text: ciarmatore

title: ciarmatore


text:
hunangur

Etymology
From. Compare 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) honey

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: hunangur


text: planane

title: planane


text:
ciato

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) a glass or metal pot, fitted with a ling handle, used for drawing off wine
 * 2) an ancient unit of measure equivalent to approximately 50 ml
 * 3)  cyathium
 * 4) a mushroom of the genus Ciato
 * 1) a mushroom of the genus Ciato

title: ciato


text:
undeaf

Verb

 * 1)  To free from deafness.

title: undeaf


text:
ciazio

Etymology
From, diminutive of.

title: ciazio


text:
ciclamoro

Noun

 * 1)  a large, single circle or ring

title: ciclamoro


text:
ciclotrimetilentrinitroammina

Noun

 * 1)  cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine

title: ciclotrimetilentrinitroammina


text:
bójaś

Etymology
From, from.

Verb

 * 1)  to fear, be afraid of
 * 2)  to fear for, be afraid for

title: bójaś


text:
Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/otъ

Voicing of the final consonant was probably due to assimilation in word sandhi. Once the jers were lost, it became so prevalent that it was taken as the "normal" form, with ot only preserved in old derivations. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 15:49, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The final *t is more likely to have been replaced with *d by analogy with *nadъ, *perdъ, *podъ, *vъslědъ, etc. --124.148.104.29 08:49, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Possibly, but iz is already a precedent for such development. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 22:03, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I have added father
As it is linked to from both ojciec and Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/átta.

Please review the declension etc. as I am not an expert.

Zezen (talk) 17:49, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/otъ


text:
talantīgs

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1)  talented having talent; gifted
 * 2)  talented such that it expresses someone's talent
 * 1)  talented such that it expresses someone's talent
 * 1)  talented such that it expresses someone's talent
 * 1)  talented such that it expresses someone's talent
 * 1)  talented such that it expresses someone's talent
 * 1)  talented such that it expresses someone's talent

title: talantīgs


text:
schellekoord

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) bellpull

title: schellekoord


text:
Crilly

Etymology
Reduced Anglicized form of. Compare.

Statistics

 * According to the 2010 United States Census, Crilly is the 26362nd most common surname in the United States, belonging to 926 individuals. Crilly is most common among White (94.06%) individuals.

title: Crilly


text:
cifoplastica

Noun

 * 1)  kyphoplasty

title: cifoplastica


text:
izglagolski

Adjective

 * 1) deverbative

title: izglagolski


text:
deverbativen

Adjective

 * 1) deverbative

title: deverbativen


text:
talantīgums

Etymology
From (with  from ).

Noun

 * 1) the quality of one (person, work) that is talented; talent, excellence

title: talantīgums


text:
cinedo

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) catamite

title: cinedo


text:
dejanje

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) action, act

title: dejanje


text: talantīgumu

title: talantīgumu


text: talantīgumā

title: talantīgumā


text: talantīguma

title: talantīguma


text: talantīgumam

title: talantīgumam


text:
holoniem

Noun

 * 1) holonym

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1)  A term that denotes a whole whose part is denoted by another term, such as 'face' in relation to 'eye'; a holonym

Adjective

 * 1) holonymous

title: holoniem


text:
cinemitragliatrice

Noun

 * 1) a form of movie camera, operated automatically when a military aircraft's guns were fired, that recorded combats

title: cinemitragliatrice


text:
abstraktno

Adverb

 * 1) abstractly

title: abstraktno


text:
cineografo

Noun

 * 1) kineograph, flip book

title: cineografo


text:
drugoten

Adjective

 * 1) secondary

title: drugoten


text:
postroad

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) A road designated for the transportation of postal mail.

title: postroad


text:
flip book

Noun

 * 1) A booklet containing a sequence of near-identical images so that flipping rapidly through the pages produces an illusion of animation.

Translations

 * German:
 * Italian:

title: flip book


text: postroads

title: postroads


text: nomina acti

title: nomina acti


text:
cineproiettore

Noun

 * 1) film projector

title: cineproiettore


text:
cinquantone

Noun

 * 1) a bank note for fifty Euros (originally one for 50,000 lire)

title: cinquantone


text:
orodje

Noun

 * 1) tool, instrument

title: orodje


text:
cionna

Etymology
Compare Eastern 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1)  pussy (vulva)

title: cionna


text:
žetev

Noun

 * 1) harvest

title: žetev


text:
gatavība

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) readiness the state of that which is ready
 * 2) readiness the state of being ready to do something, to be used in some way
 * 3)  ripeness the state of that which is ripe
 * 1) readiness the state of being ready to do something, to be used in some way
 * 2)  ripeness the state of that which is ripe
 * 1)  ripeness the state of that which is ripe
 * 1)  ripeness the state of that which is ripe
 * 1)  ripeness the state of that which is ripe
 * 1)  ripeness the state of that which is ripe
 * 1)  ripeness the state of that which is ripe

title: gatavība


text:
kopel

Etymology
From, from , from.

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) bath act

title: kopel


text:
godba

Etymology
.

Compare 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) band, orchestra

title: godba


text: gatavību

title: gatavību


text: Category:Japanese terms spelled with 所 read as ところ


text: gatavībā

title: gatavībā


text: Category:Japanese terms spelled with kanji read as ところ


text: gatavības

title: gatavības


text:
ciortone

Noun

 * 1) mackerel

title: ciortone


text: gatavībai

title: gatavībai


text:
cipsela

Noun

 * 1)  achene

Noun

 * 1) achene

title: cipsela


text:
gatavums

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) readiness the quality of that which is ready, has reached its final, desired state
 * 2) ripeness, maturity the quality of that which is ripe
 * 1) ripeness, maturity the quality of that which is ripe

title: gatavums


text:
cirritide

Noun

 * 1) hawkfish (of family Cirrhitidae)

title: cirritide


text: gatavumu

title: gatavumu


text:
cisteamina

Noun

 * 1)  cysteamine

title: cisteamina


text:
vršilec

Noun

 * 1) actor, executor, doer

title: vršilec


text: gatavuma

title: gatavuma


text:
nosilec

Noun

 * 1) carrier (someone who carries)

title: nosilec


text:
citostasi

Noun

 * 1) cytostasis

title: citostasi


text: gatavumā

title: gatavumā


text: gatavumam

title: gatavumam


text:
citto

Etymology
Possibly a reduced form of earlier, probably from. Related to and, and a. Compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1)  a (young) child
 * 2)  a boyfriend
 * 1)  a boyfriend

title: citto


text:
prvoten

Adjective

 * 1) original

title: prvoten


text:
dajalec

Noun

 * 1) giver, donor

title: dajalec


text: ciurmadore

title: ciurmadore


text:
prebivalec

Noun

 * 1) resident, inhabitant

title: prebivalec


text:
ciurmeria

Noun

 * 1) swindle
 * 2) deceit

title: ciurmeria


text:
ciuvascio

Adjective

 * 1) Chuvash

Noun

 * 1) Chuvash

Noun

 * 1) the Chuvash language

title: ciuvascio


text:
schouderblad

Etymology
From. Equivalent to. Cognate with 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) shoulderblade

title: schouderblad


text:
spaś

Etymology
From, from.

Verb

 * 1) to

title: spaś


text:
clamidosauro

Noun

 * 1) frilled lizard (of genus Chlamydosaurus)

title: clamidosauro


text:
clasto

Noun

 * 1)  clast

Noun

 * 1) clast

title: clasto


text:
clastogenetico

Adjective

 * 1)  clastogenic

title: clastogenetico


text:
Template:dsb-conj-86a

Conjugation of spaś (perfective)
 * Participles
 * Present:
 * Past active (“ł-form”):
 * Past passive:
 * Infinitive:
 * Supine:
 * Verbal noun:

title: Template:dsb-conj-86a


text: Category:Japanese terms spelled with 拠 read as よ


text:
claustrazione

Noun

 * 1) claustration

title: claustrazione


text: Template:list:continents/lv

title: Template:list:continents/lv


text: toldja

title: toldja


text:
Template:dsb-conj-86a/documentation

Usage
This template creates a conjugation table for certain Lower Sorbian verbs of class 86, namely and its compounds. It takes one optional positional parameter and one named parameter,. The positional parameter is the prefix of the verb, if any. The parameter  is the verb aspect:   for imperfective or   for perfective.

For example, for itself, which is imperfective, add:

Conjugation
and for, which is perfective, add:

title: Template:dsb-conj-86a/documentation


text:
clinostatismo

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) clinostatism, recumbancy

title: clinostatismo


text: Category:he:Units of measure

title: Category:he:Units of measure


text:
clorammonio

Noun

 * 1)  sal ammoniac

title: clorammonio


text:
Template:U:ja:uk

This term is often spelled in.

title: Template:U:ja:uk


text:
cloremia

Etymology
From and. .

Noun

 * 1)  chloremia presence of chloride in the bloodstream

Etymology
From and. .

Noun

 * 1)  chloremia

title: cloremia


text: cheremi

title: cheremi


text: chiarine

title: chiarine


text: chiassetti

title: chiassetti


text: chieppe

title: chieppe


text: chineserie

title: chineserie


text: chinofobie

title: chinofobie


text: chinoloni

title: chinoloni


text: chiocche

title: chiocche


text: chioccolatori

title: chioccolatori


text: chiorbe

title: chiorbe


text: chiorboni

title: chiorboni


text: chiroteche

title: chiroteche


text: ciammotte

title: ciammotte


text: ciarmatori

title: ciarmatori


text: ciati

title: ciati


text: ciazi

title: ciazi


text: ciclamori

title: ciclamori


text: cifoplastiche

title: cifoplastiche


text: cinedi

title: cinedi


text: cinemitragliatrici

title: cinemitragliatrici


text: cineografi

title: cineografi


text: cineproiettori

title: cineproiettori


text: cinquantoni

title: cinquantoni


text: cionne

title: cionne


text: ciortoni

title: ciortoni


text: cipsele

title: cipsele


text: cirritidi

title: cirritidi


text: cisteamine

title: cisteamine


text:
citti

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) thought; honour

title: citti


text: ciurmadori

title: ciurmadori


text: ciurmerie

title: ciurmerie


text: clamidosauri

title: clamidosauri


text: clasti

title: clasti


text:
spimmer

Noun

 * 1) One who sends spim unsolicited instant messages.

title: spimmer


text: claustrazioni

title: claustrazioni


text: clinostatismi

title: clinostatismi


text: clorammoni

title: clorammoni


text: spimmers

title: spimmers


text:
cloremie

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) chloremia

title: cloremie


text:
Template:U:ja:uk/documentation

This is meant to be used in a Usage notes section like this:

Usage notes
to display a note that the term is usually written in kana. Most dictionaries note the same fact by putting a triangle or an "x" in superscript next to the seldom-used kanji in the term. EDICT uses the abbreviation uk for "usually kana", hence the name of this template.

title: Template:U:ja:uk/documentation


text: swayeth

title: swayeth


text:
golık

Etymology
From a source, compare 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) unweaned calf

title: golık


text:
pseudoactive

Adjective

 * 1) Apparently, but not truly, active.

Usage notes

 * The spelling with a hyphen,, occurs almost four times more frequently than the spelling without.

title: pseudoactive


text: Category:he:Rodents

title: Category:he:Rodents


text: cashdesk

title: cashdesk


text:
antiprotection

Adjective

 * 1)  Opposing protectionism.

title: antiprotection


text:
protectionistic

Adjective

 * 1) Exhibiting or relating to protectionism.

title: protectionistic


text: cashdesks

title: cashdesks


text:
poeticization

Noun

 * 1) The act or process of making poetic.

title: poeticization


text: poeticizations

title: poeticizations


text:
известить

Verb

 * 1) to inform, to notify, to give notice
 * 2)  to announce, to advertise to give public notice of; to announce publicly

title: известить


text:
דיאַלעקטיש

Adjective

 * 1) dialectal

title: דיאַלעקטיש


text: Category:Class 7 strong verbs by language


text:
žywy

Etymology
From, from , from.

Adjective

 * 1) alive, living
 * 2) used with  to mean ‘to live’

title: žywy


text:
presunrise

Adjective

 * 1) Before sunrise.

title: presunrise


text:
postsunset

Adjective

 * 1) After sunset.

title: postsunset


text:
prereversal

Adjective

 * 1) Before reversal.

title: prereversal


text:
prereversion

Adjective

 * 1) Before reversion.

title: prereversion


text:
nonreversal

Noun

 * 1) Lack of reversal; failure to reverse.

title: nonreversal


text:
nonreversion

Noun

 * 1) Lack of reversion; failure to revert.

title: nonreversion


text:
oljuber

Etymology
. Compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) olive (fruit of )

title: oljuber


text: ορθοδοξίας

title: ορθοδοξίας


text: ορθοδοξιών

title: ορθοδοξιών


text: ορθοδοξίες

title: ορθοδοξίες


text: Ορθοδοξίας

title: Ορθοδοξίας


text:
oneirotherapy

Noun

 * 1) Any of various forms of psychotherapy relying on visual imagery and symbolism.

title: oneirotherapy


text: oneirotherapies

title: oneirotherapies


text:
avër

Etymology
From,.

Noun

 * 1) ice-floe

title: avër


text:
Talk:sprachraum

RFV discussion
Plenty of hits for the German version, but nothing obvious on Google book search for the English. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:18, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This is tricky: there are more than enough cites of the term in English sentences about languages other than German (for instance, here, here, and here), but they're all capitalized- which means they're still connected with the original German, to some extent. I also found a few cites for a different sense (here, here, and here: the repertoire of language available to a given person- their personal language space. Assuming they really are English, that would mean lower-case sprachraum would fail, but we would need two upper-case English senses. Of course, I haven't checked Usenet, and I may have accidentally filtered out some instances along with the German ones. Chuck Entz (talk) 11:55, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Moved to Sprachraum, new sense added. — Ungoliant (Falai) 04:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:sprachraum


text:
Talk:Golden diagram

RFV discussion
Can't find anything on Google. Looks like self promotion: single-purpose author, a la WP deletion (Slightly unrelatedly, someone who knows Spanish should probably AfD the page on es-wiki...). Paper referenced is not visible on Scholar. Hyarmendacil (talk) 07:59, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. The web hits (not durably archived) were mostly word-for-word repeats of the same promotional piece; some were paraphrases. I'm not seeing independent use. DCDuring TALK 02:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Clocked out DCDuring TALK 02:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 04:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Golden diagram


text:
Talk:biduan

RFV discussion
Any takers? (also, other similar words by a permablocked user) SemperBlotto (talk) 18:16, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I couldn't even find uses rather than mentions for biduous (< ), which Century 1913 had.

 * Clocked out DCDuring TALK 02:18, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:biduan


text:
Talk:Parnassian

RFV discussion
Rfv-senses: Noun: "Parnassian language or poetry within Gerard Manley Hopkins' writings." and a correspondingly worded adjective sense. If it is only used in Hopkins' works and in works about his works, it would not seem to me that the citations can be deemed independent. Also, I don't think his works rise to being "well-known works", as good as they are. DCDuring TALK 22:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added a bunch of quotes. WilliamKF (talk) 15:33, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see how the quotes support sense 2 rather than sense 1. But, perhaps more importantly, sense 2 doesn't seem likely to be intelligible to, say, me or a new college graduate. DCDuring TALK  02:00, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Adjective sense passed and noun sense failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 04:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Parnassian


text:
Talk:Zsazsa

RFV discussion
No relevant bgc hits for "dear|my zsazsa". —msh210℠ (talk) 16:38, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

 * It’s a Hungarian name (= Suzie), pet name for Zsuzsanna (Susan). —Stephen (Talk) 22:49, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Still does not have a verified meaning in English. Spinning Spark  23:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 04:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Zsazsa


text:
arrç

Etymology 1
From. For sense development compare 🇨🇬, from.

Noun

 * 1) cricket

Etymology 2
From.

Noun

 * 1)  buckthorn (Rhamnus)

title: arrç


text:
Talk:tekkō kagi

RFV discussion
A Japanese hand weapon. I can't find three uses of this on Google Books or Groups — whether in Japanese or English text. Equinox ◑ 17:29, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

 * The source JA term I'm not too worried about; I see two citable works right at, and I'm reasonably certain that a third wouldn't be too hard to dig up if given time.
 * The EN term was added by our anon. I let it stand in part as I wasn't sure what the practice is for terms about things not usually part of the English-speaking world, such as the specific implements and other accoutrements of another culture.  If regular CFI stands and no one can find sufficient cites, then away with the EN entry.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 15:54, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed (English section; the Japanese section was never nominated). — Ungoliant (Falai) 04:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

 * An anon in September 2014.  I just stumbled across it and re-deleted it, since it had no citations or additional information.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:18, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:tekkō kagi


text:
Talk:analexipathy

RFV discussion
Nothing whatsoever in Google Books or even a Web search. Equinox ◑ 02:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedied, along with alexipathy- also unattested (except for one use with a different definition and etymology). The definitions are rather implausible and clumsily contrived- I suspect they were thought up after the word was coined, in order to have something that fit the etymologies. The clincher, though was the contributor's user page, which consists simply of "Starting up with a new word (alexipathic)." Chuck Entz (talk) 05:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Closed, speedied by Chuck Entz. — Ungoliant (Falai) 09:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:analexipathy


text:
Talk:decrucifier

RFV discussion
English noun sense. (French verb exists) SemperBlotto (talk) 11:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Cited. -Cloudcuckoolander (formerly Astral) (talk) 13:57, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Passed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 09:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:decrucifier


text:
Talk:vuxê

RFV discussion
— Ungoliant (Falai) 20:46, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 09:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:vuxê


text:
Talk:VuXê

RFV discussion
— Ungoliant (Falai) 20:46, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 09:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:VuXê


text:
Talk:miguxo

RFV discussion
One Google Books mention. Many Google Groups uses, none of which is from a Usenet group. — Ungoliant (Falai) 20:55, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 09:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:miguxo


text:
Talk:miguxês

RFV discussion
One Google Books use; many Google groups uses but only in non-Usenet groups. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:01, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 09:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:miguxês


text:
Talk:fikdik

RFV discussion
No Google Books hits; only one Google Groups hit from Usenet:. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:10, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 09:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:fikdik


text:
Talk:tiopês

RFV discussion
— Ungoliant (Falai) 21:14, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 09:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:tiopês


text:
Talk:Belgian chocolate

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense "An act of scatolophilia involving one participant defecating on a transparent coffee table and the other underneath observing the bowel movement." - -sche (discuss) 04:07, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought the word was scatophilia. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's used in this sense in '. I have no desire whatsoever to go looking for cites for this on Google, though. —'Angr'' 14:24, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Well, scatophilia would be the entire paraphilia involving excrement, not just one act with a coffee table. I had a search around for this but I can't find it even on Google Groups (though there are a couple of mentions on the Web), so seems unlikely to pass. Equinox ◑ 14:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I was referring in my post to the red link scatolophilia, which looks like an error for scatophilia. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Clocked out DCDuring TALK 01:45, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * RFV failed: no quotations provided; as an auxi check, sense absent from several online dictionaries. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:38, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Belgian chocolate


text:
Talk:big balls

RFV discussion
Really? Countable? Courage/courage? SemperBlotto (talk) 15:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's just big + balls (plural only). DCDuring TALK 16:30, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think it means courage, just it's an allusion to it, or can be. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

 * balls can be courage but this seems SoP extension of the metaphor, like "you've got to have a lot of balls / plenty of balls to do that"; or like the idea of having a "big" or "small" ego. Equinox ◑ 17:44, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. SOP to sense 3 of ball. Send to RfD (although I wouldn't object to deletion on sight). bd2412 T 21:29, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * If this is SOP then balls: needs a usage note indicating common collocations: big can't modify courage, so this is unintuitive. —msh210℠ (talk) 16:22, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

 * If that is true then we also need notes at brain ("a big brain" means intelligence, but "big" can't modify "intelligence"), heart ("a big heart" but no "big love"), and all kinds of others. Equinox ◑ 16:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I think I agree with Msh210 on this. I think we already are accustomed to handling this properly where the countable and uncountable usage occurs with the singular form. As in those cases we should be able to address this with countable/uncountable labes and usage examples at the appropriate sense of balls.
 * There are probably only a small number of plural-only definitions that behave this way, ie, have the same meaning in both countable and uncountable usage. I can't think of another of the dual/pair plurals that works this way and my imagination and persistence are not up to the task of locating examples among the plurals of normal English common nouns. Maybe a review of plural-only senses of nouns that also have a related definition at the singular form would find more examples. DCDuring TALK 16:58, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * My comment above was unclear and even slightly off the mark. Thanks for clarifying. —msh210℠ (talk) 17:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Changed to RFD. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

big balls
SOP, per the RFV discussion. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:06, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not really SoP because if balls means courage, big balls doesn't mean big courage. Unfortunately from a Wiktionary point of view, it can be rephrased in very many ways (huge balls, massive balls) but none of them as SoP. Or if they are, what do we list at big, huge, massive, etc. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:17, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * If we keep this, I think we should insist on exact translations from every variation into all the main languages we have.
 * "Big courage" is simply not good English because courage is uncountable. Balls in this sense needs to be marked as both countable and uncountable. The countable definition could be a non-gloss definition or some strained gloss like "symbols of courage". That would then accommodate both classes of modifiers. Or we could have a single sense marked as both countable and uncountable with a non-gloss definition. An additional step would be have redirects from all the attestable (on Citations pages) combinations of modifiers and balls to a senseid-marked sense of balls and have two or three usage examples that span the usage.
 * This is yet another example of modifiers being restricted by the grammar and semantics of a term. If every one is to be an entry with translations, we have a lot of entry-creation and translation to do. Wouldn't we be better off to automate the creation of appropriate redirects? Wouldn't that help users at least as much as the proliferation of parallel entries? DCDuring TALK 13:09, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Could be covered with usage notes at balls I suppose. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:36, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I agree with the idea of a usage note. In addition to that, a redirect from big balls, but not other combinations such as massive balls, would be helpful to the user. --BB12 (talk) 20:10, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Delete per nom, with addition of usage note to balls. bd2412 T 19:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mglovesfun: while "balls" means courage, then if "big balls" means "courage" rather than "big courage", it is not a sum of parts. Admittedly, this is not in dictionaries: . --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:31, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - I have seen some usages use it as an intensifier of balls (courage). I have just added the humorous tag. Feel free to revert if you want. Pass a Method (talk) 03:30, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect per Mg, BB12. —msh210℠ (talk) 06:52, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Kept for lack of consensus to delete. bd2412 T 02:49, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

RFV discussion: July 2014–July 2015
Alleggedly means "courage". I request attesting quotations per WT:ATTEST. This was already once in RFV, but the RFV closure was irregular and no attesting quotations were provided. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

 * Just to clarify, the previous discussion DP refers to is at Talk:big_balls. Equinox ◑ 20:37, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

 * Doesn't just "balls" mean courage? Pur ple back pack 89  02:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Regardless of what "balls" means, I request evidence in the form of attesting quotations that the phrase "big balls" is actually attested to mean courage, as per WT:ATTEST. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Does that help? --Catsidhe (verba, facta) 08:22, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Let us have a look. I'll take the 1st quotation and replace "big balls" with X, and let us see whether the quotation suggests X means courage. The result is this: "Biffy says, “You've got X for a girl Bubbles. I like your style. Give it to him. Juicy's rotten, but Bubbles. You've got the scevusa on your hands now.” Bubbles  drops the hot dog, and calls Biffy and Juicy some un-young ladylike words.". Now, do you think it can be inferred from the sentence that X means courage? --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:09, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do, actually. Do you not? Certainly it is clear from two of those quotes that it's not a literal reference to body parts. The other quotes are similar: they are general approbations with a clear meaning. Unless you are demanding one of the quotes from a dictionary of slang, or a quote of something like "He showed that he had big balls by standing up by which I mean he was very brave" or something equally awful. (I'll grant that the quote you copied here could be reduced to the first two sentences, but I wanted to find a balance between excluding context, and including too much.) --Catsidhe (verba, facta) 09:19, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I certainly do not require dictionary quotations, since that is not what WT:ATTEST allows. I cannot really infer the meaning of "courage" from the quotations, but then I am not a native speaker. Let other editors comment on the merits of the provided quotations. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
 * In my experience, [big] balls (without the) doesn't simply mean courage: sometimes it means assertiveness, but usually means gall, nerve or chutzpah. A former employer of mine used to say things like "you've got balls the size of an elephant to complain about that" Chuck Entz (talk) 16:00, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

 * I've added a couple more citations. Because they demonstrate that "big" is just being used as an intensifier (because they further tweak it, e.g. "pretty big balls"), and because "balls" is where the meaning comes from — whether that meaning is courage or something more like chutzpah — I've deployed . - -sche (discuss) 07:57, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I hope that doesn't mean that we need an entry very big "synonym of big", not to mention all the other appropriate intensifiers. DCDuring TALK 12:47, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Feel free to RFD it. - -sche (discuss) 14:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I've RFDed it. - -sche (discuss) 18:49, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

 * See this external forum discussion. DCDuring TALK 16:44, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

RFD discussion: July–August 2015
See the RFV discussion. This is just big + balls, where balls carries the meaning ("courage, chutzpah") which our entry formerly ascribed to this term. That it is not a fixed phrase can be seen from the various citations where big is modified (some available in the entry and others on Google Books), like "pretty big balls", or where other modifiers come between big and balls, e.g. . - -sche (discuss) 18:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * See also Talk:big_balls, closed on 21 August 2014. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting: the previous RFV and RFD show majority agreement that the collocation is SOP and support for deletion (even one of the keep voters at the RFD, a now-banned vandal, said in effect that it was SOP), yet the RFV was closed without the term being cited and the RFD was closed without the term being deleted. I think it's good that we're having a new RFD now that the term has been cited and the citations confirm (IMO) its SOPness. - -sche (discuss) 23:30, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

 * Delete (this time in so many words) DCDuring TALK 21:39, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, as before. bd2412 T 13:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * While I agree that it should be deleted, being able to put a swear word in a phrase doesn't automatically make something SOP. Expletive infixation can break up fixed compounds and even individual words. Smurrayinchester (talk) 07:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Deleted. bd2412 T 13:23, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:big balls


text:
Talk:osmotheque

RFV discussion
A scent library or archive. Appears to be the (capitalised) name of a specific museum in Versailles, France, and not a generic lower-case term. Equinox ◑ 22:36, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Definition copied off Wikipedia. There seems to be only one such place in the world as per Equinox. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 22:55, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:osmotheque


text:
Talk:osmothèque

RFV discussion
French term. L' is a unique French institution, but I don't think that the uncapitalised word exists. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Apparently, the term Osmothèque was coined when they created the museum. Didn't find any evidence that the term has turned to a common noun. — Xavier, 22:19, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:osmothèque


text:
Talk:армянофилия

head2= is not working. --Vahag (talk) 18:52, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:армянофилия


text:
Talk:newco

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense: A placeholder name for a company, used in textbooks.
 * The single citation would be consistent with the first definition - and is not from a textbook. DCDuring TALK 15:12, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The definition in Wikipedia is perfect. Let's use it. The rfv'd def is humbug. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * As I recall from my law school courses, the rfv'd sense is also accurate:
 * 1982, Arthur M. Borden, Going Private, page 3-4:
 * A merger can be implemented between the issuer ("Oldco") and a new corporation ("Newco") owned by the proponents, as a result of which Oldco shares not owned by the proponents are converted to cash and Newco shares remain outstanding.
 * 2003, William T. Allen, Reinier H. Kraakman, Commentaries and Cases on the Law of Business Organization, page 439:
 * In this structure, the acquirer (A) forms a wholly owned subsidiary (call it NewCo). A will transfer the merger consideration to NewCo in exchange for all of NewCo ' s stock. Then Target will merge into NewCo (or NewCo will merge into Target).
 * 2008, Edward D. Hess, Charles D. Goetz, So, You Want to Start a Business?: 8 Steps to Take Before Making the Leap, page 62:
 * For this example, we're going to assume that a new company (we will call it NewCo) is going to build brick homes in the $250,000 price range.
 * Cheers! bd2412 T 21:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * @BD2412, I see little real difference between the RFVed sense and the first sense. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:50, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The citations show not that the term is used for any corporation, but for a newly created one, which brings it very close indeed to sense 1. DCDuring TALK 23:11, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Let me put it this way. Fido is a common name for a dog, but it is not the common name for "a dog"; i.e., if you were walking down the street and you saw a dog, you wouldn't say, "look, there's a Fido". Newco may well be relatively common as a name given to a newly formed company created to acquire the assets of another company as part of a merger, or for similar business purposes. However, there is no law, nor really even much of a custom, for the naming of companies formed for such purposes. The creators of a company can call it whatever they please. Newco is merely the common placeholder name for such companies, sometimes in real life, sometimes in hypotheticals, just as Fido is a common placeholder name for a hypothetical dog, and Blackacre is the standard law school placeholder name for a landed estate. bd2412 T 23:35, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree that the two senses are distinct enough to merit keeping separate. Thanks for citing the second sense, btw. - -sche (discuss) 23:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The cites look to be for a distinguishable sense. I don't see why would limit it to "textbooks" as it is used in the "real" world of M&A (and news coverage thereof) to refer to a corporate entity that has not been created yet, or does not yet have its final name, or the name of which is immaterial. It needs the labels finance and law. DCDuring TALK 00:26, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I grant that "textbooks" is too specific, but clearly the term is generally used as a placeholder name in hypotheticals discussing a newly formed company. bd2412 T 01:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It is by no means assured that a Newco is always literally a newly formed entity, as opposed to, say, a clean shell. That is a matter of implementation in many cases. In any event, we are rapidly closing in on good cited definitions, better than those few now at . DCDuring TALK 03:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I certainly agree that our definitions are outstripping our competitors. As for this word, I agree that it does not necessarily reference a newly formed entity, but there are many hits like those above where the term is explicitly used to describe a newly formed company. bd2412 T 21:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Passed. Citations moved to entry. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

RFC discussion: May 2012–August 2017
This explains it: more Wonderfoolery. How did I not guess? In any case, this is a jolly mess he's left for us. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 15:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * In fairness, this is what is for. If there were no citation to go with it, I'd delete it happily, but since there is, let's keep it. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:07, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm struggling to find any uses of the term outside this one particular dispute (the Scottish football club Rangers is in financial trouble, and its owners want to wind it up and then start a new company - the newco - which would continue the Rangers name), but there is a Wikipedia page about this word, and the fact that no newspaper articles about the dispute define newco makes me think that it must have been used before. Smurrayinchester (talk) 10:03, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, cited, and I've added a second sense. Smurrayinchester (talk) 10:14, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

 * NewCo, Newco, and newco all occur in business discussions, especially in the discussion of corporate restructurings (mergers, etc). The capitalized forms are proper nouns whose specific reference is defined in the context of a specific proposed business restructuring transaction. I don't think that anything significant can be associated with the capitalized forms, but we can inflate our entry count by having them. It should be possible to cite the common noun by searching for "a newco" and "newcos". I don't really think two senses are necessary. DCDuring TALK 11:26, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I have added citations for newco in the headword's capitalization. DCDuring TALK 11:53, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

The citation given for the second sense does not seem to support the definition. To me, it seems to discuss "newco" in the sense of the first definition. --Hekaheka (talk) 00:19, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

 * Looks great now, and the original user was blocked, so we're unlikely to hear from them again. --WF on Holiday (talk) 14:14, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:newco


text:
Talk:deae ex machinis

RFV discussion
I found a second citation, but I don't see a third anywhere (and the first citation that was already in the entry italicises the term like it's Latin, not English). - -sche (discuss) 13:09, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 11:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:deae ex machinis


text:
Talk:aufschiebbar

RFV discussion
I'm seeking verification not of the lemma but of the comparative and superlative, which are vanishingly rare (I can find exactly two hits of the comparative, from 1828 and 1981, and one hit of the superlative, from 1918). - -sche (discuss) 13:22, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I found this, which I find amusing, but it's not durably archived. Sort of surprising that it's so rare; I'd have thought people would frequently say things like "Dein Termin ist aufschiebbarer als meiner, und Peters Termin ist am aufschiebbarsten von uns allen". But apparently not. —Angr 14:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 11:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:aufschiebbar


text:
Talk:me gustas

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense "(idiomatic, vulgar, slang) You turn me on." removed by an anon as nonexistent. —msh210℠ (talk) 04:08, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the IP is spot on here; not idiomatic, vulgar or slang, just use of the first sense. Mglovesfun (talk) 07:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * And the first sense is SOP, and would be even with the more idiomatic English translation "I like you". I know this isn't RFD, but delete anyway. —Angr 10:19, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * This should be at rfd, because it's simply the second person singular of the verb gustar, with a first person singular object. Granted, the verb works differently than English speakers would expect, but we would need to have a similar entry for every single combination of person and number for the subject and object, to be consistent. It seems easier to me just to convert it to an "inflection of" entry. Chuck Entz (talk) 12:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Not even. Gustas should be (and presumably already is) an "inflection of" entry; this is just two words whose meaning is a sum of their parts. —Angr 13:09, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 11:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

RFD discussion: October 2013–April 2014
Straightforward SOP. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 18:57, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

 * The current translation is not acceptable, but I’m not so sure the term is straightforward for English-speaking students of Spanish. The translation should be "I like you"; it might be better as a phrasebook term. It’s a confusing construction for English-speakers who are studying Spanish. I think most Spanish students would argue that me gustas and te gusto are errors, and that only me gusta is correct. —Stephen (Talk) 19:50, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Of course to a Spanish speaker it's pure sum of parts. However surely this is a good candidate for a phrase book entry, so keep as a phrasebook entry, move the literal meaning to the etymology. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I have edited it. Please check if it still fits to be a RFD candidate. --kc_kennylau (talk) 17:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Delete. Move any idiomatic parts of the definition to or  . --WikiTiki89 18:48, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The ping didn't work, and it's still just as SOP as ever. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 19:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

 * Keep, since Stephen is not so sure the term is straightforward for English-speaking students of Spanish, and since this seems to be a good candidate for a phrasebook entry as per Mglovesfun. Furthermore, if the usage note at me gustas is correct that this phrase is only restricted to expressing sexual attraction, then I do not see how this is a sum of parts; see also and the following example given there: Me gusta la canción. — I like the song. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:31, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Searching me gustas at google image further proves that it is not SOP. --kc_kennylau (talk) 16:39, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * But me gustas is nothing more than a conjugated form of se gustar is it not? The definition should be at the lemma and not the conjugated form, since other conjugated forms also share the definition (like "te gusto"). --WikiTiki89 23:13, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete or keep as a phrasebook entry. It's certainly SOP. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 01:45, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as a phrasebook entry (converted), that's what it is. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:54, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Kept, no consensus to delete. bd2412 T 12:44, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:me gustas


text: りす

title: りす


text:
Talk:Colin Tampon

RFV discussion
A Swiss person, the equivalent of John Bull. Or just a character from one work? - -sche (discuss) 07:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * There are these mentions:, , , , but I did not encounter any actual usage. It seems that Colin-Tampon has been used as a nickname in French for Swiss soldiers serving in French military, but there's also the sense "obese, dull". This usage antedates the book. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:46, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 11:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Colin Tampon


text:
Talk:ærumna

RFV discussion
Is this attested in English? Are aerumna and erumna attested, and if so, are they more common? - -sche (discuss) 23:04, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Just delete it. More careless completion. --Æ&Œ (talk) 23:23, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 11:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:ærumna


text:
Talk:Houm Päĳtsh

RFV discussion
Seriously? -- Liliana • 16:21, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Apparently this will be difficult to attest. This is about everything I could find . --Hekaheka (talk) 07:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I find it curious and ironic that a term, ostensibly so intimately related with the online world, would be effectively impossible to find in use in the wild. After excluding various Wiktionary and Wikipedia echo chambers, I am left with seven hits, of which Hekaheka's above is one.  Notably, that's just an entry in a terminology database, not even an example of use.  Of the remaining six Google hits, one is now a 404, one is an automated translation entry, one is an interactive terminology database that doesn't even have an entry for this term, and the last three are Wikipedia or Wiktionary echoes that squeaked through my search exclusion terms.
 * I'm under the impression that Kölsch isn't a very widely used language, but even so, I'd expect to find more than this if it were really in use to mean.
 * [[Image:Arrowred.png|15px]] Delete as a protologism or otherwise fatuous entry. If and when someone can find sufficient citations of actual use, we can re-create the entry then.  -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:48, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Well, Kölsch is a very widely spoken language, but it's almost never written except by Wikimedia fans and in Asterix translations. Speakers may very well say something that sounds like Houm Päijtsh when speaking of a homepage, but I bet the spelling that goes through most of their heads when they do is Homepage. —Angr 18:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Probably, and the Finns say "houm peits", but that's not entry-worthy either. --Hekaheka (talk) 14:35, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

 * This looks like somebody's attempt at spelling out a term they heard used in speech. I find it significant that it uses a different orthography than all of our other Kölsch entries. I'm really surprised at the "sh", since Kölsch speakers are pretty much all also speakers of Standard German, which always uses "sch". Of course, I couldn't find any uses of "Houm Päĳtsch", either. The "ĳ" looks fishy, too- but I don't know enough about the orthography to be sure. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:05, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth (which isn't much), the Kölsch Wikipedia main page is called Houpsigk, and on that page I found the trigraph ⟨eij⟩ in two words where standard German has ⟨ei⟩: bevölkerungsreijch for standard bevölkerungsreich and jeijstisch for standard geistig. I also found ⟨sh⟩ in Shtadt for standard Stadt and Jelsenkirshen for Gelsenkirchen and Duisbursh for Duisburg. I can't discern any rhyme or reason for when ⟨sh⟩ is used and when ⟨sch⟩ is used; both occur for standard German /ʃ/ as well as standard German /ç/ (which are usually merged into a single phoneme by people who speak Kölsch-influenced standard German and therefore I assume are merged in Kölsch itself). —Angr 16:25, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I should have been more clear: the main problem I have with "ĳ" is that it's a single-character ligature, not "i"+"j". This could potentially cause problems with searches, if it's normally spelled as two letters. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:22, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 11:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Houm Päĳtsh


text:
Talk:made in Japan

RFV discussion
I suspect that the two non-literal senses should be combined the way I combined the two non-literal senses of made in China. Or are they distinct? - -sche (discuss) 21:15, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Merged. Archaic label changed to dated. 1970s isn’t archaic by any stretch of the word’s meaning. — Ungoliant (Falai) 11:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:made in Japan


text:
Talk:impeevish

RFV discussion
"Not peevish; impassive." Cannot find in Google Books; also, how is "impassive" an antonym for "peevish"?! Equinox ◑ 05:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Tosh. I would have just deleted it. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:07, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

 * RFV failed, entry deleted. —Ruakh TALK 14:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:impeevish


text:
Talk:admiraless

RFV discussion
Looking especially for independent cases of use that are not proper names; I find recurring quotes of James Fenimore Cooper. . --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:18, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Found some cites, but pretty much all of them capitalize it. -Cloudcuckoolander (formerly Astral) (talk) 18:35, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Passed. Moved to Admiraless. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:17, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:admiraless


text:
Talk:abit

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense :. Claims of Chaucer. --Semper amore (talk) 14:43, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

 * The Yeoman's Tale, l.1175
 * He is so variaunt, he abit nowhere.
 * Other hits in Chaucer seem to be = "habit", as in clerical garb. But this does seem to be an attestation of the 3rd sing present of abide
 * — Catsidhe (verba, facta) 21:23, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Since we consider everything before about 1500 (I don't remember the exact cutoff) to be Middle English, we need to either find something later, or convert it to Middle English. That's assuming we can find the one cite needed for Middle English, of course. Given that the Yeoman's tale passage would work just as well with the French verb habiter, what do we know about whether the Old French equivalent made it into Middle English, and whether it ever lost its h? Chuck Entz (talk) 22:10, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * A quick check at the Middle English Dictionary at the University of Michigan shows more than enough cites for a Middle English entry. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Moved to Middle English section. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:17, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:abit


text:
Talk:wordwrapper

RFV discussion
Looks like tosh to me. Any takers? SemperBlotto (talk) 15:16, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * There's a software sense, but nothing for this definition on Google Books or Usenet. Best to wrap this word up and toss it in the trash... Chuck Entz (talk) 15:58, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The etymology makes it seem like the contributor is simply trying to present a superficial imitation of a real entry. I could find usage on Usenet for a definition relating to the "wordwrap" function in text-presentation software. DCDuring TALK 16:22, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:17, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:wordwrapper


text:
drúva

Etymology
From (compare 🇨🇬), from ).

Noun

 * 1) grape (fruit of )

title: drúva


text:
meower

Noun

 * 1) One who meows.

title: meower


text: meowers

title: meowers


text:
Talk:apothecary's bill

RFV discussion
Seems to only be used when referring to actual apothecaries' bills, or when saying something is "as long as an apothecary's bill", which doesn't show "apothecary's bill" to be idiomatic. - -sche (discuss) 19:49, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. I spent some time looking for citations, and all I could find were these: (and I’m not sure they are for this sense). — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:apothecary's bill


text:
Talk:arbor vitae

RFV discussion
RFV-sense "penis". turns up exactly one hit. - -sche (discuss) 20:04, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Citation moved to Citations:arbor vitae. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:arbor vitae


text:
Talk:das

RFV discussion
Translingual -- Liliana • 22:54, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

that's
What meaning(s) of that's does das represent? only that is? --Backinstadiums (talk) 11:36, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

decasecond
10^1 s. JMGN (talk) 10:19, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:das


text:
Talk:mank

RFV discussion
RFV-sense "man milk" (supposedly literal milk from a male's nipples, as opposed to ). - -sche (discuss) 05:52, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

 * I'll note that it links to the deleted page Baby Mank, which isn't exactly a vote of confidence for the reliability of the word.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:29, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That used to be a redirect to the list of characters on ', which suggests mank may have been used only on that show, in which case it would need to meet WT:FICTION. —'Angr'' 15:32, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Having done a pretty extensive Google Books search, I find nothing at all. There is clearly a surname, Mank, although even that is probably not particularly widespread. bd2412 T 00:45, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:mank


text:
Talk:cℓ

RFV discussion
ℓ in the sense of "symbol for the liter" failed RfV, so these should go as well. -- Liliana • 09:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * ℓ as liter shouldn’t have been deleted. It is used at least in Japan. See the entry of U+3397 (&) in the Unicode document CJK Compatibility (3300–33FF), and you’ll find that it is equal to U+0064 U+2113 (dℓ). — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 05:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Another source for the cursive ℓ for litre : . — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:57, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

 * Both failed. Even if ℓ as liter were to be kept, these would need their own citations. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:cℓ


text:
Talk:dℓ

RFV discussion
See Talk:cℓ. — Ungoliant (Falai) 19:29, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

See also Requests for verification archive/2012/more. I think this can be considered as an alternative form of common letter. And alt form does not need RFV. Any way the symbol is actually used at least on appliances. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:12, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:dℓ


text:
wumrěś

Etymology
From (compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬), from, from. .

Verb

 * 1) to die

title: wumrěś


text:
Talk:alotropa

RFV discussion
Needs three independent uses spanning more than a year. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Humm..I could only find one source for this word. When I added it, I thought there where a lot more.  I'll go ahead and ask for this page to be deleted. Razorflame 21:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Closed. Speedied by . — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:alotropa


text:
Talk:alotropo

RFV discussion
Per above. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:33, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Cannot find any sources to verify this term. Will mark it for deletion. Razorflame 03:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

 * RFV failed; no quotations at Citations:alotropo and at alotropo; deleted on 30 July 2013 aparently on the creator's request. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:50, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:alotropo


text:
Talk:*g8

RFV discussion
-- Liliana • 18:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I just failed *fish as uncited since January 2013. There are other suspect ones in Special:Contributions/194.83.24.240, *t for example, it might be real but searching for it would be almost impossible. Anyone care to vouch for it? Mglovesfun (talk) 21:34, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm?? This seems like a random abbreviation to me. Sure people use it, but only when theyre trying to write quickly. I mean sometimes I write "Switz" or even "Sw" for Switzerland and everyone knows what it means but no one would expect to find them in a dictionary as variant forms of Switzerland.  Soap (talk) 02:27, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:*g8


text:
k-essence

Etymology
Shortening.

Noun

 * 1)  kinetic quintessence

title: k-essence


text:
Talk:оуньшиина

RFV discussion
I'm not disputing the term itself but its spelling. The double и looks like it might be a mistake, especially as the head= parameter lacks it. Is anyone able to verify the correct spelling? 17:06, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is a reference in that entry for a reason . The lemma form is a normalized spelling ignoring the typographical distinctions among the different symbols for /i/. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 18:18, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Since I can't read the reference, what does it say? Why did you initially create this with the head parameter not the same as the page name. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's a dictionary of OCS in Russian (also translations to Czech and Greek are given in the headwords). On the page 741, right column, the third headword from the top is the lemma as above. The number in the parentheses (1) indicates how much attestations does this word have - only one. Its entry also contains an excerpt from Codex Suprasliensis (abbreviated as Supr, in Cyrillic that would be Супр) where this word is used. In the quotation the second /i/ is written with a diaeresis, and the normalized lemma entry contains simply two ии letters. The headword was different because I accidentally a letter, due to the haste in which these entries were made. Anyway, the entry should be moved to per Unicode 5.1 (which was released after this entry was created..). --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 23:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Would you happen to know anything about the etymology of the word? 23:39, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's from which is listed on the previous page of the one linked above, with an attestation of  in Supr, which would presumably be a genitive form, onto whose stem -ina suffix was added. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 01:27, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've moved it to the form with  instead of  . —Angr 19:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Passed. Untagged by . — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:оуньшиина


text:
igul-

Etymology
From, from.

Prefix

 * 1) sea-urchin

title: igul-


text:
Talk:præférence

RFV discussion
I tried some misscan spellings, but no luck so far. ‘Præ‐’ spellings, in early modern French’s case, tend to be excluded to the 17th century. Also, many of the spellings that use é’s today lacked é’s back then. --Æ&Œ (talk) 20:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:præférence


text:
Talk:kiwanja ya ndege

RFV discussion
This was entered by a user with no knowledge of Swahili and seems spurious. A mistake for, most likely (that would literally mean "the airplanes' plot of ground"). —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 03:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:kiwanja ya ndege


text:
Talk:tembo-bahari

RFV discussion
Protologism at use in sw.wikipedia, but not in durable media AFAICT. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:27, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:tembo-bahari


text:
Talk:kulungu aktiki

RFV discussion
Same as above. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:30, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:kulungu aktiki


text:
Talk:elki

RFV discussion
As above. If it exists, I assume it means "elk", not "moose". —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:32, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * In European usage, elk is the moose. The wapiti (the US elk) is sometimes considered conspecific with the red deer, which is the main species referred to as deer in Europe without a qualifier (the other species are the roe deer and the fallow deer. This apparently is the result of the most common US deer (the white-tailed deer) having no counterpart in Europe, so it took over the word deer, displacing the wapiti, which took over the word elk. This left the original elk as the loser in this game of musical chairs: it ended up with a borrowed American Indian name. This is sort of like the phonological concept of a chain shift, but applied to the lexicon. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:14, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:elki


text:
Talk:nguva aktiki

RFV discussion
As above. I hope there aren't too many more of these... —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's valid! Sw-wiki has a page, and there's a cite here. It appears to be an alternate or dialectal name (?) If no-one here knows Swahili, I can do a more-or-less decent cite using Google translate. Hyarmendacil (talk) 09:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry to crush your hopes, but that's not how RFV works. See WT:ATTEST. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 16:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry, I thought Swahili was an LDL. Hyarmendacil (talk) 05:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * No, Swahili doesn't need that. Real words (actually used, unlike this) aren't too hard to cite, IME. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:nguva aktiki


text:
Talk:slothu

RFV discussion
As above. This is just ridiculous. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:slothu


text:
Talk:mume

RFV discussion
This is not a Latin adjective. I am unwilling to accept this. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:06, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. The specific epithet in taxonomic names is, by definition, either an adjective in the nominative case, a noun in the genitive, or a noun in the nominative, in apposition. This would seem to be the last of the three, so even if you accept the assumption that taxonomic names are Latin, this would still be a noun in the nominative case, not an adjective. I'm not so sure it's a case for rfv, though. It's probably best to just convert it to a translingual proper noun, and forget about Latin. Another problem is that apricot is a mistranslation. The species in question (Prunus mume) is sometimes referred to as "Japanese apricot" (when it's not called a "flowering plum"), but it's not the same as the true apricot (Prunus armeniaca). Chuck Entz (talk) 05:39, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Move to Translingual DCDuring TALK 01:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

 * Closed. Language changed to Translingual, POS changed to noun and definition changed to (per Chuck Entz’s comment). — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

RFV discussion
Last time I RFVed this entry, it was Latin, and other editors decided to keep it, but as Translingual (see Talk:mume). I am now sending it back to RFV, because it has never been cited in any language. It is only used as a specific epithet for one species,. This is only one cite, so the best course of action would be to have no longer link to, and explain the etymology on that page. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:15, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * RFV failed. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 15:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:mume


text:
Talk:zoutch

RFV discussion
"zoutches" and "zoutching" get no hits. The hits of "zoutch" that aren't gibberish seem to be mentions. The first few hits for "zoutched" are actually hits of "water-zoutched". - -sche (discuss) 05:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Most of what I found were about people named Zouch, and the place called Ashby de la Zouch. There was this, but it refers "water zouch", in what seems to be a noun sense. It's a bit more than a mention, though. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:zoutch


text:
Talk:倩

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense for "cia'2" (Teochew) POJ reading. This doesn't look like a Pe̍h-ōe-jī reading to me and it isn't cited. Bumm13 (talk) 17:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:倩


text:
Talk:yellow dog

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense "socially conservative and economically liberal person". - -sche (discuss) 22:15, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I share your skepticism. I never heard it.  I don't know how to try to cite it.  DCDuring TALK  23:08, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * US Political term: ref. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_dog_Democrat –Catsidhe (verba, facta) 23:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but that isn't the definition which is subject to RFV. - -sche (discuss) 00:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, of course. Yes, I see the problem. From looking around, I see that Yellow Dog has split into two meanings, politically. One is generalised from "would vote for a yellow dog if it was on the Democrat ticket", and means anyone who would rather vote for the worst possible option in party X than anything in party Y. Attestations include this on FreeRepublic for "Yellow Dog Republican", although this is immediately challenged on the ground that "Broken Glass Republican" is correct. (Can't use any term which is tainted by association with them... whoever "they" happen to be.)
 * On the other hand is the idea that the Yellow Dog Democrats are an ideological subset of Democrats with a definable set of attitudes beyond being "rusted on". eg. this from 2003, especially in contrast to the "Blue Dog Democrats", who started out with a particular ideology. But even then, it appears to be used as meaning socially and economically liberal, as opposed to the (relatively) socially and economically conservative Blue Dogs. I suspect this use comes from not long after 1995, in reaction to the Blue Dogs who were founded to espouse more conservative ideologies and attempt some sort of rapprochement with the Republicans.
 * I wonder if there is some sort of "... Dog" bloc, united generally by social conservatism but divided by economics, per . That would explain the extant wording of that sense in the entry. Pure speculation, however.
 * All use of "liberal" and "conservative" are, of course, in the US political senses, which may or may not have anything to do with liberalism and conservatism as defines ideologies (as opposed to tribal markers).
 * But you're also right that this looks to be non-trivial to disentangle. Does anyone know a scholar of US Political Science to ask? –Catsidhe (verba, facta) 01:44, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:yellow dog


text:
Talk:againbuy

RFV discussion
All Google Books hits seem to be, upon inspection, instances of "again buy", instances of "again" in one column of a page and "buy" in an adjacent column, or typos or scannos of "again by". The entry previously contained one citation, but it was spurious: the metadata was wrong (the work was from ante 1910, not from 2008) and the quotation itself used the two words "again buy", not a single word meaning "redeem". - -sche (discuss) 21:22, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:againbuy


text:
Talk:gainset

RFV discussion
RFV-sense of the current definition, "to set against, to oppose". "Gainset", "gainsets" and "gainsetting" appear to mean something in the context of audio engineering / sound technology, but I can find no support for the current def. The only citation in the entry is from the Middle English period. - -sche (discuss) 01:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added an EME citation (1594) in form of gainsetteth. Leasnam (talk) 12:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Passed as Middle English. Post-1500 citation moved to Citations:gainset. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

gainset way
I added a cite dated 1841 in Yorkshire dialect. The text clearly shows this to be "gainset", but I'm wondering...this also makes sense if it be a misspelling for "gainest" (="easiest", "most direct"). I can find no other samples of this poem. Can someone with better access please look ? Leasnam (talk) 02:32, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:gainset


text:
Talk:gainyield

RFV discussion
AFAICT, this term has only been used once: in the 1300s by Richard Rolle. - -sche (discuss) 01:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Per NED, the noun is attested thrice in EME (and Scots); the verb, however, may be as above. Leasnam (talk) 14:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Readded as Scots. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:gainyield


text:
Talk:gaingive

RFV discussion
Mentioned by one or two dictionaries but never used, AFAICS. - -sche (discuss) 01:26, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:gaingive


text:
Talk:gaincover

RFV discussion
It's mentioned in the Handbuch der englischen Wortbildungslehre, and it's present as a rare scanno of "gain cover", but is it ever used? - -sche (discuss) 01:28, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:gaincover


text:
Talk:gaincope

RFV discussion
The only citation I can find is the one in the entry. That means we're 1/3 of the way towards attesting 1/3 of the senses... - -sche (discuss) 02:42, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Citation moved to Citations:gaincope and word added to Appendix:English dictionary-only terms. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:gaincope


text:
Talk:gaincome

RFV discussion
The citation which was in the entry was actually Middle Scots. There's a lot of noise/chaff on Google Books. This term might be just barely attested, though. - -sche (discuss) 03:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. I’m not so sure the cite is Middle Scots though. Looks like slightly dated/dialectal English or at least modern Scots, despite the original date. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:gaincome


text:
Talk:with-child

RFV discussion
This is probably attested as a variation of the phrase "with child"... not as a verb! - -sche (discuss) 02:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * it is a verb derived from the phrase "with child" Leasnam (talk) 14:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Citation moved to Citations:with-child. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:with-child


text:
Talk:withdrive

RFV discussion
RFV of the "repel" sense. Of the six citations currently in the entry, the first doesn't make sense to me, the second (minus a stray comma) actually does seem to use the current definition, and all the rest are errors for "withdraw" — in one case, the speaker immediately corrects themselves and says "withdraw". On which note, should we add a sense like " to [withdraw]]"? - -sche (discuss) 03:36, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Bit removed from the definition. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:withdrive


text:
Talk:withturn

RFV discussion
This has only one modern English citation, and I can't find any more. (Following the ISO, we define anything from before 1500 as Middle English; see About English.) I suggest it be moved to as Middle English; the MED has several citations of both senses of that word from the 1400s. - -sche (discuss) 05:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Moved to withturnen and converted to Middle English. Post-1500 citation moved to Citations:withturn. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:withturn


text:
Talk:withgang

RFV discussion
None of the inflected forms get any hits, and most hits of "withgang" are Middle English, Scots, mentions, or scannos of "with gang". - -sche (discuss) 06:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed, sadly. The entry was very well formatted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've preserved most of the content by converting it to a Scots entry; it does seem to be attested in Scots (it may also be attested in Middle English). - -sche (discuss) 19:53, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:withgang


text:
Talk:withjoin

RFV discussion
Has one Middle English(?) citation of the split spelling with Ioyne, and one old but modern English citation of withjoyne. I can't find any other citations, though I may have missed something in the sea of scannos of "with join(s|ed|ing)". - -sche (discuss) 07:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Moved to with Ioyne and converted to Middle English (perhaps should be with Ioynen or some other spelling. I’m not familiar with Middle English). Post-1500 citation moved to Citations:withjoin. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:withjoin


text:
Talk:withnay

RFV discussion
AFAICT, it's mentioned in a few dictionaries, used in a couple of Middle English works ("withnay her fruyt" in ?Palladius?, "withnay thou never my rueful boon" in Pearl), found (spuriously) as a scanno of "with, nay" and "with - nay", and...that's it. Must we withnay it entry into our dictionary? - -sche (discuss) 07:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:withnay


text:
Talk:withsafe

RFV discussion
I can't find nay use of this at all, even as a Middle English word. I didn't try that many variant spellings, though. - -sche (discuss) 07:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:withsafe


text:
Talk:withseek

RFV discussion
- -sche (discuss) 07:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:withseek


text:
Talk:capitol

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense: The building in Washington, D.C., where the Congress of the United States meets.

What are some of the lowercase uses of this sense? How many are they in comparison to those of Capitol? --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Is the temple of Jupiter in Rome really a common noun? Mglovesfun (talk) 16:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added that sense to this RFV. I think both the "template" and the "Congressional building" senses belong in the majuscule entry. - -sche (discuss) 23:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Temple of Jupiter sense moved to Capitol. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:capitol


text:
Talk:Santalusia

RFV discussion
Swahili Tbot entry; doesn't actually seem to be used. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 16:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:55, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Santalusia


text:
Talk:kuketo

RFV discussion
Sense 1 of kuketo

Out of all the sources that I've found for this entry, 99% of them say this word means cupcake. I can find virtually no sources that say that this means HTTP cookie or anything of the sort. Maybe someone else will have better luck than me? Otherwise, I'd say to delete the first sense and keep the cupcake translation as that is the valid translation according to more than 10 sources. Razorflame 22:04, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:kuketo


text:
Talk:amuser

RFV discussion
RFV-sense "Rogues who carried snuff or dust in their pockets, which they threw into the eyes of any person they intended to rob; and running away, their accomplices (pretending to assist and pity the half-blinded person) took that opportunity of plundering him." - -sche (discuss) 07:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

 * This sense seems to be directly taken from Barrère and Leland's Dictionary of Slang, Jargon and Cant (1889, p.37 s.v. Amusers):
 * Amusers (English and American), thieves, who formerly used to throw snuff or pepper in a victim's eyes, while an accomplice robbed him, under pretext of rendering assistance.
 * Farmer & Henley's Dictionary of Slang and Colloquial English (1927, p.10 s.v. Amuse) has:
 * ... Whence amuser, a cheat a snuff-throwing thief; one that decieves. (Ash and Grose)
 * And Eric Partridge's Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English (2013, ed Beale) has:
 * amuse, in late C.17–18 c, is to throw dust, pepper, snuff, etc., in the eyes of the person to be robbed; an amuser is one who does this. B.E.
 * –Catsidhe (verba, facta) 08:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It's a special usage of a general older sense. We've had this discussion before at amuse (see here).  I've taken the liberty of replacing a specific usage in one work with the more general older sense of which that was a special case.  Technically, this is almost covered by sense 1 since the most of the meaning is given at the amuse entry.  I suppose we could add dozens of particular slang senses, but I think they are all covered by the older meaning.    D b f  i  r  s   11:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * ...later ... Sorry, in my rush, I'd removed the template before allowing further discussion here. I've restored it as sense 3, but I suggest that this sense be deleted, or used as an example of sense 2.  Francis Grose was a satirist, and seems to have introduced this specific meaning partly as a joke, though there's no doubt that the word was used to describe such thieves, and others who used similar techniques.    D b f  i  r  s   12:13, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Personally, I think it should stay, even if marked as obsolete or archaic. While the derivation from the primary sense of amuse to the specific one of someone who uses distraction as a cover for theft is obvious enough when shown, it's not necessarily clear without specific mention. It's clearly derived, but it's just as clearly specific and distinct. I would like this sense back in the entry for amuse as well, for the same reason. Even if as a subsense of one of the existing senses. —Catsidhe (verba, facta) 12:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

 * We could certainly extend the sense, or add the Francis Grose as a citation to illustrate usage. As I mentioned, I don't think Grose intended it as a serious definition, but others might have taken it to be so after 1785.    D b f  i  r  s   12:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Thanks for clearing up the definition, Dbfirs. As for the "sandy" sense: as per usual RFV practice, it can stay iff there are words that use "amuser" with that sense, distinct from the general sense that's just been added. - -sche (discuss) 19:15, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

 * 1993, Stella Cameron; [Only by Your Touch] p.88
 * "He should have knowed better than to tangle with you, Miss Lindsay. Where did you learn to be an amuser, then?"
 * 2013, Michelle Lovric; [The Remedy]
 * "Valentine watches the bunch of amusers close around the politician, the leader already dipping into his pocket for the snuff to fling into the eyes of their victim."

I did a search for anything likely in Google Books between 1750 and 1900, and found not a damn thing... as I suspect Dbfirs predicted. But the previous two cites show that even if no-one at the time used the term in anger (or at least, not in print), it is now used retroactively for period flavour. I even tripped over a mention of the term being used in the movie Gangs of New York. —Catsidhe (verba, facta) 10:13, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Yes, Francis Grose seems to have had more influence than I had expected. In view of your excellent research, I reverse my opinion and agree that we could have a third archaic slang sense.     D b f  i  r  s   13:25, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Seems we allow cites from durably archived non-written material, a Gangs of New York citation would be fully acceptable. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Quotes for Bill 'The Butcher' Cutting (Character) from Gangs of New York (2002)
 * Boss Tweed: I don't know. I think maybe we should hang someone. Bill: Who? Boss Tweed: No one important, necessarily. Average men will do. Back alley amusers with no affiliations.
 * Will that do? —Catsidhe (verba, facta) 08:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It fits the general sense 2, and might, or might not, be intended in the Francis Grose sense.   D b f  i  r  s   09:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

 * Passed. Citations added to the entry; since every cite is recent, I changed the label from obsolete to historical. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

RFC discussion: July 2011–May 2017
Tagged, not listed. Looks like an RFV might be in order. Equinox ◑ 10:27, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Looks awesome now --Celui qui crée ébauches de football anglais (talk) 12:12, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:amuser


text:
Talk:sell a bargain

RFV discussion
Cant sense. - -sche (discuss) 19:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:sell a bargain


text:
Talk:arch duke

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense "comical person". - -sche (discuss) 19:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. I’d expect it to be an alternative spelling of archduke, but every cite I could find capitalises it as Arch duke or Arch Duke (and even these are rare, with the hyphenated or joined spelling being much more common). — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:arch duke


text:
Talk:ard

RFV discussion
RFV-sense "hot". The only uses of "he was ard", "it was ard" I can find use it as an aitch-dropping form of "hard": "he was 'ard of hearin'", "it was ard, real tough", etc. - -sche (discuss) 19:27, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:ard


text:
Talk:autem

RFV discussion
I don't see anything on the first several pages of Google Books searches for "an autem", "autems", "to autem", "at autem", "in autem" that seems to support this sense. - -sche (discuss) 19:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:autem


text:
Talk:alderman

RFV discussion
RFV-senses "a turkey" and "a potbelly". - -sche (discuss) 04:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sense 2 converted to say it is only used in alderman in chains and alderman hung in chains, both trivially citable. Sense 3 failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:alderman


text:
Talk:Eurotrash

RFV discussion
RFV-sense "A controversial style of modern opera focusing on sexuality and the sociopolitical." The linked-to WP article has been deleted/redirected, and turns up hits for the other two senses, but not AFAICT this. - -sche (discuss) 23:17, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The search string eurotrash regietheater seems to get what you need. Regietheater is where the Wikipedia link redirects to.  But note that the contributers to this forum thread argue that Eurotrash and Regietheater are not synonyms and Eurotrash cannot even be defined simply as bad Regietheater. Spinning Spark  00:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I had tried, actually. IMO all the hits there use sense 1 of Eurotrash (that is, they're dismissing Regietheater as low-quality or low-brow entertainment), not a separate operatic sense. - -sche (discuss) 00:45, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

RFV discussion: April–July 2016
Sense: "shallow, fashion-focused, sometimes sexually promiscuous European or admirer of Eurotrash <--sense 1--> entertainment. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I see two issues here:
 * What does the conjunction "or" signify? I suspect it is two senses lumped into one bullet: (a) European and (b) admirer of Eurotrash.
 * "shallow, fashion-focused, sometimes sexually promiscuous" - who calls these people thusly? Indians? Is this list of qualifiers correct? I'd like to see usage examples for each of them or a ref to a dictionary. Wikipedia Eurotrash (term) gives a different definition, citing Webster (I have no access to verify). Staszek Lem (talk) 21:53, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Isn't it just a slur on some grouping of youngish Continental Europeans? Perhaps we should look to other slurs to find more defensible wording. There are a few definitions at . DCDuring TALK 03:27, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

 * RFV failed. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 17:28, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Eurotrash


text:
wusmjerśiś

Etymology
, from.

Verb

 * 1) to kill put to death

title: wusmjerśiś


text:
Talk:boxo

RFV discussion
Portuguese. — Ungoliant (Falai) 04:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Portuguese Wiktionary does have it... as Galician! Wonderfool entry, probably entered without due care and attention, just delete it? Mglovesfun (talk) 10:33, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. Note that the Galician entry in the Portuguese Wiktionary does not mention this sense. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:boxo


text:
Talk:clean coal

RFV discussion
"Coal which has been cleaned up to make it environmentally acceptable". This is a very vague and dubious definition. Is it coal that has been washed etc, and by what standard is it environmentally acceptable. The Wikipedia article give a lot more meaning, and seems to cover the entire industry and not just a specific supply of the stuff. Is the term US specific. Is there more than one definition needed. --Dmol (talk) 00:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

 * I believe it to be more of a process than a tangible thing. It's not that someone sits down with coal and a scrubbing brush, more that the coal is prepared before being burned in specially designed furnaces with fume extractors to recover soot and pollutant gasses from the exhaust, &c &c. It's a noun in the same mould as "Democracy". ref http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_coal_technology.
 * A cousin of mine who works in the field of environmental engineering has remarked to me that "clean coal" is, charitably, only relative to the normal process, and uncharitably, a contradiction in terms. But that's opinion, not etymology or definition.
 * – Catsidhe (verba, facta) 01:17, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. Since only the first definition existed when the term was RFVed, and the nominator specifically mentioned it’s the definition that is dubious, only that definition has been deleted. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

clean coal
+ . — Ungoliant (Falai) 22:05, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

 * It does damage the environment, though. (OTOH, I'm not sure all misnomers should have entries. I'll stay on the fence for now.) - -sche (discuss) 23:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

 * In an Orwellian sense like the Clean Air Act cleans the air of birds. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 04:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why it is listed for deleted, when the term clearly exists. The reason I listed it at RFV was that the definition is vague and dubious. Feel free to put in a more accurate definition, then I'm sure we can get rid of this sense only.--Dmol (talk) 07:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Because it’s SOP. Clean is used for anything which (whether true or not, as -sche noted) doesn’t damage the environment. There’s clean energy, clean oil, clean technology, clean mining, etc. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:36, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Delete per nom. The Orwellian magic is right in the word clean, like organic, gluten-free, democracy, etc. DCDuring TALK 18:08, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I have added a second definition, taken from Wikipedia, that seems to cover the term. As I have said, I wanted verification of the dubious and vague first definition. --Dmol (talk) 08:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

The nominated sense has been deleted. bd2412 T 17:17, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:clean coal


text:
Talk:XXL

RFV discussion
Translingual, roman numeral. Doesn't follow standard rules for Roman numerals and seems highly unlikely. May be difficult to attest. -- Liliana • 15:36, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy. --Hekaheka (talk) 19:45, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:XXL


text:
Talk:Bagup

RFV discussion
Any takers? Caps looks wrong. Why would it be uncountable. Grammar needs tweaking. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:48, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

 * It's a trademark, so must meet WT:BRAND, which is highly doubtful. Found on the Web: "BagUps(tm), a trash bag system that dispenses a constant flow of bio-degradable trash liners while automatically re-lining the trash receptacle with a new bag after the old bag is removed." Equinox ◑ 15:54, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bagup


text:
Talk:baraghtan

RFV discussion
The only hit on Google Books is a mention. This might pass as a Manx noun, though, if we allow mentions from that book... - -sche (discuss) 08:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:baraghtan


text:
Talk:graney

RFV discussion
From the same book as the preceding. All hits for "feel|feels|feeling|felt graney" use the personal name Graney, not this adjective; ditto for the hits of "is graney" I looked through. - -sche (discuss) 08:45, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:graney


text:
Talk:mid hundreds

RFV discussion
A number between 134 and 166? Who determines this? Equinox ◑ 15:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * While we're at it, I added RFVs to the two in the subheader. The specificity is silly, but if they weren't specific, we'd have to RFD them. They'll go to the gibbet either way. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 23:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The terms inherently imply an unspecified number, and the current definition builds on the rationale that there are three terms, and the scale between 100 and 200 can be split in three parts with the limits being 133.333... and 166.666..., and the given definitions are rounded up or down from that. If it seems to be more appropriate to have a less specific definition, another alternative for low hundreds may be "an unspecified number between 100 and 199 that is rather close to 100 than 200". Or, as with dozens, "a large number".
 * I also noted an issue of "criteria for inclusion" on my talk page, whereof I think this has "clearly widespread use", which can be seen on googling low hundreds and high hundreds. Mikael Häggström (talk) 11:57, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

 * The terms are in clearly widespread use. Whether specific boundaries can be stated in the definitions is unclear, but those stated make sense. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

 * These terms are the sum of their parts, anyway; one can also say "temperatures will be in the mid seventies (Fahrenheit)" or "his approval rating was in the low thirties", etc. New York Magazine has "A counter at the exhibit, set to zero on March 8, is now in the low three thousands." I agree with Metaknowledge that this should be listed on RFD if it passes RFV. - -sche (discuss) 17:13, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought mid hundreds meant an interval hundreds wide, centered on 500. I guess it would depend on context, eh? DCDuring TALK 17:47, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Or in degrees Fahrenheit 105 degrees ± 2, other interpretations being fatal, either quickly or slowly. DCDuring TALK 17:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, the string of words is in widespread use- but using what definition? The problem is that low, mid, and high are relative terms, with their exact meaning depending on context, and on the conventional expectations of scale for the type of thing being measured. The current "definition" is a rule of thumb, not a definition. It may work for many cases, but it's not inherent in the meaning of the term.
 * It's already got two choices in the definition, but it would need more to be comprehensive: for instance, it's entirely possible that "hundreds" might be in opposition to "hundred-ten's", instead of "two-hundreds", so that low hundreds might mean 100-103 (or thereabouts). Also, if you split the categories, low mid and high mid might reduce the range of low, mid and high.
 * I think all one can say for sure is that low is lower than mid and high, mid is lower than high and higher than low, and high is higher than mid and low (try saying that ten times fast!). Attaching numbers to these is making them seem more precise than they probably are in most people's usage. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that the given numbers in the "definition" makes seem appear inappropriately precise, so I think it's a good idea to change the phrases into something that emphasizes the relative differences from the other entries. For low hundreds, perhaps it could be something like this: "an unspecified number between 100 and 199 that is rather close to 100 than 200, as opposed to mid hundreds and high hundreds", but perhaps there are other suggestions? "Hundreds" in this sense may theoretically refer to 100-109 or 100-900, which may deserve mentioning, but I haven't seen any such usage. Mikael Häggström (talk) 09:01, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've used this latter suggestion in those pages now, but further comments are still welcome. Mikael Häggström (talk) 07:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Closed as resolved. The definitions have been made less specific. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:mid hundreds


text:
Talk:low hundreds

RFV discussion
See Talk:mid hundreds. — Ungoliant (Falai) 19:52, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:low hundreds


text:
Talk:high hundreds

RFV discussion
See Talk:mid hundreds. — Ungoliant (Falai) 19:53, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:high hundreds


text:
Talk:foxtrot

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense bubble wrap. Seems ridiculous, but not quite a shoot-on-sight. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 23:18, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how to filter it from all the uses of foxtrot, so I looked for "Foxtrot216", which this is supposed to be shortened from: not in Usenet or Google Books with anything like the definition given (hardly at all with any), and apparently only exists on the web as part of the definition- one would think something in use enough to be recognizable as an abbreviation would show up somewhere. Add to that the use of the military alphabet and random numbers in film industry slang, and the attribution of the term to an "Avant-garde documentary filmmaker" who's not notable enough to be even mentioned in Wikipedia, and it's hard to discuss with a straight face. I think this is just a lame attempt to get a certain name mentioned, and should be dispatched to oblivion forthwith. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:48, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * And it's been there for more than four years, inserted by an anon. DCDuring TALK 20:36, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 12:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:foxtrot


text:
Talk:agency

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense: "bond issued by a US government-backed entity, such as Fannie Mae"

I know that Fannie Mae is an agency, but could not find evidence of it issuing agencies. Or is this financial slang? --Hekaheka (talk) 07:11, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It might be short for "agency bond", I suppose. I haven't found anything for it yet, but it's hard to filter out the other senses. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

RFC discussion: March 2012–February 2021
A huge mess. Not even all the entries listed on the en.wikipedia disambiguation page are covered by our meanings. -- Liliana • 17:18, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * did a massive overhaul of the page. I'd inclined to say it's decent now. Well, much more decent, anyhowe. --Java Beauty (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Closed as stale. — surjection ⟨??⟩ 22:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:agency


text:
Talk:navicella

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense: pod

— Ungoliant (Falai) 03:19, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Unclear which sense of pod, but maybe pod as in a small watercraft? Mglovesfun (talk) 11:59, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:navicella


text:
Talk:Obama's Law

RFV discussion
Unsure how this should be treated. Most uses are mentions ("Dodd-Frank is known as Obama's Law in the Congo") and not first-hand uses - but given the current state of the Congo I don't think we can expect any first-hand uses in published texts. Also, does it pass SoP? I mean, we don't include Obama's Healthcare Law; is this much different? Hyarmendacil (talk) 10:52, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Obama's Law


text:
Talk:holophony

RFV discussion
Rfv-sense: Actually, this is just what's left after I trimmed off a good bit of encyclopedic content- including a link to the coiner's home page (I don't think the IP who added this is same person, so I'm assuming it wasn't for promotional reasons). I couldn't find anything for this in Google Books or Usenet, but it seems to have been contributed in good faith, so I'm bringing it here. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:13, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * A musical texture in which two or more parts fuse into a single entity, as the synthesis of simultaneous sound streams into a coherent whole.
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:holophony


text:
Talk:crowdcontest

RFV discussion
I suspect this may be real, but 1) I've only found one Google Books hit (dated 2013, so it may just be too recent), and 2) the definition needs to be cleaned up, which would need more information about usage to be done correctly. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:14, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

 * I have radically trimmed the definition because it was noodling waffle. I don't think this term meets our requirements at all. Equinox ◑ 01:38, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you amputated a bit too much (it's hard to resist, I know, when you've got such a bloated mass of verbiage to start with). The term is an outgrowth of crowdsourcing, so it probably needs to include the idea of soliciting something of value from the participants. My version doesn't quite hit the nail on the head, either, though. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:29, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:crowdcontest


text:
Talk:codecessor

RFV discussion
Nicely formatted entry and all, but the word seems to be a clear neologism. Nothing meeting WT:CFI that I can see. Equinox ◑ 01:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Neologism? Perhaps. Nothing meeting WT:CFI? Not quite so; nothing is a strong word! Thanks for the formatting comment! :) I've intuitively used it in 3 or so peer-reviewed publications since 2008 where nobody complained of its non-existence. Google shows that there is another independent use. I hadn't known until last week of the word's status as I naturally assumed it exists; and was told I was understood what I meant. I've then done a search... Wiktionary's WT:CFI general rule "A term should be included if it's likely that someone would run across it and want to know what it means." motivated my inclusion of it here given that the publications exist using this word. I've also submitted an entry to m-w.com. Granted, it fails some of the attestation criteria; and also perhaps is a COI on my part; sorry about that. But I've explained my motivation to boldly put it in. If it's put down as a neologism at an RfD, let it be; I won't fight for it. I'll wait until it catches on (if ever)---I am a very patient man. :) Let the community consensus here decide. Peace.--Mokhov (talk) 14:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * By your own admission, the word is still a neologism, but let us know when you find other people using it. It's not really an antonym of predecessor; that would be the non-existent word "postdecessor".   D b f  i  r  s   23:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I will surely let you know if more usage comes to be... :) However, I think "predecessor" is a correct ("near-"?)antonym since it is an antonym of "successor", which, in turn, is a synonym of "codecessor" as a "co-successor" :) I am not sure what "postdecessor" would be though unless it's a successor of a successor (or of a codecessor), which is redundant. I, however, digress... so I will leave the neo-semantic discussions at that. --Mokhov (talk) 23:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * If your neologism has an exact synonym in standard English, why not use the normal English word?   D b f  i  r  s   06:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * If it were really exact, I would have just used it as I am quite familiar with it. That's why I provided the definition of the intended meaning as: "A (technically) co-descendant notion or concept, but not necessarily a close sibling to concepts alike emerged around the same timeframe from the same or similar predecessor concept(s)." This is not an exact synonym of "successor". --Mokhov (talk) 13:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Delete. Protologism. No usage found independent of Mokhov. Spinning Spark  09:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems the RfV has transformed into the deletion debate, so perhaps it should be moved to the RfD section. Speaking of which, does Wiktionary have a practice to userfy entries like Wikipedia does? (BTW, there seems to exist one independent usage of me I could find at www.bsd.org.cn, but not widespread for sure). --Mokhov (talk) 13:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * This should remain in RFV; the vote "delete" above can be ignored. The question of whether this is attested is decided by our WT:ATTEST policy in conjunction with evidence. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:12, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Failed. Moved to User:Mokhov/codecessor per request above. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:codecessor


text:
Talk:unguiltness

RFV discussion
Freedom from guilt. Note this is not the similar word unguiltiness. Equinox ◑ 18:46, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Curiously, there is an entry for unguilt, but not with the sense 'unguilty'. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:53, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Failed. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:10, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:unguiltness