua00nessgoog/page/n14/mode/1up?view=theater]. Also see [https://books.google.com/books?id=aM8OAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA594 ''Altpreussische Monatsschrift'', vol. 7, p. 594], [https://books.google.com/books?id=K4BVAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA2-PA186&dq=abgloyte ''Chronicon Prussiae'']. I'm not exactly sure where all those variants came from. Different copies of the manuscript? Regardless, the exact spelling ''abglābti'' isn't attested. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 02:37, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:Additionally, Nesselmann as well as Pierson in Altpreußische Monatsschrift give another meaning. --10:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[be#rfv-notice-prg-|be]] ===
''bhe'' is attested with the meaning "and". There are other attested variations, but ''be'' doesn't seem to be one of them. [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/paieska/paieska/1?id=213] [https://archive.org/details/thesauruslingua00nessgoog/page/n30/mode/1up?view=theater]
 
''bhe'' is also attested with the meaning "without", but again ''be'' is not attested in this sense. [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/paieska/paieska/1?id=214].
 
The exact spelling ''be'' is apparently only attested with the meaning "was" (to be, past tense). [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/paieska/paieska/1?id=202] [https://archive.org/details/thesauruslingua00nessgoog/page/n29/mode/1up?view=theater] [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 02:37, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:BTW: {{m-lite|prg|bhe}} got created. --10:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[Prūsiskan#rfv-notice-prg-|Prūsiskan]] ===
Especially because of the "[[New Prussian|New]]"; maybe cp. [https://books.google.com/books?id=JGs-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA144]. --05:42, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:So basically this should be an adjective form (feminine accusative singular) referring to an ethnicity instead of a proper noun referring to a language, and the definition needs to be changed accordingly. AFAICT the capitalization and diacritic should stay as they are though, unlike what Nesselmann has. See [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/paieska/paieska/1?id=1913]. The reason I like the VU site is that it's really easy to see a scan of the original attestations, just click the red links and then the little icon next to "Faksimilė". [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 05:52, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:BTW: {{m-lite|prg|Prūsiskan|pos=adjective form}} got created. --10:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[Appendix:Old Prussian/tēr#rfv-notice-prg-|Appendix:Old Prussian/tēr]] ===
This is [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/zodynas/paieska/1?id=2417 real] and should be in mainspace but without the macron. "ter kai" occurs [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/tekstai/paieska/?saltinis=III&puslapis=115&zodzio_id=25 here], and elsewhere this occurs as part of the phrase [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/zodynas/paieska/1?id=2418 "ter ains"]. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 05:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:Given explanation is: „{{l-lite|de|denn}} – {{l-lite|lt|tik}}“, but the terms have different meanings. [https://books.google.com/books?id=JGs-AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA187 Nesselmann] translates it as {{m-lite|de|als||as; than}}; [https://books.google.com/books?id=NVQ-AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA326 Berneker] doesn't have it. In [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/tekstai/paieska/?saltinis=III&puslapis=115&zodzio_id=25 the passage] it should correspond to German {{m-lite|de|denn}}, and so ''tik'' and ''only, just, merely'' seem to be wrong translations. --09:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
::Oh, good point noting the discrepancy. The original passage in the Enchiridion where the interpretation is under dispute translates to something like "and that he may not be helped in any other way / '''than''' that he was born new through baptism out of God". It seems like '''only''' would also fit in that gap and express the same meaning; not all languages express the same idea using a direct word-for-word translation. For example, compare [https://archive.org/details/maziulis-prusu-kalbos-paminklai-t.-2-1981/page/221/mode/2up?q=%22pagelb%C4%97ta+b%C5%ABti%22 this interlinear translation of the Old Prussian] (also by Mažiulis, but shows that he must have intentionally translated it this way). And in "ter ains" (allein - tik vien - only one / alone) in particular, it seems to be much easier to explain its function as an adverb meaning "only" than as a comparative conjunction meaning "than". There's also an external Baltic etymological argument for thinking it may have this meaning; see {{tl|R:bat:CPMBL|page=288}} [https://archive.org/details/schmalstieg-jegers-translators-janis-endzelins-comparative-phonology-and-morphol/page/288/mode/2up?q=ter]. So I think the meaning "only"/"merely" is probably defensible and includable, but we should maybe also include a note discussing this. [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 20:02, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:::Like CPMBL, {{tl|R:lt:LEW|page=1071|head=tè}} [https://archive.org/details/fraenkel-litauisches-etymologisches-woerterbuch-bd.-1-2-1962-1965/page/1070/mode/2up?q=ter+ains] glosses ''ter'' as German ''nur'' ("only") and compares it to the Lithuanian ''te'', ''te-''. So this seems to be the most common interpretation among Balticists.
:::{{small|1=[http://www.balticlinguistics.uw.edu.pl/sites/default/files/full_texts/BL6_petit.pdf This recent paper] OTOH offers a seemingly different etymological comparison. I have no idea how accepted the theory outlined here is, but Petit sees Prussian ''-er-'' as an equivalent morpheme to what Lithuanian and Latvian have as ''-i(e)k-''. The theory relates to the well-known system of Baltic correlatives in ''t-'' and ''k-''. But to get to the point, even this idiosyncratic paper glosses *''ter'' as 'so much, only' (adding the asterisk, perhaps not noticing that ''ter'' is actually attested outside of the construction ''ter ains''?); which makes sense because it would be ''t-'' + ''-er'', equivalent to Lithuanian ''t-'' + ''-ik'' = ''tik''.}} [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 23:14, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 
'''RFV-resolved''', although I wonder whether the two senses couldn't be unified by glossing it as English "but", which can be used both for "only" ("there is but one") and "other than" ("no god but God"). [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 00:36, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[σάτρα]]  ==
 
The Ancient Greek word σάτρα is currently given as comic Old Persian for 'gold', and is found in both LSJ and Bailly. However, a 2004 article by Andreas Willi puts forth a compelling argument that the line (Ar. Ach. 100) from which this word is taken, should rather be segmented as ἱ αρταμαν' εξαρξα ν[ι]απισσ' ο[υ]ασ' ατρα. He takes ατρα to represent Old Median *aθrā 'here, then'. If this interpretation is accepted, the page for σάτρα should be deleted. What do you think? [[User:AntiquatedMan|AntiquatedMan]] ([[User talk:AntiquatedMan|talk]]) 18:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:{{re|AntiquatedMan}} If it's in standard dictionaries, we should keep it, but we can add a usage note explaining the modern alternative explanation. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 18:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
::That seems to be a good road, yeah. What should I do with the alternative reading of the line? Obviously it can't remain as a quotation, as it does not show the stated definition of 'gold', but I do want to include it somewhere. [[User:AntiquatedMan|AntiquatedMan]] ([[User talk:AntiquatedMan|talk]]) 07:36, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:::It can be in the usage note. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 14:08, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Uindiorix]] ==
 
This is obviously morphologically incompatible with our Proto-Brythonic reconstruction. The inscription containing this name has case endings; in our reconstruction they're gone already. It's clearly not in the same language as our Proto-Brythonic and thus shouldn't be sorted under "Proto-Brythonic". — ''Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung'', ''[[User:Mellohi!|mello]]'''''[[User talk:Mellohi!|hi!]]''' ([[Special:Contributions/Mellohi!|投稿]]) 22:15, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 
:Also the etymology line is clearly anachronistic. It’s weird seeing the form being derived from clearly much younger lemmas. // [[User:Silmethule|Silmeth]]  22:27, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
: In retrospect, probably better to give it a Proto-Celtic header with a Brythonic label. --[[User:Skiulinamo|Skiulinamo]] ([[User talk:Skiulinamo|talk]]) 02:04, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
:: Done. I had to make Proto-Celtic attested tho. --[[User:Skiulinamo|Skiulinamo]] ([[User talk:Skiulinamo|talk]]) 02:25, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
::: ...It's not Proto-Celtic either. Not only is Proto-Celtic itself dated too early for the inscription to be Proto-Celtic (the inscription was written around Roman times), the inscription itself has the wrong accusative singular ending (-in instead of -am). It is almost certainly ''not'' attested Proto-Celtic. — ''Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung'', ''[[User:Mellohi!|mello]]'''''[[User talk:Mellohi!|hi!]]''' ([[Special:Contributions/Mellohi!|投稿]]) 03:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
:::: At some point, granularity just becomes pedantic and makes fools of us all. --[[User:Skiulinamo|Skiulinamo]] ([[User talk:Skiulinamo|talk]]) 04:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
:::::Your move also caused technical problems (we'll continue this at Beer Parlor). — ''Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung'', ''[[User:Mellohi!|mello]]'''''[[User talk:Mellohi!|hi!]]''' ([[Special:Contributions/Mellohi!|投稿]]) 04:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
:::::It should certainly be put under ‘Brittonic’, it’s much to late to be Proto-Celtic. That’s just a fact, it’s not pedantic, it’s just correct. You wouldn’t put a French noun under ‘Latin’… [[User:Silurhys|Silurhys]] ([[User talk:Silurhys|talk]]) 20:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
:As we're discussing in another thread here, Proto-Brittonic/Brittonic should be a daughter of Proto-Celtic and the hypothetical parent of Brittonic (attested from the 4th/3rd century BC and lasting until the mid 6th century AD, when it gave way to Neo-Brittonic). Uindiorix dates to the Brittonic period and should be labeled as Brittonic. The Languages of David J. Peterson ridiculously calls Archaic Neo-Brittonic (mid-5th century AD through the end of the 8th century AD) "Proto-Brythonic"; both inaccurate and idiosyncratic, as no professional Celticist uses this term to refer to Neo-Brittonic. [[User:M.Aurelius.Viator|M.Aurelius.Viator]] ([[User talk:M.Aurelius.Viator|talk]]) 20:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 
I've moved it back to Proto-Brythonic. It's true that attested Proto-Brythonic forms don't match up with our reconstructed forms, but we call them both Proto-Brythonic anyway. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 18:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 
----
 
Proto-Brythonic. Attested in Latin {{lang|la|ADIXOUI DEUINA DEIEDA ANDAGIN UINDIORIX CUAMENAI}}, but - in the same vain as ''[[#Artognou|Artognou]]'' - that seems to make it a Latin transcription of a Proto-Brythonic name, and not a Proto-Brythonic term in its own right. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 16:51, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
: {{re|Theknightwho}} You are technically right if it is a Latin sentence, so this page would have to be split into a Latin page and a Proto-Brythonic reconstruction. But the inscription’s language has been controverted. So it could be an [[:Category:Undetermined lemmas|Undetermined language lemma]] as some other names including [[ΒΟΥΗΛΑ]]. There would be no gain in information with either option. Technically it is an attested term with arguable header attribution. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 17:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
::@[[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] I would prefer to have the Proto-Brythonic entry at a reconstructed normalised spelling, with a Latin entry at {{m|la|Uindiorix}} that states it's a Latin transcription of the Proto-Brythonic name. That would keep the distinction clear, better matches the expectations of users who work in one language or the other, and also leaves room for discussion as to what the best normalised form actually is. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 17:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Theknightwho}}, as a minute of research would tell anyone, the sentence [[Uindiorix]] is attested in is today universally agreed upon by scholars to be in Celtic, not Latin. The only question is if it's too old to fit in how ''we'' on the project define Proto-Brythonic, and not dialectal Proto-Celtic. {{ping|Mahagaja}} -- 22:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
::::The sentence isn't Latin at all. The clearest evidence is found in the lexeme ''andagin'', composed of ''an-'' "un" and ''dagin'' "good (accusative)". [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 11:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Erntemond#rfv-sense-notice-de-|Erntemond]] ==
 
German. Rfv-sense: {{tq|(Northern Germany) harvest moon}} Tagged ({{diff|69279345}}) with the comment "also as References (unlike Quotations) aren't sufficient for WDLs and as the Reference is gone" but not listed. — [[User:Fytcha|Fytcha]]〈[[User talk:Fytcha| T ]]|[[Special:Log/Fytcha| L ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fytcha| C ]]〉 06:21, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
:'''Cited'''. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 20:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[tiewe]] ==
 
Skalvian. RFV-term, appears on [[Reconstruction:Proto-Balto-Slavic/tewas]]. Is this language even attested ''at all''? For some reason, extinct Baltic languages are a magnet for questionable additions. [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Reconstruction:Proto-Balto-Slavic/tewas&oldid=65629637 The person who originally added this] also included Sudovian, Old Curonian, and Kursenieki.
 
* Sudovian is barely attested, only in [[Appendix:Pagan dialects from Narew|one word list]] (that scholars aren't even sure is Sudovian) and [[w:Sudovian_language#Fragmentary_Texts|a few short sentences]] from {{w|Sudovian Book|one medieval book}} (that are likely actually Old Prussian, and academic Old Prussian dictionaries treat them as such, e.g. [http://www.prusistika.flf.vu.lt/zodynas/paieska/1?id=934]). The form they added for Sudovian, "tove", was apparently an unattested invention of Suduva.com; I have replaced it with an attested spelling from the word list.
* Old Curonian is in a similar situation, only having one representative text (which isn't even securely identified as Curonian), but possibly a great deal of words could be legitimately academically reconstructed from onomastics and the significant regional influence it had on Lithuanian/Samogitian and Latvian. Luckily, the one purportedly Old Curonian text is the Pater Noster, so the word for father is attested ("thewes"), but it doesn't even match the spelling added by the user ("thæwæs", which has no other hits on Google) unless I'm missing something.
* Kursenieki is definitely attested, and even has two living speakers, but it's still rare so it nonetheless sets off a bit of an alarm. The particular Kursenieki form "teve" may be attested, as searching for "teve mūses" on Google brings up some hits, mostly various Wikipedias and one 2017 self-published ebook (funnily enough cited on [[w:lv:Kursenieku_valoda]], but surely an instance of citogenesis since the [https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nehrungskurisch&diff=prev&oldid=110551178 text has been on de.wikipedia since 2012]), but I have no idea the original source/authenticity of this Pater Noster translation. [https://alew.hu-berlin.de/ ALEW], which I trust more but still isn't an ideal source, gives "têvs" as the Kursenieki cognate of Lithuanian "tėvas". Dictionaries and texts in the language exist but I don't think I can access any of them. The form is superficially plausible, although I have to wonder whether "teve" is supposed to be the vocative instead of the nominative (lemma form), which I would have expected to end in -''s''. For example, the Lithuanian Pater Noster starts with "tėve mūsų", instead of the lemma form "tėvas". But in Latvian, of which Kursenieki is a dialect, the nominative and vocative are both "tēvs", so IDK.
[[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 00:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[စပ#rfv-notice-my-|စပ]] ==
 
Burmese. Created by a vandal. [[User:RcAlex36|RcAlex36]] ([[User talk:RcAlex36|talk]]) 16:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 
:[https://twitter.com/Rourke528/status/1342730264032645122 This Twitter post] makes me think the term might be real. Dunno about the etymology. Whether it's citable to our standards, IDK either. The current citation is terrible (the title of a random YouTube video consisting of various clips of dancing women; the word isn't even spoken in the video, nor is any word other than "one, two, three, four"(?) at the start). [[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 21:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
* [[Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/ǵenh₁-]] 'to be born' names it in unnassorted, as meaning (2) "kinsman".
* article also has the meaning1  of "known"
* article etymology has it from [[γιγνώσκω]], itself from [[Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/ǵneh₃-]] 'to know'
* I suspect meaning 1 comes from H3 and meaning 2 from H1. Can anyone confirm so to split etyms?
[[User:Sobreira|Sobreira]] ►〓 [[User_talk:Sobreira|(''parlez'')]] 21:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
 
:[https://archive.org/details/etymolog-greek/page/n159/mode/2up?view=theater Beekes] assigns both meanings to the root of {{m|grc|γιγνώσκω}}:
::{{small|γνωτός, -τή 'relative' belongs to γιγνώσκω.}}
:[[Special:Contributions/70.172.194.25|70.172.194.25]] 23:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
 
** I will take this to [[Project:Etymology scriptorium/2023/January]] where it should be. [[User:Sobreira|Sobreira]] ►〓 [[User_talk:Sobreira|(''parlez'')]] 07:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 
= February 2023 =
 
== [[цукор#rfv-notice-mn-|цукор]] ==
 
Mongolian. — [[User:Surjection|S]]  05:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[квайт#rfv-notice-koi-|квайт]] ==
 
Komi-Permyak. One of the defining features of Permyak is that Proto-Permic ''*ť'' is reflected as <ть> instead of the Zyrian <йт>. [[квать]] is supported by the dictionaries I have. Seems to again be a case of someone not knowing what Permyak is. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 14:58, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[чӧскыд#rfv-notice-koi-|чӧскыд]] ===
Another one. Should be [[чӧскыт]].
 
=== [[шоныд#rfv-notice-koi-|шоныд]] ===
Another one. Should be [[шоныт]].
 
=== [[небыд#rfv-notice-koi-|небыд]] ===
Another one. Should be [[небыт]].
 
=== [[вунӧдны#rfv-notice-koi|вунӧдны]] ===
Another one. Should be [[вунӧтны]].
 
=== [[югыд#rfv-notice-koi|югыд]] ===
Another one. Should be [[югыт]].
 
: '''Югыд''' seems to be Komi Zyrian or Komi Izhma, so we can just change the name of the language, no need to delete the whole entry. [[User:Tollef Salemann|Tollef Salemann]] ([[User talk:Tollef Salemann|talk]]) 07:02, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[сьӧкыд#rfv-notice-koi|сьӧкыд]] ===
Another one. Should be [[сьӧкыт]].
 
=== [[кӧдзыд#rfv-notice-koi|кӧдзыд]] ===
Another one. Should be [[кӧдзыт]].
 
=== [[пемыд#rfv-notice-koi|пемыд]] ===
Another one. Should be [[пемыт]].
 
Honestly, I'm getting tired of this shit by Rajkiandris. Can we just nuke all his entries without sources? [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 19:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 
:Yes. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 19:13, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 
=== [[вой#rfv-notice-koi|вой]] ===
Another one. Should be [[ой]]. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 11:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Ιεηωουα#rfv-notice-grc-|Ιεηωουα]] ==
 
Ancient Greek.
 
I can't find any evidence of this, but I don't have access to good resources on Ancient Greek proper nouns. Given the religious proscriptions on use of the Divine Name, I'm skeptical, but I don't know enough about Koine usage to be sure. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 16:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
:Hellenistic Jewish writers still needed a form to write, as [[יהוה]] is, and those proscriptions don't exist for non-Jewish sources, cf. the citations at [[Ἰαω]], so there's nothing inherently implausible about it on purely religious grounds. This particular form is quite difficult to track down, though. The claim at [[Iehova]] that it's attested in the Gnostic ''{{w|Pistis Sophia}}'' (which survives only in Coptic in any case) appears to stem from an earlier Wikipedia misinterpretation of Charles William King's 19th-century study ''The Gnostics and Their Remains'', which, while discussing the ''Pistis Sophia'', mysteriously states that "The author of the 'Treatise on Interpretations' says, 'The Egyptians express the name of the Supreme Being by the seven Greek vowels ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ'". (Wikipedia now correctly states "Charles William King attributes [it] to a work that he calls ''On Interpretations''", but previously ascribed it to the ''Pistis Sophia''.) Unfortunately King gives no indication at all as to what the 'Treatise on Interpretations' is, and it's never mentioned again. So I'm inclined to delete this, in the absence of any better evidence. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 18:21, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
::I think the place to look for this would be the Greek Magical Papyri, which are absolutely littered with all sorts of theonyms, including many variations on the Tetragrammaton, as well as all sorts of ‘magical’ sequences of the seven Greek vowels. I haven’t found this exact form myself with a cursory glance, but if it would be anywhere, that would be the most likely set of texts to search. (Also note that King refers to ‘the Egyptians’; the Magical Papyri themselves originate in Greco-Roman Egypt.) Another source that may have some information about where this comes from, if anyone can dig it up, is Gesner’s 1746 ''De laude dei per septem vocales''; various more modern books refer to this when discussing this particular form. — [[User:Vorziblix|Vorziblix]] ([[User_talk:Vorziblix|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Vorziblix|contribs]]) 02:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
:::Edit: I’ve dug up the above-mentioned treatise by Gesner; it can be found on p.245 of [https://gdz.sub.uni-goettingen.de/id/PPN352829796_0001 this work] (Commentarii Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 1). Unfortunately I don’t think my Latin and Greek are quite up to the task of wading through it, but if someone else wants to give it a try, perhaps there might be some useful references there. — [[User:Vorziblix|Vorziblix]] ([[User_talk:Vorziblix|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Vorziblix|contribs]]) 03:07, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
::::I found ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ (in all caps) on [https://gdz.sub.uni-goettingen.de/id/PPN352829796_0001?tify=%7B%22pages%22%3A%5B372%5D%2C%22pan%22%3A%7B%22x%22%3A0.45%2C%22y%22%3A0.78%7D%2C%22view%22%3A%22thumbnails%22%2C%22zoom%22%3A0.398%7D page 254] of Gesner's thesis, but the thesis is written in Latin, and the term is only mentioned, not used. I don't know whether this is sufficient for inclusion. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 09:08, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
{{ping|Liray70}} For new coinages like these, at least three separate citations are required and the citations need to span at least a year. Thanks. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 10:21, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
* '''RFV-failed'''. [[User:Ultimateria|Ultimateria]] ([[User talk:Ultimateria|talk]]) 03:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Please provide at least three separate citations are required and the citations need to span at least a year. Thanks. --[[User:Mar vin kaiser|Mar vin kaiser]] ([[User talk:Mar vin kaiser|talk]]) 10:25, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
* '''RFV-failed'''. [[User:Ultimateria|Ultimateria]] ([[User talk:Ultimateria|talk]]) 03:16, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[amarantka#rfv-notice-pl-|amarantka]] ==
 
Polish. Wikipedia articles don't count. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 18:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 
:The Wikipedia articles don't count as cites, but it's worth noting that both that article as well as [[ziarnojadek]]'s refer to the Jagiellonian University's [http://listaptakow.eko.uj.edu.pl/ Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World], so it might be worth looking somewhere there. [[User:Hythonia|Hythonia]] ([[User talk:Hythonia|talk]]) 11:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ziarnojadek#rfv-notice-pl-|ziarnojadek]] ==
 
Polish. Wikipedia articles don't count. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 18:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[বীরভূমী]] and [[বর্ধমানী]] ==
 
As an inhabitant of [[West Bengal]] and a native speaker of Bengali, I don't think I have ever heard of these terms. I found nothing like these in Bengali-language publications in West Bengal, including {{w|Anandabazar Patrika}}, {{w|Bartaman}} etc. So far, I have found words like [[বীরভূমবাসী]] and [[বর্ধমানবাসী]], which are demonyms of [[বীরভূম]] and [[বর্ধমান]] respectively. --[[User:Sbb1413|Sbb1413 (he)]] ([[User talk:Sbb1413|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Sbb1413|contribs]]) 06:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[santi#rfv-sense-notice-pi-Feminine|santi]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: Does the feminine of the present participle {{m|pi|santa}} have this form? --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 13:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Unsupported titles/:d#rfv-notice-mul-|:d]] ==
 
Translingual. {{tq|{{synonym of|mul|\:D}}}} Isn't this an alternative form of {{l|mul|\:P}} or {{l|mul|\:p}}? [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 06:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
: Uh, this is difficult, how would you distinguish in quotes? Both are asumed faces. It is sure though that in some cases it is the former due to typing so lazily as to omit pressing the shift key. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 11:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::Tbh I usually  see it used with a bit more irony cheekiness, :d is more like :v. :D is usually just expressing joy. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 12:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::: Then let's forgo defining it as “synonym of” aught and relegate the uncertainties, concerning which actual symbols it is related to, to the etymology. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 13:12, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
::::Did we all see the comment on [[Talk:Unsupported_titles/:d]]?  Because  I was skeptical too.  I dont play that game but the explanation makes sense.  And, as for other online games ...  I can see how an originally capitalized emoticon could evolve to  lowercase  for  ease of typing in a fast-paced video game, especially these days when we rely so much on more colorful emojis.  [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 10:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[tarati#rfv-sense-notice-pi-swim_float|tarati]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: swim
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: float
 
I can't find this meaning in any dictionaries, and I've looked in PTS, Childers, Maung Tin and Buddhadatta.  The Languages of David J. Peterson does have this meaning for the cognate {{m+|sa|तरति}}.  The meaning was added for Pali by {{ping|LolPacino}}. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 12:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[natthi#rfv-sense-notice-pi-|natthi]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: 'absence'
 
I see no reason to deduce that this contraction should be reckoned as a noun. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 15:28, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Kanadestro#rfv-notice-eo-|Kanadestro]] ==
 
=== [[britestro#rfv-notice-eo-|britestro]] ===
 
Esperanto.  Both added by the same editor; the third entry (at the time of writing; {{m|eo|kanadino}}) may also be suspect. — [[User:Surjection|S]]  21:14, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Befehl ist Befehl#rfv-notice-nl-|Befehl ist Befehl]] ==
 
Dutch. I think it's still German. [[User:PUC|P]][[User talk:PUC|U]][[Special:Contributions/PUC|C]] – 12:13, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ettagonu#rfv-notice-mt-|ettagonu]] ==
 
Maltese. — [[User:Surjection|S]]  19:19, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 
= March 2023 =
== [[ghadhia#rfv-notice-sw-|ghadhia]] ==
 
Swahili. Tagged by [[User:Tbm|Tbm]] with the reason: “I can't find attestation. Maybe a misspelling of ghasia?” [[User:MuDavid|MuDavid]] 栘𩿠 ([[User Talk:MuDavid|talk]]) 03:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 
:I only find [https://www.jamiiforums.com/threads/ndege-yetu-kukamatwa-na-kuachiwa-inapaswa-kuwa-funzo-kwa-taifa-letu.1625505/ one use], but the word seems to have a different meaning here. [[User:MuDavid|MuDavid]] 栘𩿠 ([[User Talk:MuDavid|talk]]) 03:55, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ehuku#rfv-notice-sw-|ehuku]] ==
 
I can't find attestation but maybe I haven't looked enough...? [[User:tbm|tbm]] ([[User talk:tbm|talk]]) 06:58, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 
:I find exactly zilch. ''-Ehukuliwa'' seems to be a thing, though. [[User:MuDavid|MuDavid]] 栘𩿠 ([[User Talk:MuDavid|talk]]) 02:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[sechsundzwanzigköpfig#rfv-notice-de-|sechsundzwanzigköpfig]] ==
 
German. Zero Google hits. The user has created many such entries which may need attention. [[User:Equinox|Equinox]] [[User_talk:Equinox|◑]] 19:42, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
:Search for inflected forms like {{b.g.c.|sechsundzwanzigköpfigen}}, {{b.g.c.|sechsundzwanzigköpfige}}. That gives enough results of the term. One could only argue regarding the meaning:
:* a being/creature with 26 heads [possible not existing and not given in the entry]
:* a group of 26 people [easily attested like ''sechsundzwanzigköpfige Besatzung, Gruppe, Mannschaft, Delegation/Gremium/Komitee/Kommission'']
 
== [[wainen#rfv-notice-enm-|wainen]] ==
 
Middle English: “{{lb|enm|uncertain}} to [[obtain]]”. The ''MED'' only has attestations with ''y''. [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 11:16, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
:The reason here appears to be that the MED has filed the other senses under ''wainen'' and this is seemingly an extension of the same term, so it makes sense to '''move''' this to [[waynen]], which is the main lemma for us anyway. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 13:44, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/Strybogъ]], [[Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/Xъrsъ]] ==
{{movedto|WT:RFDR}}
 
== [[Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/regti]] ==
{{movedto|WT:RFDR}}
 
== [[သိက္ခါ#rfv-notice-my-|သိက္ခါ]] ==
 
Burmese.
 
I don't believe sealang.net provides a true representation of the word.  Show us a picture!  Other on-line dictionaries are showing {{lang|my|သိက္ခာ}} instead.  The SEALang rendering could be due to a faulty algorithm for resolving pre-Unicode 5.1 AA as round AA or TALL AA, e.g. 'tall after KHA' instead of 'tall after non-subscript KHA'. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 20:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[łomny#rfv-notice-zlw-opl-|łomny]] ==
 
Old Polish. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 23:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
 
:{{ping|Vininn126}}: Per Bańkowski this one does appear in Old Polish, but only in place names (see [[w:pl:Łomna]], appearing as early as 1155). Other than that he says the meaning "frangible" was used in the 16th-18th century, which appears to be corroborated by other dictionaries. The alleged descendant is, per WSJP, derived from ''ułomić'', from PS ''*u-lomiti''. [[User:Hythonia|Hythonia]] ([[User talk:Hythonia|talk]]) 17:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
::If we decide to keep this as a mention, supported by the demonym, we should make it abundantly clear. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 17:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[boojum]] ==
 
An unadapted English loanword in the extinct language [[Cochimi]] of western Mexico.  The cactus was given this name in English at just about the time when Cochimi was going extinct, so I wonder if it's even meaningful to say whether the word is or not part of the language.  It's also a bit strange that a language native to the cactus' habitat would need to borrow from English to describe it, so it's possible this is an error of some kind and that the scientist never intended ''boojum'' to be part of the Cochimi language.  The Spanish and Nahuatl wiktionaries also list this word as belonging to two other languages of the area, so for those who edit other wikis, this RFV could be applied to those languages as well. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 12:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Ikhthues#rfv-notice-mul-|Ikhthues]] ==
 
Translingual. "taxonomic" I would have thought it belonged among Italic terms for RfV.
 
Sometimes used as a transliteration for Greek. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 09:08, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 
:Any Latin usage would normatively be spelled with ''c'' and ''y'' (and indeed all the taxa seem to be ''-ichthyes''). Can't find evidence that this is ever used except as a transliteration of {{m+|grc|ἰχθύς||fish|pos=plural}}. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 23:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[aka#rfv-notice-csb-|aka]] ==
 
Kashubian. Should be haka according to Gołąbk's dictionary. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 23:09, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[berda#rfv-notice-csb-|berda]] ==
 
Kashubian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 23:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[cajtung#rfv-notice-csb-|cajtung]] ==
 
Kashubian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 11:15, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[europ#rfv-notice-csb-|europ]] ==
 
Kashubian. I believe this could be real, and I think some chemistry textbooks have been printed in Kashubian, I would like at least one quote from them... [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[haka#rfv-notice-csb-|haka]] ==
 
Kashubian. Gołąbk lists as hôk, I propose the entry be moved. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 22:30, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[jantôr#rfv-notice-csb-|jantôr]] ==
 
Kashubian. I think it should be jantar according to my sources. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 19:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Kashubian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 20:41, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
 
'''RFV-cited'''. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 09:43, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Kashubian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 12:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 
'''RFV-passed'''. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 09:47, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[samar#rfv-notice-csb-|samar]] ==
 
Kashubian. Like with europ, I think this is real, probably in some Kashubian textbook, I just would like a quote. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 14:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[stëczeń#rfv-notice-csb-|stëczeń]] ==
 
Kashubian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 14:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[bachoro#rfv-notice-szl-|bachoro]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 19:13, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[czołgot#rfv-notice-pl-|czołgot]] ==
 
Polish. Based on that references it's an old ghost word? [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 19:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
: Query in Google Books ([https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=czo%C5%82got+dzi%C4%99cio%C5%82]) gives at least 4 other dictionaries with this meaning. [[User:Olaf|Olaf]] ([[User talk:Olaf|talk]]) 12:01, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
::@[[User:Olaf|Olaf]] Please see [[w:Use-mention distinction|Use mention distinction]], we do not accept mentions in other dictionaries, they need to be uses in running text for WDL's. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 12:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ajnflus#rfv-notice-szl-|ajnflus]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:31, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ทิฟฟานี#rfv-sense-notice-th-|ทิฟฟานี]] ==
 
Thai. Rfv-sense: a transgender woman.
 
As a (native) Thai speaker, I have never found anyone using the term to refer to ''any'' transgender woman. Also, a Google search did not return any use of the term in such a sense. --[[User:Asembleo|Asembleo]] ([[User talk:Asembleo|talk]]) 15:45, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[cycŏcz#rfv-notice-szl-|cycŏcz]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 11:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== {{m|ang|Ædre}} ==
 
I tried myself to verify the existence of this name but I was unable to find anything reliable on it, I've also never seen it in any charters or the Domesday Book and to my knowledge the element {{compound|ang|ǣdre}} isn't used  in any other Old English names. [[User:Pirsicola T.|Pirsicola T.]] ([[User talk:Pirsicola T.|talk]]) 22:46, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ꓚꓳ-ꓗꓴꓷꓼ#rfv-notice-lis-|ꓚꓳ-ꓗꓴꓷꓼ]] ==
 
Lisu. This doesn't make sense within the Fraser script orthography, and I can't find any evidence of it online. The "transliteration" is very clearly taken from [https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/145803/1/PL-C126.pdf A Dictionary of the Northern Dialect of Lisu], but in actual fact that uses a separate Latin orthography altogether that follows quite different rules.
 
I suspect this was simply copied from the Chinese The Languages of David J. Peterson. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 04:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
 
= April 2023 =
 
== [[drzyń#rfv-notice-szl-|drzyń]] ==
 
Silesian. Drzyń as a last name exists but I can't find even a mention outside of us. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:20, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[dziyk#rfv-notice-szl-|dziyk]] ==
 
Silesian. No mentions outside of us it seems. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:48, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[erc#rfv-notice-szl-|erc]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 11:57, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[апелсин#rfv-notice-mn-|апелсин]] ==
 
Mongolian (orange {{gl|fruit}}). Not in any dictionary I can access. The spelling {{m|mn|апельсин}} (exactly as in Russian) gets hits in Mongolian Google searches. The regular term for orange (fruit) is {{m|mn|жүрж}}.
 
== Passive inflections of {{l|eo|amori}} ==
 
{{l|eo|amori}} appears to be intransitive. See for example the Reta Vortaro, where they list active but not passive participles, and the example:
:''se edzo opiniis, ke lia edzino '''amoris kun''' alia, sed ne havis pruvon, tiam li                                iris kun sia edzino al la templo''
with intransitive "amoris kun alia" rather than transitive "amori alian".
 
If this is the case, then the 27 passive inflections in the following table should be deleted. (I thought it would be disruptive to tag them individually for verification.)
 
{{eo-conj|root=amor}} [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 22:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[grajzik#rfv-notice-szl-|grajzik]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 11:51, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[karw#rfv-notice-szl-|karw]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 12:06, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[писанка#rfv-sense-notice-uk-|писанка]] ==
 
Ukrainian, tagged but not listed. Rfv-sense: "{{q|figurative|derogatory}} gaudily dressed woman or girl".  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  14:04, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Reagan]] ==
 
Cebuano. Another @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]] entry without any supporting citations. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 12:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Vladimir]] ==
 
Cebuano. Imagine an alternate history in which Russia invaded the Philippines instead of Spain. Sounds like @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]] lives there. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 12:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Bambi]] ==
 
Cebuano. Is Disney suddenly relocating to the Philippines, @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]]? [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 12:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Darius ]] ==
 
Cebuano. He only went as far as India, not the Philippines. Another @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]] creation with no citations. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 12:59, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Wojtyla]] ==
 
Cebuano. @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]], how related is Cebuano to Polish? [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 13:01, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Jerry]] ==
 
Cebuano. Another @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]] product. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:12, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[White]] ==
 
Cebuano. @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]], did you mistake English for Spanish? [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Lancelot]] ==
 
Cebuano. @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]] Should be [[Lanzarote]]. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:15, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
==[[Reichelt]]==
 
Cebuano. @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]], are you living in German Philippines? [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Siegfried#rfv-notice-ceb-|Siegfried]] ==
 
Cebuano. Again, I didn't think the Germans ever maintained a colony in the Philippines, @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]]. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Aramis#rfv-notice-ceb-|Aramis]] ==
 
Cebuano. @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]] Did you think the French creators suddenly found themselves in Cebu? [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:26, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[foreigner#rfv-notice-ceb-|foreigner]] ==
 
Cebuano. @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]]. I don't know how an English term would be borrowed directly into Cebuano in the absence of any other Philippine language. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[target#rfv-notice-ceb-|target]] ==
 
Cebuano. @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]]. I don't know how an English term would be borrowed directly into Cebuano in the absence of any other Philippine language. [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 22:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
:Of all the recent RFD's, this one stands out as the most believable since this word has also been borrowed into other languages. It is in the linked dictionary with senses much as our entry claims it has, although the dictionary spells it as ''targit''. Is this a matter of two different spelling standards, or should we change the spelling of our entry?  In any case, I cant be of any help in finding citations, let alone citations for all five senses, but it seems wholly reasonable to me.  Best regards, [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 18:20, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[barbie#rfv-notice-ceb-|barbie]] ==
 
Cebuano. Are Barbies even made in Cebu?
 
Also {{ping|Carl Francis}} [[User:Chuterix|Chuterix]] ([[User talk:Chuterix|talk]]) 03:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[mogebny#rfv-notice-szl-|mogebny]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 12:07, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[nŏleżny#rfv-notice-szl-|nŏleżny]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 13:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Sutcliffe#rfv-notice-ceb-|Sutcliffe]] ==
 
Cebuano. @[[User:Carl Francis|Carl Francis]] [[User:Kwékwlos|Kwékwlos]] ([[User talk:Kwékwlos|talk]]) 14:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[rōst#rfv-notice-szl-|rōst]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 16:18, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[sztajfniŏk#rfv-notice-szl-|sztajfniŏk]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 18:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[sztau#rfv-notice-szl-|sztau]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 18:49, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[sztrōmpfhōuzy#rfv-notice-szl-|sztrōmpfhōuzy]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 18:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[wstōnżka#rfv-notice-szl-|wstōnżka]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 11:25, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ôdpytōnek#rfv-notice-szl-|ôdpytōnek]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 09:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ôficyjny#rfv-notice-szl-|ôficyjny]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 09:39, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[śniygulŏk#rfv-notice-szl-|śniygulŏk]] ==
 
Silesian. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 11:09, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[kaci#rfv-sense-notice-pl-tormentor's?|kaci]] ==
 
Polish. Partial verification request for the definition. ''Kaci'' is the relational adjective of the noun ''kat'', which has two distinct meanings: literal, "executioner," and figurative, "tormentor." It's pretty easy to find usage of the noun in the figurative sense, but I can't seem to find occurences of ''kaci'' as relating to it, only to the literal meaning (especially in collocations like ''kaci topór'' — executioner's axe, ''kaci kaptur'' — executioner's hood, etc.). [[User:Hythonia|Hythonia]] ([[User talk:Hythonia|talk]]) 13:44, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 
:Notably, WSJP ''clearly'' states it only relates to "executioner". [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 13:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
::Quote from [https://www.google.pl/books/edition/Lud_W_Ks_Pozna%C5%84skie/CLhCAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=kacia+tortura&pg=RA1-PA234&printsec=frontcover] (1840): "Kiedy miano czarownice i czarowników próbować torturami, kaci zabobonnicy i guslarze wielcy, golili im na sam przód włosy" (English: "When witches and sorcerers were to be tried by torture, tormenting superstitious [people] and great guslars shaved their hair first."). Here "kaci" is definitely used as an adjective from "kat" in the sense of "tormentor", and not "executioner", but still the meaning is literal.
::In another example, we can see contemporary usage in the figurative sense, but it's just a random quote from the internet, and a kind of poetry, so it may not adhere to the strict language rules: [http://absurduer.blogspot.com/2016/10/zmijny-swad.html].
::Still, I believe "kaci" is just a standard creation of an adjective from a noun "kat", so there is no reason why we shouldn't use it in all possible senses. It's just rare, so it's hard to find examples. [[User:Olaf|Olaf]] ([[User talk:Olaf|talk]]) 10:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Olaf|Olaf]] Per our [[WT:CFI]], each ''definition'' needs three examples, just just the entry as a whole. If the only definition is "of or relating to a executioner", we need three examples of that. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:33, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
::::I thought this discussion is about meaning of "kaci" as "of or relating to a tormentor", because "of or relating to an executioner" is already well confirmed with dictionaries. So here is the third quotation in which "kaci" is definitely used in a figurative sense: https://www.google.pl/books/edition/Wi%C4%99%C5%BA/m25IAQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=kaciego&dq=kaciego&printsec=frontcover [[User:Olaf|Olaf]] ([[User talk:Olaf|talk]]) 10:42, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:Hythonia|Hythonia]] As the lister. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::Two examples more:
::::::* [http://nkjp.pl/poliqarp/nkjp1800/], look for "kacia": "Lecz czy dzielić się musiał wymiotem? Skąd ta wiedza, ta pewność '''kacia''', ze stojąc pod płotem sam nie grzęźnie po uszki otulon swych projekcji błotem?" - refers to an unpleasant situation, but not an execution.
::::::* [http://nkjp.pl/poliqarp/nkjp1800/], look for "kaciej", second item: "w pewnym momencie poczujesz bunt, potem nienawiść do swego krzywdziciela, a nawet chęć zemsty. Dążąc do ich realizacji "przyobleczesz szaty" kata, by w kolejnym żywocie odpłacić się temu człowiekowi za wszelkie krzywdy, jakie ci uczynił. Po pewnym okresie swej '''kaciej''' działalności może pojawić się poczucie winy."
::::::[[User:Olaf|Olaf]] ([[User talk:Olaf|talk]]) 11:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
:::(Sorry, this took a bit to type up, the reply interface lags a lot on this page.) {{ping|Olaf}}: Addressing the latter part, I was a bit unsure about this request, yeah. It is a rather standard derivative, so maybe the definition was fine like that? Still, I was slightly alarmed by the fact WSJP lists two definitions for ''kat'' ("executioner" and "tormentor"), whereas for ''kaci'' it specifies that it refers to the sense "executioner", so I felt that it's better to be safe than sorry.
:::The latter two examples seem fine; the first, hm. It seems ambiguous? It might be employing the adjective, but given it speaks of what's happening during an execution, it seems more likely that it's a noun concord (i.e. two nouns -- ''kat zabobonnik'' in the singular -- because, like, there would assumedly be torturers present, and they'd be superstitious as well). I don't know if the Criteria for Inclusion would allow the second quote, but at the very least it's proof the word's used that way. [[User:Hythonia|Hythonia]] ([[User talk:Hythonia|talk]]) 11:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
::::Oh, oops -- never mind. Hadn't seen your last comment prior to typing this up. Yeah, this looks like a closed case. Thank you. [[User:Hythonia|Hythonia]] ([[User talk:Hythonia|talk]]) 11:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[হায়রে লন্ডন শান্তি নাই#rfv-notice-bn-|হায়রে লন্ডন শান্তি নাই]] ==
 
Bengali. — [[User:Surjection|S]]  06:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ur-|]] ==
 
{{movedfrom|Project:Requests for deletion/Non-English#}}
Urdu.
This word must be kept on!
This word is found on Hindustani Dictionary. {{unsigned|গহীনঅরণ্য|9:53, 24 April 2023 (UTC)}}
: {{ping|গহীনঅরণ্য}}: The original RFD nomination, which I have changed to RFV, says "Not Urdu. Transliteration of {{m|hi|योग्य}}." Urdu is only half of Hindustani, and it is not just Hindi spelled with a different script. We need to see evidence that this is used in Urdu, not just Hindi. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 10:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[теңбийлик#rfv-notice-ky-|теңбийлик]] ==
 
=== [[өкүлкеңеш#rfv-notice-ky-|өкүлкеңеш]] ===
 
Kyrgyz. Two supposed calques from Finnish, both added by [[User:Almanbet Janışev]] and have no ghits outside of The Languages of David J. Peterson. Most entries in [[:Category:Kyrgyz neologisms]] appear suspect in general. — [[User:Surjection|S]]  19:41, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 
:I need to add that this user has been adding entries from other Wiktionaries not checking if they match our [[WT:CFI]] or not. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 12:45, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[afterblismed#rfv-notice-enm-|afterblismed]] ==
 
Middle English. [[User:J3133|J3133]] ([[User talk:J3133|talk]]) 11:48, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[erg#rfv-sense-notice-nl-|erg]] ==
 
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "(obsolete) homosexual, gay"
[[User:-sche|- -sche]] [[User talk:-sche|(discuss)]] 21:32, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 
= May 2023 =
== [[ne manuti#rfv-notice-sq-|ne manuti]] ==
 
Albanian. Recently added by an anon. I don't know Albanian, so I don't know if this is a real term or something somebody made up one day. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 22:21, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[มือฝรั่ง#rfv-notice-th-|มือฝรั่ง]] ==
 
Thai. Unattested at all. No usage of the term is found anywhere. Google search returned no usage of this term. --[[User:YURi|YURi]] ([[User talk:YURi|talk]]) 20:19, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ยาเม็ดสีทอง#rfv-notice-th-|ยาเม็ดสีทอง]] ==
 
Thai. The attestation of the term is in doubt.
 
# Regarding Definition 1 - Not sure what the OP really wanted to refer to. But the def provided seems to refer to any medicine that is gold in colour, which, if so, would constitute an SOP.
# Regarding definition 2 - Never once have I seen this term used in this sense. Google search returned no usage of the term in this sense.
 
--[[User:YURi|YURi]] ([[User talk:YURi|talk]]) 20:25, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[kuvantum#rfv-notice-tr-|kuvantum]] ==
 
Turkish. Tagged by [[User:Xenos melophilos]].  Defined as a misspelling.  As a standalone term it has more than three apparently citable uses.  It's harder to tell if it is a rare misspelling (RFD material), common misspelling, or alternative form.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 20:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
: Verificated in [[kuantum]]. [[w:Turkish Language Association|TDK]] is a government foundation and whatever it says is the official language. If the words taken from foreign languages are taken in a late period, TDK generally prefers to take their spelling close to the original. Quantum is already an academic word, we don't use it in our daily life. So, [[kuvantum]] can not be a dialect. It's a misspelling. We spell it kuantum and read this word as it is written. [[User:BurakD53|BurakD53]] ([[User talk:BurakD53|talk]]) 22:30, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
:I think you're right about RFD. [[User:BurakD53|BurakD53]] ([[User talk:BurakD53|talk]]) 22:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[pfundig#rfv-sense-notice-de-|pfundig]] ==
 
German. Rfv-sense: "voluptuous, curvaceous".  – [[User:Jberkel|Jberkel]] 19:08, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[пызь#rfv-notice-koi-|пызь]] ==
 
Komi-Permyak.
The word is missing in the "Komi-Permyak-Russian Dictionary (1985)" and "Russian-Komi-Permyak Dictionary (1946)".
[[User:Burmort|Burmort]] ([[User talk:Burmort|talk]]) 19:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[pii#rfv-sense-notice-fi-|pii]] ==
 
Finnish. Rfv-sense #3 under Etymology 2: Synonym of {{m|fi|hammas|'''hammas'''}}.
: {{ping|Surjection}} I don't think so. We have sense #1 "thorn, prong, tooth or similar element e.g. in a plant, a saw or a rake" and it is correct that in this sense "hammas" is a synonym. Having this (#3) as separate sense leads one to think that "pii" might have referred to the anatomical tooth as well. I found no evidence but am happy to see any quotes that would prove me wrong. --[[User:Hekaheka|Hekaheka]] ([[User talk:Hekaheka|talk]]) 14:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
:{{m|fi|pii}}'s original etymological meaning ''is'' tooth in the anatomical sense, but it's not obvious that this sense survived into Finnish - I'll see if I can find quotes. — [[User:Surjection|S]]  14:30, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
::Well, I wasn't. '''RFV-deleted''' — [[User:Surjection|S]]  15:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Ukrainamiutut#rfv-notice-kl-|Ukrainamiutut]] ==
 
Greenlandic.  Tagged by {{ping|Gamren}} in 2017 but not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[überfreut#rfv-notice-de-|überfreut]] ==
 
German. Tagged by an IP editor but not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:57, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[beennen#rfv-notice-nds-|beennen]] ==
 
Low German.  An IP editor requested verification of the past participles ''ebeennt'' and ''gebeennt'' in the inflection table.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[bedüden#rfv-notice-nds-|bedüden]] ==
 
Low German.  An IP editor requested verification of the past participles ''ebedüüdt'' and ''gebedüüdt'' in the inflection table.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:01, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[graag#rfv-notice-nds-|graag]] ==
 
Low German. Tagged by an IP editor, not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:03, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Gröyter#rfv-notice-nds-|Gröyter]] ==
 
Low German or Low Saxon. The L2 says Low Saxon, the head template says Low German.  Tagged by an IP editor but not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:05, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
: ''[[nds]] = [[Low German]] ''(strict sense)'' = [[Low Saxon]]'' -- it all means the same. (''nds'''-nl''' = '''Dutch''' Low German/Saxon'' has an addition.)
: [[gröyter]] (small g) is more likely, but still questionable. {{unsigned|2003:DE:3724:F14:A8BC:6D10:5D61:B07A}}
 
== [[Rüen#rfv-sense-notice-nds-|Rüen]] ==
 
Low German. Rfv-sense: "dog".  Tagged by an IP editor who added a sense as an oblique form of {{l|nds|Rüe|t=dog}}. [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[starfsemi#rfv-sense-notice-is-|starfsemi]] ==
 
Icelandic. Rfv-sense: industriousness.  Tagged by {{ping|Numberguy6}} but not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 18:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[nashke]] ==
 
Albanian. Can we source that? [[User:Sławobóg|Sławobóg]] ([[User talk:Sławobóg|talk]]) 21:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[bithbhlast]] ==
 
is it ''-blast'' or ''-plast''? Does Irish use the same suffix for both? Either way, there seems to be no usage of this word in running text. This also covers the alternate spelling {{m|ga|biothbhlast}}.  Thanks, [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 12:57, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 
:
:I see that our entry for {{m|en|bioblast}} says that it's just an alt form of {{m|en|bioplast}} anyway, so never mind. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 07:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 
::Oh, sorry, I didnt think to check the English.  {{m|en|-blast}} and {{m|en|-plast}} have similar meanings, but not the same, so  I dont think bioblast and bioplast should be synonyms in English either, but i found this from a different thread mentioning that bioplasm may not actually exist, so it may be that these words are all archaic and the meanings of -blast and -plast were not set in stone at the time. [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 22:31, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Esperanto. Rfv-sense: "lemming". I have only found one use on Google Books, while a quick look on Google Search did not hit anything either.  [[User:Lingo Bingo Dingo|  ]] ([[User talk:Lingo Bingo Dingo|talk]])  09:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
* '''RFV-failed'''. [[User:Ultimateria|Ultimateria]] ([[User talk:Ultimateria|talk]]) 05:51, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[baat#rfv-sense-notice-nl-|baat]] ==
 
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "cocky" — [[User:Mnemosientje|Mnemosientje]] ([[User talk:Mnemosientje|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Mnemosientje|c]]) 14:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Ꝉ#rfv-notice-ga-|Ꝉ]] ==
 
Irish. The lowercase form [[ꝉ]] is used in Old Irish and Middle Irish, but I don't think it's used in modern Irish, and I don't think the uppercase form is used in any of them. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 17:30, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Горішні Плавні#rfv-sense-notice-uk-|Горішні Плавні]] ==
 
Ukrainian. Rfv-sense: nowheresville.  Tagged by [[User:Underfell Flowey]], not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 02:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
: At some stage the renaming caused a storm of memes in Ukrainian and Russian at some period but the sense is wrong, IMO. Google "''Горішні Плавні мем''" to see meme examples. Since the name sounded funny, someone may have assigned that meaning but I don't think it was anywhere widespread. {{unsigned|Atitarev}}
 
== [[anapilin#rfv-notice-lt-|anapilin]] ==
 
Lithuanian. —  18:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[abad#rfv-sense-notice-id-|abad]] ==
 
Indonesian. Rfv-sense: eternal era.  Tagged by [[User:Rex Aurorum]] years ago, not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Indonesian.  Tagged by [[User:Rex Aurorum]] years ago, not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Xbypass|Xbypass]] ? Can't find this anywhere. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 04:07, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
::@[[User:Xbypass|Xbypass]] I'm going to delete this in a few days. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 03:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
'''RFV-failed''', the creator has  ignored the pings despite being otherwise active. Probably just an error. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 10:48, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Kerambreoù#rfv-notice-br-|Kerambreoù]] ==
 
Breton. Defined as "Hogwarts". Tagged by an IP editor in 2019.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:08, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ଷ଼#rfv-notice-or-|ଷ଼]] ==
 
Oriya. Tagged by an IP editor years ago with the comment "ṣô + nukta becoming /ɻ/ does not make sense".  This may be meant as a request for verification of pronunciation /ɻɔ/.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[snoppstoppare#rfv-notice-sv-|snoppstoppare]] ==
 
Swedish.  Tagged by [[User:Christoffre]], not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:15, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[evrenk#rfv-notice-tr-|evrenk]] ==
 
Turkish. Tagged by [[User:Afb2011]].  If it exists it might be spelled ''evreng'', the Ottoman pronunciation given in {{tl|R:tr:NewRedhouse}}.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:33, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== {{l|ceb|Lance}} ==
 
RFV label added by Kwekwlos, but not listed here. ''[[User:Donnanz|DonnanZ]] ([[User talk:Donnanz|talk]]) 21:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)''
 
== [[Republiik van Albaanje#rfv-notice-li-|Republiik van Albaanje]] ==
 
Limburgish. Tagged by an IP editor with the comment
: As:
:* nothing at Google and Google Books.
:* officialese names are uncommon in vernacular and minority languages.
:* per [[w:Eupen dialect]], the dialect is Ripuarian (part of [[:Category:Central Franconian language|Central Franconian]]) and not Limburgish.
[[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[köferik#rfv-notice-slr-|köferik]] ==
 
Salar. Tagged by [[User:BurakD53]] with the comment "I think it is misunderstanding of köprik “breast”, page 393".  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:14, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-sense-notice-ajp-|]] ==
 
South Levantine Arabic. Rfv-sense: corkscrew.  Tagged by [[User:AdrianAbdulBaha]], not listed.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:24, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ajp-|]] ==
 
South Levantine Arabic.  Tagged by [[User:Fenakhay]].  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 16:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
: {{re|Fenakhay}} Deffo present in Jordan. [[w:File:Current and former Carrefour Global locations.jpg|Carrefour]] Jordan [https://www.carrefourjordan.com/c/FJOR6010202 sells] it. Something about [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obB2rSYkda4 fishing in Jordan], and a [https://www.tiktok.com/@royakitchen/video/7147773620587154689 cooking show], although this is some nice Modern Standard Arabic the girl is talking; it is generally correct to assume terms for flora and fauna to belong to either literary language or dialect if found in one unless there is contrary evidence. My search is , as Jordan is between Egyptian and Hijazi Arabic where it is used because of influence from Egyptian Arabic; apparently here borrowed from Egyptian into Jordanian phonology, hence unexpected {{IPAchar|/d͡ʒ/}}. [[User:Fay Freak|Fay Freak]] ([[User talk:Fay Freak|talk]]) 16:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Artognou#rfv-notice-cel-bry-pro-|Artognou]] ==
 
Proto-Brythonic. It's a given name attested in the inscription {{lang|la|PATERN[--] COLI AVI FICIT ARTOGNOU COL[I] FICIT}}, which is Latin, which strongly suggests this is a Latin transcription of a Proto-Brythonic name, and not a Proto-Brythonic term in its own right. By comparison, the reconstructed form would be {{m|cel-bry-pro|*Arθgnọw}}.
{{pb}}
I should note that this has been RFV'd before ([https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Artognou&diff=prev&oldid=41361788] - discussion [[Talk:Artognou|here]]), but the notice was [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Artognou&diff=prev&oldid=41383692 removed after 2 days] with the baffling reasoning that it is attested, without actually addressing the fact that the dispute is over which language it's actually attested in. Can we please clear this up once and for all? [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 16:42, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Ἀργεντοκόξος#rfv-notice-cel-bry-pro-|Ἀργεντοκόξος]] ==
 
Proto-Brythonic. According to the etymology, it's attested in a Koine Greek text as a transcription of a Proto-Brythonic given name. Same issue as ''[[#Artognou]]'' and ''[[#Uindiorix]]'', in that the attestation makes it a Koine Greek term (which we group under Ancient Greek), and not a Proto-Brythonic term. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 17:50, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
South Levantine Arabic.  Tagged by [[User:AdrianAbdulBaha]].  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:35, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
:'''RFV failed''' —  00:40, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-notice-ajp-|]] ==
 
South Levantine Arabic. More seafood skepticism from [[User:Fenakhay]].  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:37, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[#rfv-sense-notice-ajp-|]] ==
 
South Levantine Arabic. Rfv-sense: sexuality.  Tagged by an IP editor.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:41, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[rikìta#rfv-notice-rmy-|rikìta]] ==
 
Vlax Romani.  Tagged by the creator of the definition.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:44, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[застреха#rfv-sense-notice-ru-|застреха]] ==
 
Russian. Rfv-sense: eavestrough.  Tagged in 2017 by D1gggg whose account is now globally locked.  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:54, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]]: The term can be referenced in Ushakov, Ozhegov, Zaliznyak, orthographic, etc. dictionaries: The links are all here: [https://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/ushakov/812646] Ushakov gives a usage example: "Воробьи́ под застре́хой вьют гнёзда." Kindly retract the rfv. [[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 00:37, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[злоумыслить#rfv-sense-notice-ru-|злоумыслить]] ==
 
Russian. Rfv-sense: To lie in wait.  Tagged by [[User:Allahverdi Verdizade]].  [[User:Vox Sciurorum|Vox Sciurorum]] ([[User talk:Vox Sciurorum|talk]]) 17:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[sattha#rfv-sense-notice-pi-Not_in_dictionaries.]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: seventh
 
{{m|pi|sattha|Sattha|t=seventh}} looks like a typo to me. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 00:17, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 
:'''Delete''' --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 14:04, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
:I've traced the spelling with the aspiration back to Duroiselle's ''A Practical Grammar of the Pāli Language'', Third edition, 1921.  Paragraph 251 gives the form as 'sattha', while Paragraph 275 gives it as unaspirated {{m|pi|satta}}.  I suspect interference from adjacent {{m|pi|chaṭṭha|t=sixth}} and {{m|pi|aṭṭhama|t=eighth}}; their underdotting in the text has to be taken on faith - it is not visible in the scan of the original. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 09:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[гач#rfv-notice-koi-|гач]] ==
 
Komi-Permyak.
The word is not in Kuznetsov's Dictionary (1946) or the Krivoschekova-Gantman Dictionary (1985).
[[User:Burmort|Burmort]] ([[User talk:Burmort|talk]]) 16:17, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[hode#rfv-sense-notice-nl-|hode]] ==
 
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "testicle".
 
[https://gtb.ivdnt.org/iWDB/search?actie=article&wdb=WNT&id=M026024&lemmodern=hode WNT] gives one mention, but that's about it for now. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 12:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ఞాయిరు#rfv-notice-te-|ఞాయిరు]] ==
 
=== [[ఞాయిఱు#rfv-notice-te-| ఞాయిఱు]] ===
 
Telugu. —  16:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[അച്ചുതൻ#rfv-notice-ml-|അച്ചുതൻ]] ==
 
Malayalam. —  16:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 
:I have added gloss for given name [https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%B4%85%E0%B4%9A%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%9A%E0%B5%81%E0%B4%A4%E0%B5%BB&diff=prev&oldid=74729618#Malayalam]. [[User:Vis M|Vis M]] ([[User talk:Vis M|talk]]) 19:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[എപ്പൊൾ#rfv-notice-ml-|എപ്പൊൾ]] ==
 
Malayalam. —  16:51, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 
:It was the spelling for {{l|ml|എപ്പോൾ}} in older works.[[:s:ml:Page:CiXIV40.pdf/125]], [[:s:ml:Page:CiXIV133.pdf/546]], and [https://ml.wikisource.org/w/index.php?limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=%E0%B4%8E%E0%B4%AA%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%AA%E0%B5%8A%E0%B5%BE&title=%E0%B4%AA%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%B0%E0%B4%A4%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%AF%E0%B5%87%E0%B4%95%E0%B4%82:%E0%B4%85%E0%B4%A8%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%B5%E0%B5%87%E0%B4%B7%E0%B4%A3%E0%B4%82&ns0=1&ns100=1&ns104=1 several others].
:I think I created this entry by mistake while sourcing missing lemmas from older works, and then realized the mistake and immediately added the archaic label. [[User:Vis M|Vis M]] ([[User talk:Vis M|talk]]) 19:03, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 
::{{ping|Vis M}}, The dictionary seems to transcribe all ō and ē as o/e as in [https://ml.wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%B4%A4%E0%B4%BE%E0%B5%BE:CiXIV40.pdf/125 വെഗം, എന്നെക്കും, ഇനിമെൽ], [https://ml.wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%B4%A4%E0%B4%BE%E0%B5%BE:CiXIV40.pdf/126 തൊറും, തലെന്നാൾ], [https://ml.wikisource.org/w/index.php?limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=%E0%B4%8E%E0%B4%AA%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%AA%E0%B5%8A%E0%B5%BE&title=%E0%B4%AA%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%B0%E0%B4%A4%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%AF%E0%B5%87%E0%B4%95%E0%B4%82:%E0%B4%85%E0%B4%A8%E0%B5%8D%E0%B4%B5%E0%B5%87%E0%B4%B7%E0%B4%A3%E0%B4%82&ns0=1&ns100=1&ns104=1 ദ്രൊഹം], could be a Grantha feature though im not sure whether the early Malayalam script really lacked distinction between ō/o, ē/e? also transcribing the kuttiyalukaram as unmarked though that was common before [[User:AleksiB 1945|AleksiB 1945]] ([[User talk:AleksiB 1945|talk]]) 09:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[anupādāaparitassanā#rfv-notice-pi-|anupādāaparitassanā]] ==
 
Pali.
Hiatus is odd, especially given its absence in the claimed antonym.  {{ping|Felfeu}}: Where's this word been seen? --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 21:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
:Maybe this is obvious, but the hiatus is because both parts of the compound are negated, not just the first. I dont know this language ... would an ''ā'' normally swallow a following ''a'', even if that /a/ is  a very important morpheme? [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 14:53, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
::'''Keep''' Some of the X-not-X compounds have looked very unclear, but I forgot the first rule - try Google.  I've now found seemingly good quotations and will put at least one of them up tonight. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 15:28, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
:::{{re|soap}} It's an SoP (as in the looming German/Swedish/Sanskrit problem) and coal mine mess!  First durable source hyphenates, and also hyphenates the feminine form of the positive, but not the neuter form of the positive. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 16:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
::::This is RFV, not RFD. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 18:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
:::{{re|Soap}} I misread the accusative of the feminine form as a neuter form.  The Sinhala script version has the phrase or whatever as a single word, so we now have quotes for one word in the Sinhala script, and for hyphenated and two words in the Roman script.  They're not independent. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 00:12, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
: Is this word associated with a specific religious or philosophical tradition? If so, it should probably be labeled.__[[User:Gamren|Gamren]] ([[User talk:Gamren|talk]]) 12:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
::{{re|Gamren}} If you're up to identifying the tradition, go ahead and label it.  I'd be tempted to say it's a Buddhist term, but for all I know it might just be a Theravadin concept.  It might not Sanskritise well. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 12:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
::: I don't know anything about this topic.__[[User:Gamren|Gamren]] ([[User talk:Gamren|talk]]) 14:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[caturaṅga#rfv-notice-pi-|caturaṅga]] ==
 
Pali.
 
Even an LDL needs some evidence of existence for its words. Can find no evidence of this noun in Pali. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 21:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
:Well, it's got two descendants listed at the bottom of the [[चतुरङ्ग]] page. Would these two be better explained as direct loans from Sanskrit? [[user:Soap|—]][[Special:Contributions/Soap|—]] 09:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
::It works - dating of the loans would help.  The compilers of Thailand's Royal Institute Dictionary gave up on trying to decide whether words were borrowed from Sanskrit or Pali.  In this instance, I think borrowing via Thai would also be possible.  The word exists in Thai, though not on The Languages of David J. Peterson.  The homonymous adjective in Pali has a ghostly existence - it can be seen as an intermediate element of compounds, but is also borderline SoP. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 10:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[patodaka#rfv-sense-notice-pi-|patodaka]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: 'spur'
 
Dictionaries record {{m|pi|patoda|t=goad, spur}}. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 12:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 
= June 2023 =
== [[āraññaka#rfv-sense-notice-pi-Where]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: an ascetic forest-dwelling
 
Put simply, what evidence do we have that this was (or is) used as a noun in Pali?--[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 13:00, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[vacati#rfv-sense-notice-pi-grammarians-fancy|vacati]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: to say
 
Both [[vacati]] and [[vatti]] appear to be grammarians' fancies, and Childers writes, "[[w:Aggavamsa|Saddiníti]] gives the present forms ''vatti'' and ''vacati'', neither of which I have yet met with in texts, ''vadati'' in Pali being generally substituted for the present of वच्.".
 
Geiger makes no reference to ''vatti'' in his discussion of athematic verbs.  In his grammar, Thomas Oberlies uses the expression '(*)vatti' to refer to the forms from the stem {{m|pi|vac}}.  Neither grammar makes any mention of ''vacati''.
 
As the Saddiníti refers to them, there may be some merit in fashioning an explanation of the terms on The Languages of David J. Peterson.  (Note that Oberlies' usage is in English.) --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 17:13, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 
:{{ping|Apisite}} Please note that I've sent {{m|pi|vacati//vatti}} to RfV. [[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 17:29, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
 
===References===
r:Surjection|S]]  12:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ဣ#rfv-notice-mul-|ဣ]] ==
 
Translingual.  RfV was raised at entry by [[User:Kwamikagami]], who neglected to create an entry here. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 16:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 
:Corrupt entries like this should of course just be fixed or deleted, but RichardW57m is edit-warring over imposing a Burmese-nationalist bias on Wikt, so better for a third party to fix it.
:RichardW57m was instructed, [[Project:Beer_parlour/2023/July#Pronunciation_Labelling_in_Translingual_Items|when he asked about this issue]] at the Beer Parlor, that the translingual header is for translingual entries, and that individual languages belong under their own headers. Yet he insists that Burmese does not belong under a language header, but should be presented as some kind of translingual entity, and that all other languages of Burma are secondary to it. I've tried fixing, e.g. by changing the 'translingual' header to 'Burmese', but RichardW57m reverts that and complains I am 'deleting' the entry. He also deletes Burmese entries as 'redundant'. (Somehow deleting Burmese does not count as 'deleting'.) I've fixed 'Burmese alphabet' (which RichardW57m intends specifically as the alphabet of the burmese language, not as the translingual Mon-Burmese script -- this isn't a matter of him being confused by the name) to the translingual Mon-Burmese script (arguably it's actually the Mon script), but RichardW57m reverts it back to his favored language, arguing that the Burmese alphabet is representative of the Mon script and so should be presented instead. There's also the problem that Mon, Shan, Karen etc. are not pronounced as Burmese. In this single case he has made the grudging concession of labeling the pronunciation as 'Burmese', but of course it should still be moved to a Burmese header. He's also called for me to be banned for opposing his nationalist bias, which has no business dictating the format of Wikt. [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 18:54, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
::The likes of {{m+|mul|i|pos=letter}} are defined by reference to well-known alphabets; the current and early definition of th (vowel) letter are by reference to a well-known alphabet.  (He appears to be frustrated that the Mons were definitively defeated by the Burmese after attempting to assimilate the Burmese, so that Burmese culture is better known to English speakers than Mon culture.)
::There is currently a moratorium on editing one-character letters, such as this, so here is evidence of translinguality:
::#* {{#invoke:string|replace|{{m+|my|'''ဣ'''န္ဒြေ|t=composure}}|.'''na.d|'''nd}}
::#* {{m+|mnw|ဣန်|t=Indr|tr='''i'''n}}
::#* {{m+|pi|'''ဣ'''မ|t=this}}
::As for the history, I contend that simply '''undo'''ing an improper edit is perfectly reasonable - {{ping|Kwamikagami}} had replaced 'translingual' by 'Burmese' without raising an {{tl|rfm}} or anything suitable.  If he had simply added a Burmese language section for a letter, I would not have changed his edit except perhaps for uncontroversial edits, such as fixing typos or supplying omitted items. [[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 20:59, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
:::'''Keep'''.  (I was interrupted by a computer problem).
:::As to the matter of citing pronunciations, that is something that can be improved.  We are slowly discussing it in [[Project:Beer parlour/2023/July#Pronunciation Labelling in Translingual Items]], where on 15 July {{ping|Kwamikagami}} conceded, "If under 'translingual' you wanted to give the pronunciation of the various languages that use the letter, that would be technically correct, but that's why we have sections for individual languages."  The discussion is moving to the notion of focussing on abstract sounds, and not using sound clips at all, which tend to be cluttered by irrelevant details of individual languages. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 21:30, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
:::I fixed the transliteration of the Burmese; it was part of the edits lost by my computer problem. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 09:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[fransozisch#rfv-notice-nl-|fransozisch]] ==
 
Dutch.
 
[[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 18:54, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 
:I had a quick look around and {{google|"is fransozisch"}}, {{google|"was fransozisch"}}, {{google|"zijn fransozisch"}}, and {{google|"waren fransozisch"}} all come up with exactly [[bupkus]].
:Frankly, this looks like a typo of {{cog|de|französisch}}. ‑‑ [[User:Eirikr|Eiríkr Útlendi]] │ 20:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
:: The same user also created {{cog|nl|fransoos}}, and from what I'm finding at {{google|"de fransoos"}}, most usages have initial capitalization, which seems lexically important.  ‑‑ [[User:Eirikr|Eiríkr Útlendi]] │ 21:02, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[אַדורכן#rfv-sense-notice-yi-|אַדורכן]] ==
 
Yiddish. Rfv-sense: could not find any online sources using this word as a verb, but instead as a preposition. [[User:Insaneguy1083|Insaneguy1083]] ([[User talk:Insaneguy1083|talk]]) 07:45, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[sammā#rfv-sense-notice-pi-otiose_gibberish_and_gramatically_wrong|sammā]] ==
 
Pali. Rfv-sense: Adding 'completely' would be redundant, 'sum' makes no sense, and the added translations are wrong gramatically. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 20:00, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[∹#rfv-sense-notice-mul-|∹]] ==
 
Translingual. Rfv-sense:
 
== [[វិតាល់#rfv-notice-km-|វិតាល់]] ==
 
Khmer. Seems to be a brand name, but I can't find any usage as a word. [[User:Binarystep|Binarystep]] ([[User talk:Binarystep|talk]]) 10:49, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ย้อน#rfv-sense-notice-th-dialect_status|ย้อน]] ==
 
Thai. Rfv-sense: because
 
Does this actually occur in some Central Thai dialect, or is this merely an echo of its existence in the Northern Thai and North-eastern Thai ''languages''?  We have no source, explicit or implicit for this sense, a practice some have tried to ban.  {{wgping|th|u1=Alifshinobi|u2=Octahedron80|u3=YURi|u4=Judexvivorum|u5=หมวดซาโต้|u6=Atitarev|u7=GinGlaep|u8=Noktonissian}}.  This sense was added by {{ping|21janvier1793}}, who has not edited for over a year. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 12:16, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 
:I could not find the reference to support it. In fact, I don't think Central Thai dialect ever use this word in that sense. Even in the contemporary Northern Thai, the use of this word to mean "because" is rare. I think the user @[[User:21janvier1793|21janvier1793]] put the meaning here because he misunderstood that Isaan was a dialect of Central Thai. [[User:Noktonissian|Noktonissian]] ([[User talk:Noktonissian|talk]]) 13:18, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
::Does anyone feel up to writing the Isaan entry?  I wasn't up to translating the examples I could find. It looks as though the simple word is both preposition and conjunction, though Becker just gives {{lang|tts|ย้อนว่า}} (in Lao script) as the conjunction. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 14:39, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 
:I do not think the meaning "because" belongs here. พจนานุกรมฉบับราชบัณฑิตยสถาน does not mention this meaning. I think we should remove it. --[[User:Alifshinobi|A.S.]] ([[User talk:Alifshinobi|talk]]) 13:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
:In view of Noktonissian's opinion and the lack of support for this word, and to stop this RfV stalling for timidity - '''Delete'''. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 12:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Alofo#rfv-notice-pwn-|Alofo]] ==
 
Paiwan. This language does not appear to use the letter ''f'': see a long text at [https://indigenous-justice.president.gov.tw/doc/apology_text/Paiwan.pdf]. The phoneme ''v'' is apparently used, so it is possible that different orthographies exist. The word {{m|pwn|alofo}} (with lowercase) may belong to a different Taiwanese indigenous language, such as Amis. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 11:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 
:[https://klokah-file.com/111/%E9%98%BF%E7%BE%8E%E8%AA%9E-%E8%AA%9E%E6%B3%95%E6%A6%82%E8%AB%96.pdf This resource] about the Amis language glosses {{m|ami|’alofo}} as {{m|zh|[[背]][[袋]]||backpack}}. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 12:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Ǹ#rfv-notice-und-|Ǹ]] ==
 
Undetermined. Having deleted the entry for the Chinese upper case 'letter', {{ping|Kwamikagami}} added the tag {{tl|rfv}} with the explanation, 'Lacking a language orthography'.  Now if {{m+|yo|ǹ|pos=letter}} is valid, we need a good explanation as to why the corresponding capital does not exist or is not translingual.  Incidentally, {{m+|mul|ǹ|pos=symbol}} existed until {{ping|Kwamikagami}} deleted it out of process on 2 June 2023. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 12:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Old Polish.
I tagged but forgot to list. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 
'''Rfv-failed'''. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Old Polish.
I tagged but forgot to list. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 
'''RFV-failed'''. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 10:01, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[mathafarn#rfv-notice-pwn-|mathafarn]] ==
 
Welsh. This is certainly a proper noun used as a house and farm name[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathafarn] but I can't find any record of it as a common noun, specifically in Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru. [[User:Llusiduonbach|Llusiduonbach]] ([[User talk:Llusiduonbach|talk]]) 16:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[йӕуу#rfv-notice-os-|йӕуу]] ==
 
Ossetian.
 
An IP has complained on the talk page about this being a misspelling. While one might wonder whether an IP from Pahrump, Nevada knows much about the spelling of a relatively obscure language such as this, the entry was created by Rajkiandris- so we definitely need a reality check. Pinging {{ping|Victar}}, who might have a clue. [[User:Chuck Entz|Chuck Entz]] ([[User talk:Chuck Entz|talk]]) 13:35, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
: {{re|Chuck Entz}} IP was correct. Moved and sourced. -- 19:35, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
 
= August 2023 =
== [[ӧті#rfv-notice-koi-|ӧті]] ==
 
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed last February. [[User:Burmort|Burmort]], who tagged it, didn't say why they're suspicious of it, but perhaps the existence of {{m|koi|ӧтік}} raised a red flag. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 18:06, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[mprat#rfv-notice-sq-|mprat]] ==
 
Albanian. The dialectal variation of ''mb- ~ mp-'' is plausible. [[User:Catonif|Catonif]] ([[User talk:Catonif|talk]]) 09:26, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[σαώ#rfv-notice-grc-|σαώ]] ==
 
Ancient Greek. I can find the proper noun {{m|grc|Σαώ}} and two verbs with the accentuation {{m|grc|σάω}}, but none of the sources listed under ===References=== actually lists a common noun {{m|grc|σαώ}}. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 12:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Welsh; a loanword meaning "potty". Wouldn't surprise me, but I can't find it in dictionaries. —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 19:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
:Added a citation, Welsh is an LDL. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 09:19, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
::Great, thanks! —[[User:Mahagaja|Mahāgaja]] · [[User talk:Mahagaja|''talk'']] 17:43, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[луа#rfv-notice-koi-|луа]] ==
 
Komi-Permyak. Attested term is {{m|koi|лы́а}}. Not present in the usual dictionaries. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 14:35, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[kalidrungudrungulj#rfv-notice-pwn-|kalidrungudrungulj]] ==
 
Paiwan. Tagged 2 years ago by {{ping|Mar vin kaiser}}: "not found in official Ministry of Education dictionary". Created in 2009 by {{ping|Qehath}}, who is still around. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 10:54, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[tzitzitl#rfv-notice-nhe-|tzitzitl]] ==
 
Eastern Huasteca Nahuatl. The entry saw participation from {{ping|Aearthrise|Marrovi}} in 2018 and 2020. Note that the Western Huasteca Nahuatl entry was removed out of process. [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 02:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[кулны#rfv-notice-kpv-|кулны]] ==
 
Komi-Zyrian. Standard form is [[кувны]]. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 13:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Thadh|Thadh]] I'm starting to think that we should allow anything added by Rajkiandris to be nuked on sight. These RFVs for his entries are rarely worth our time. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 05:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[мыськыны#rfv-notice-koi-|мыськыны]] ==
 
Komi-Permyak. Not in the usual dictionaries. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 18:15, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[мыськыны#rfv-notice-udm-|мыськыны]] ==
 
Udmurt. Standard form is [[миськыны]]. [[User:Thadh|Thadh]] ([[User talk:Thadh|talk]]) 18:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Bách Độ#rfv-notice-vi-|Bách Độ]] ==
 
Vietnamese. With the following reason: "Is the Sino-Vietnamese reading ACTUALLY used instead of "Baidu"?". --[[User:ChemPro|ChemPro]] ([[User talk:ChemPro|talk]]) 13:59, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
: {{ping|PhanAnh123}} After a little bit of research, I've found that the Sino-Vietnamese reading is exclusively used for the company name. For the search engine, "Baidu" is used instead [https://mayphiendich.com/tin-tuc/baidu-la-gi/][https://chineserd.vn/baidu-la-gi-baidu-co-giong-voi-google/][https://tiengtrung.vn/baidu-la-gi][https://thanhmaihsk.edu.vn/baidu-trung-quoc-cach-dang-ky-va-su-dung/][https://hicado.com/baidu-la-gi/][https://marketingai.vn/baidu-la-gi-he-lo-su-that-ve-google-cua-trung-quoc-it-nguoi-biet-19488232.htm]. --[[User:ChemPro|ChemPro]] ([[User talk:ChemPro|talk]]) 13:59, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
::This [https://vov.vn/the-gioi/trung-quoc-keu-goi-cu-dan-mang-khong-tan-cong-cac-trang-web-nuoc-ngoai-131903.vov 2010 article], Bách Độ '''were''' used for both the search engine & the company name.
::as in "Trước diễn biến này, '''Công ty ''Bách Độ''''' đã kêu gọi cư dân mạng Trung Quốc giữ bình tĩnh, không nên tấn công trả đũa các trang web nước ngoài. /As the situation thus develops, the '''''Baidu'' company''' has exhorted Chinese net denizens to keep their cool and not attack foreign websites in retaliation." as well as in "Sáng qua (12/1), '''trang web công cụ''' tìm kiếm hàng đầu của Trung Quốc là '''trang ''Bách Độ''''' bị hacker tấn công. /  Yesterday morning (12 January), China's leading '''search engine – ''Baidu''''' – was attacked by hackers." I think we can remove the {{[[Template:rfv|rfv]]}}! [[User:Erminwin|Erminwin]] ([[User talk:Erminwin|talk]]) 03:12, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[barbe#rfv-notice-eo-|barbe]] ==
 
Esperanto. "In the manner of beards". It also said "beardically" before I removed that suspicious nonsense. [[User:Equinox|Equinox]] [[User_talk:Equinox|◑]] 05:42, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Angorawolle#rfv-notice-de-|Angorawolle]] ==
 
German. "# [[wool]] of a certain kind of [[goat]]s ({{taxlink|Capra hircus angorensis|subspecies}})"
 
Fine wools are produced by members of breeds of ''[[Capra hircus]]'', but subspecies ''Capra hircus angorensis'' is not in Mammal Species of the World, Catalog of Life, WP, or Wikispecies, though six other species are. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 02:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
: In any case, angora wool is from the Angora ''rabbit'', not the Angora ''goat''. The hair of the goat is called mohair.__[[User:Gamren|Gamren]] ([[User talk:Gamren|talk]]) 12:02, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
:: Thanks. We could use a correct definition in addition to the one under challenge. [[User:DCDuring|DCDuring]] ([[User talk:DCDuring|talk]]) 19:28, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Lê trung hưng triều#rfv-notice-vi-|Lê trung hưng triều]] ==
 
Vietnamese. According to {{ping|PhanAnh123}}: "What are some attestations in Vietnamese texts?" --[[User:ChemPro|ChemPro]] ([[User talk:ChemPro|talk]]) 15:26, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Lê sơ triều#rfv-notice-vi-|Lê sơ triều]] ==
 
Vietnamese. According to {{ping|PhanAnh123}}: "What are some attestations in Vietnamese texts?" --[[User:ChemPro|ChemPro]] ([[User talk:ChemPro|talk]]) 15:26, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[жопа#rfv-notice-be-|жопа]] ==
 
Belarusian. Belarusians may occasionally use this word in their Russian speech, but I doubt that it can be considered a proper Belarusian word. The synonyms of this word exist in Belarusian dictionaries, so it's not vulgar enough to be excluded from dictionaries on the basis of being vulgar. And yet the Belarusian dictionaries don't seem to have "жопа". [[User:Ssvb|Ssvb]] ([[User talk:Ssvb|talk]]) 16:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:Ssvb|Ssvb]]: Hi. The Belarusian entry was added by me. It can be marked as rare or "Russianism". The more common synonym {{m|be|ду́па}} is listed under synonyms. It was possible to find usage in Belarusian. Folklore: "Ах, мілка мая, вярці '''жопаю''', як я. Стара будзеш — пазабудзеш, вярцець жопаю не будзеш." Another usage: "Раптам бачу, круцяць міма нас '''жопамі'''".
:More common vulgar forms like "пайшла ў жопу!". It is verifiable in different forms, if someone wants to keep it.
:I don't mind keeping Belarusian less contaminated by Russian, though, if it's decided to delete the entry. I am neutral but remember we describe the language the way it is, not the way we want it to be. [[User:Atitarev|Anatoli T.]] / 08:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ᠱᠷᠢᠢ#rfv-notice-sa-|ᠱᠷᠢᠢ]] ==
 
Sanskrit.
 
The word is not found in Google for any language, not just absent as {{m+|sa|ᠱᠷᠢᠢ}}.  Notifying {{ping|AleksiB 1945|Theknightwho}}, {{wgping|sa|u1=AryamanA|u2=Bhagadatta|u3=Svartava|u4=JohnC5|u5=Kutchkutch|u6=Inqilābī|u7=Getsnoopy|u8=Rishabhbhat|u9=Dragonoid76}}. --11:31, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 
:@[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] Neither are several of the other scripts given. Why are you only RFV’ing this one? If you’re only doing it because you disagree with the move to use the conventional Mongolian I instead of the Galik one, then I should point out that exactly the same issue applies to that version as well. It seems very clear to me that it would be more productive to get rid of the automatic Sanskrit alternative generator instead of these sorts of piecemeal nominations, wouldn’t you agree? [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 04:10, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
::Also this can be found in {{lang|zh|《同文韻統》}} volume 1, [https://www.babelstone.co.uk/Mongolian/TWYT_136.jpg page 137], column 5, which can be verified by cross-comparison with Tibetan-script {{l|sa|ཤྲཱི}} in the top row. Below are Manchu-script {{l|sa|ᡧᡵᡳᡳ}} and Mongolian-script {{l|sa|ᠱᠷᠢᠢ}}. [[User:Theknightwho|Theknightwho]] ([[User talk:Theknightwho|talk]]) 05:00, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
:::{{re|Theknightwho}} Good, could you please add the dictionary (?) mention. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 21:21, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
::{{re|Theknightwho}} A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
::In this particular case, we can now read the word as hand-written, and attempt to work out what is actually written.  And here we also get mentions for Manchu and Tibetan for free from your example.
::After seeing {{ping|AleksiB 1945}}'s confession at [[WT:GP]], I realised there was a whole bunch of unsupported transliterations to investigate.
::While the automated generation of alternative forms tends not to be trustworthy, it does seem to be more trustworthy than the equivalent manual generation of red links, and is better than having private code generating wikitext that is then pasted in manually.  And continual improvement is available for automatic generation.  I do however see false blue (only orange if one's logged in and has so chosen) links as a reputational problem.  One solution for them pending the location of evidence is {{tl|no entry}}. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 22:18, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ఞాయిరు]], [[ఞాయిఱు]] ==
 
Telugu, as mentioned in the deletion summary, no results in CPB or Andhra Bharati repo, not found on internet or gbooks, Tamil Lexicon and Burrow ([https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/burrow_query.py?page=252 DEDR [2910]]) don't identify any Telugu cognate; it is specifically a South Dravidian word, is not even loaned to Telugu and Telugu doesnt have the phoneme /ɲ/, the word is a literal transliteration from Tamil {{l|ta|ஞாயிறு}}. [[User:AleksiB 1945|AleksiB 1945]] ([[User talk:AleksiB 1945|talk]]) 09:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Polish.
One hit on Google, nothing else anywhere. Seems to be a protologism or the IP's invention. [[User:Vininn126|Vininn126]] ([[User talk:Vininn126|talk]]) 11:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 
'''Speedied''' [[User:This, that and the other|This, that and the other]] ([[User talk:This, that and the other|talk]]) 12:28, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 
==  ==
 
Esperanto. Rfv-sense: "a tree of that fruit type", specifically whether it's still in use. It was previously marked as obsolete, but an IP editor {{diff|75790233||removed the label}} as false. I note that the removed usage notes stated (though maybe not in reference to this sense?) "in recent times, the ''-ujo'' is regaining popularity", which does seem incompatible with being "obsolete". —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 15:19, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
:I've added three citations to the entry, and it's easy to find lots of others on Google Books and Tekstaro. —[[User:Mx. Granger|Granger]] ([[User talk:Mx. Granger|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Mx. Granger|contribs]]) 15:40, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
:'''RFV-passed'''. —[[User:Al-Muqanna|Al-Muqanna]]  ([[User talk:Al-Muqanna|talk]]) 14:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[gafasit#rfv-notice-fi-|gafasit]] ==
 
Finnish. Seems to only exist on the Urban Dictionary and a few hashtags that someone probably copied off there. — [[User:Surjection|S]]  17:56, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Өхәй#rfv-notice-xal-|Өхәй]] ==
 
Not attested anywhere besides a [https://xal.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%90%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BD_%D0%9D%D0%B8%D0%B8%D1%86%D3%99%D1%82%D3%99_%D0%9E%D1%80%D0%BD_%D0%9D%D1%83%D1%82%D1%83%D0%B3%D1%83%D0%B4&oldid=15223/ 2010 Kalmyk wikipedia page on the United States], which is also full of non-attestable coinages which apparently tried to adapt state names to Kalmyk phonology. --[[User:Nominkhana arslang|Nominkhana arslang]] ([[User talk:Nominkhana arslang|talk]]) 07:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[Шинзеленд#rfv-notice-xal-|Шинзеленд]] ==
 
Kalmyk.
 
Seems to be another coinage from [https://xal.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A8%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B7%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B8%D0%BD_%D0%9E%D1%80%D0%BD xal-wikipedia]. Not attestable anywhere else. --[[User:Nominkhana arslang|Nominkhana arslang]] ([[User talk:Nominkhana arslang|talk]]) 07:33, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ශ්රී#rfv-notice-sa-|ශ්රී]] ==
 
Sanskrit.
 
Distinctly implausible given Sinhalese spelling {{m|si|ශ්‍රී}}.  If no defence of this spelling can be provided, I recommend that this page simply be deleted, rather than converted to an invocation of {{tl|no entry|sa}}.
 
This entry was perpetrated by {{ping|AleksiB 1945}}.  Unfortunately, we have too little Sinhala-script Sanskrit text to ''constructively'' test the behaviour of [[Module:sa-convert]], which originally perpetrated this spelling. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 05:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 
:[[ශ්‍රී]] looks like an improperly rendered version of [[ශ්රී]], the url shows it as "ශ්%E2%80%8Dරී" and both use the same letters just that the middle "%E2%80%8D" makes the first one a ligature it seems [[User:AleksiB 1945|AleksiB 1945]] ([[User talk:AleksiB 1945|talk]]) 09:51, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
::{{re|AleksiB 1945}} Yes, that's the spelling difference.  Sinhalese mostly forms consonant clusters using {{angbr|0DCA}}, the visible al lakuna - strictly speaking, killed consonant plus normal consonant with vowels: Pali mostly, or at least traditionally, forms consonant clusters using {{angbr|200D 0DCA}} - touching letters: Sanskrit seems to mostly form them using full-blown conjuncts {{angbr|0DCA 200D}}, but I'm not sure whether it (i.e. the user) falls back to touching letters - to be researched.  Additionally, some of the conjuncts seem to be repurposed for prenasalised consonants, and have indecomposable Unicode encodings for when used for that purpose.  Just to complicate matters, it seems that Pali and Sinhala mostly use the full-blown conjunct encodings for clusters with 'r' or with 'y' in second place.  There are at least seven combinations besides those ending in 'y' and 'r' for which Pali uses 'conjuncts' rather than touching letters.  Some of these combinations are to be found in contractions rather than normal words, where they have been almost or mostly assimilated away, e.g. -kv- (no words, I think) and -nv- (only one verb and its compounds that I am sure of).
::Oh, and there's the complication that the Windows font Nirmala UI supports neither touching letters nor full-blown conjuncts not used by Pali, so it falls back to visible al-lakuna.  At least Windows now puts the preposed vowels and vowel fragments after the al-lakuna following the first consonant.
::Finally, the Sinhalese users of Sanskrit in Sinhala script are distinctly a minority - Devanagari has mostly taken over in Sri Lanka. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 13:40, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
:::you should workout with [[Module:sa-convert#Example]], as for the Mlym script it seems the chillus/dot reph are used but not the anusvara for final m as in Malayalam or the chillu m, instead മ് is used; also ive heard some saying word final t/d, ṭ/ḍ are represented with chillu l and ḷ but that might be a Malayalam only thing (not used in the samples either). Samples: [https://sanskritdocuments.org/malayalam/ 1], [https://www.bible.com/bible/2113/MAT.1.SANML 2] [[User:AleksiB 1945|AleksiB 1945]] ([[User talk:AleksiB 1945|talk]]) 11:17, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
::::{{re|AleksiB 1945}} What we need to do is to populate the testcases, and that needs people to work from Sanskrit texts in the relevant scripts.  In some cases, e.g. Sinhala, the examples are almost useless for checking because we lack the fonts to read them properly.  {{wgping|sa|u1=AryamanA|u2=Bhagadatta|u3=Svartava|u4=JohnC5|u5=Kutchkutch|u6=Inqilābī|u7=Getsnoopy|u8=Rishabhbhat|u9=Dragonoid76}}.  I've got two pieces of Sanskrit in Sinhala script, and the chances of my misreading them are very high.  My best chances are with the text at the foot of p26 of https://www.aathaapi.net/tipitaka/28.OTSPKN_Khuddaka_Patha.pdf, and I don't know what type of Sanskrit it is - it could be Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit for all I know.  At least I seem to have a Pali translation of that text in the verses above. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
::::You are aware, are you not, that [[Module:sa-convert#Example]] is generated by the module? --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
::::Beware of the Sanskrit Bible on the Internet.  It is automatically generated from a Devanagari master, and is only as trustworthy as their conversion code.  I've found one version with a couple of sibilants swapped round! --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
::::The first sample may be better; they are aware of the presence of pitfalls - "We are aware of the limitations of this automatic conversion from one language script to the other". --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
::::[[Module:sa-convert/testcases/Sinhala]] demonstrates 3 failures out of 11, and that's working from a lower bar - that the Devanagari and Sinhala have the same Roman transliteration.  Basically, we either have a very modern spelling, well under a century old, or the transliteration to Sinhala is deeply wrong.  I believe it is deeply wrong.  I'm disinclined to fix that detected bug until I can fix other bugs I've seen that are not amenable to automatic conversion. --[[User:RichardW57m|RichardW57m]] ([[User talk:RichardW57m|talk]]) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
 
== [[ສໍສ຺ກ຺ຣິຕ#rfv-notice-sa-|ສໍສ຺ກ຺ຣິຕ]] ==
 
Sanskrit. No non-The Languages of David J. Peterson Google hits, and I don't believe the spelling.  I would expect {{m|sa|ສໍສ຺ກ຺ຣຶຕ}}, but, unsurprisingly, I can't find that either.  Also perpetrated by {{ping|AleksiB 1945}}. --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 06:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 
:I also searched for the nominative, accusative, instrumental and ablative singular of {{m|sa|ສໍສ຺ກ຺ຣິຕ}} and {{m|sa|ສໍສ຺ກ຺ຣຶຕ}}, all to no avail.  (We have an issue with various levels of ambiguity in the writing system that cause problems for automatic transliteration.) --[[User:RichardW57|RichardW57]] ([[User talk:RichardW57|talk]]) 07:08, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:14, 9 September 2023

[Month] [Year]

Example

Retrieved from "https://wiki.languageinvention.com/index.php?title=Project:Requests_for_verification/Non-English&oldid=470758"