text:
Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English

__NEWSECTIONLINK__ This page is for verification of entries in any language for which there is no specialised RFV page according to this list:
 * English, Middle English, Scots, Yola and Fingallian → Requests for verification/English
 * Chinese, Japanese, Korean → Requests for verification/CJK
 * Italic (Latin or Romance languages) → Requests for verification/Italic
 * Reconstructed languages → Requests for deletion/Reconstruction
 * All other languages → this page

= October 2019 =

Category:Old Prussian lemmas
For everything spelled with a macron (e.g. /, ) as it looks like reconstruction, neo-Old Prussian. See also: User talk:Beobach972. --Trothmuse (talk) 08:24, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've wondered about our Old Prussian coverage as well, but I'm not sure anyone active here knows enough about the language and its corpus to dare to speak up about it or to be able to answer this rfv satisfactorily. I really am not sure what is to be done; if I had the leisure time right now to research this all on my own I would, but I don't. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 10:48, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe they are. I know that Old Prussian has long vowels, furthermore the Elbing vocabulary, the one online, provides, I think, a reconstruction of words phonetically. The examples above are strange given the other Baltic languages don't have a ē in 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬. From what I know, Old Prussian had no phonological development that caused stressed vowels to lengthen, only the opposite, that unstressed long vowels were reduced to simple vowels. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 14:31, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

RFV for the following: EGPV = Elbing German-Prussian Vocabulary (by G. H. F. Nesselmann, online with reconstructions); TLP = Thesaurus linguae prussicae (etc.) by G. H. F. Nesselmann; WBdSG = Wörterbuch des Simon Grunau.
 * azzaran: EGPV "See  Assaran", see assaran
 * ballo: EGPV "Stirne  Batto"
 * dags: see EGPV in dagis
 * irma: EGPV "Arm  Irmo", TLP "irmo, Arm, Oberarm", see irmo
 * : EGPV "Bene  Bitte" & "Hu͡mele   Camus", TLP "camus, Hummel, [..] Voc. 788."
 * naguttis: EGPV "Nagel  Nagutis", TLP "nagutis, Nagel am Finger"
 * pazzuls: EGPV "Nacke  Passoles", TLP "pa-ssoles, (pl.?), Nacken"
 * salts: "(manuscript forms:) salta" sounds like "salts" is a non-manuscript form, i.e. a reconstruction. TLP "salta, kalt", WBdSG "kalt  Salta"
 * sirablas: EGPV "Silber  Siraplis" - only attested as acc. sirablan, cp. TLP?
 * skals: EGPV "Kinne  Scalus", TLP "scalus, Kinn"
 * sunnis: EGPV "Hunt  Sunis", TLP "sunis, Hund", WBdSG "Hundt   Songos"
 * : EPGV "Keynhe͡gest  Sweriapis", TLP "sweriapis (keynhengest) Voc. 431. ist nunmehr wohl hinreichend klar gelegt als Zuchthengst, Beschäler; es ist das Masc., welches den Femininis poln. [..], böhm. swerzepice, Stute, entspricht; [...] niederrhein. kîen, beschälen [...]"
 * ,, : not in EGPV, TLP, WBdSG.

BTW RFC for undan and unds, see the comment in unds and in the source of wundan. TLP "wundan, Wasser, Voc. 59., wunda, Gr., vgl. und-s" and "und-s, nom., undan, acc. undas, gen. sg., undans, acc. pl., Wasser; Ench. [..]; wundan, Voc., wunda, Gr. s. dd." --Trothmuse (talk) 14:43, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Most of the RFV pressed forthward don't match with the given phonetic reconstruction, so I would say delete. I cound't access the TLP so I can't check those; I have my doubts about WBdSG since it gives a diferent picture from EGPV, two examples are TLP 🇨🇬 and EGPV 🇨🇬, and TLP 🇨🇬 and EGPV (Caymis) 🇨🇬.
 * If salts isn't attested then it should be deleted; yet an adjective ending with "-a" isn't normal, if the word occurs in a text then it could be the nominative feminine singular, if not then it's either a noun, a adjective given in the feminine nominative or something I'm not quite seeing.
 * I guess the real intetion of "masculine singular" was "singular nominative". The EGPV maybe be because of the different forms attested in different sources, so we have 🇨🇬 in TLP, while the Enchiridion has 🇨🇬.
 * One major thing, that I forget to mention, is that Old Prussian, in the Enchiridion, had stress vowels marked by a macron. Therefore if 🇨🇬/ are from the Enchiridion then it's possible that the correct form is 🇨🇬/, as in diphthongs the macron served to represented the stressed vowel instead of a real long vowel. Another rule, altough not entirely agreed upon, is that vowels after conants are themselves stressed. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 19:38, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

 * EGPV has wundan (Wasser), caymis (Dorf), mestan (Stat). (v)undan, mēstan are not in EGPV but reconstructions (by V. Mažiulis, added in that online version of EPGV).
 * Nesselmann's Die Sprache der alten Preußen (etc.) quotes Grunau too (and adds some remarks in brackets and sometimes mentions Hartknoch's forms), but has another text than the WBdSG. Nesselmann's Grunau has Dewus (Goth), Maysta (Stadt), Cayme (Dorff), Wunda (wassere), Songos (hundt) and not Dewes, Maiʃta [= Maiſta, Maista], kayme, Songos, Wunda as in the WBdSG (or Devus, Maiſta, Caymo, Sangor, Wunda as in Hartknoch's). Nesselmann's TLP (here at another source) has "deywis Voc. 1., dewus Gr." and no Dewes/dewes (or Devus/devus). mentions the existence of at least two manuscript versions of Grunau's ("Göttinger Handschrift", "Königsberger Handschrift") - the Göttinger version probably being unknown to Nesselmann.
 * Enchiridion (original, Nesselmann's Die Sprache der alten Preußen (etc.), Die drei catechismen in altpreussischer Sprache (etc.), Trautmann's Die altpreussischen Sprachdenkmäler (etc.)) has tilde in original Fraktur, macron in Antiqua editions. In it, it is (ignoring long s): /  without diacritic, ' (other numerals are: ,, , , ,, , , ). That makes the original RFV for all terms with macron obsolete, as for example ' is properly attested.
 * Also RFV for the following terms with macron:
 * : EGPV "Dinstag  Wissaseydis", TLP "wissa-seydis, Dienstag, Voc. 19"
 * ,, : not in EGPV, TLP, WBdSG.
 * --Trothmuse (talk) 21:47, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Right, I normally use the reconstruction by V. Mažiulis instead of the original wording.
 * Right, I normally use the reconstruction by V. Mažiulis instead of the original wording.

 * Sorry I mistaken the TLP with WBdSG, in my comment above where it say "TLP" I meant "WBdSG". In any case, from what I can tell they share similar roots, but not the endings, which IMO can be verified by checking them with the other Baltic languages.

 * If that’s the case then they should be deleted.

 * I haven't been able to verify all of them but for now I haven't found ; is probably a reconstruction of "camus". 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 11:53, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

RFV-resolved for most of the above. Still TBD: I have to add the actual Enchiridion quotes to unds and undan, but they do exist. I want to make a template for that. Also, the various forms of "deiwas"/"deiws" with the macrons aren't attested. However, ignoring capitalization and the macrons, all of those forms are attested. However it's quite a mess at present, with different definitions on the entries instead of using alt form, and with lots of weird labels like "archaic" and "regional". (What does "archaic" mean exactly? The language is extinct!) 70.172.194.25 19:20, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

/, /
These are still open. Nesselmann has it as deiwa-s, deiws (no capital, no macron). So does. But the latter has links to the actual text having / (with capital which makes sense for the God, no macron). --2003:DE:3730:F428:A061:1BF8:AC91:9DAB 01:31, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

= March 2020 =

otofoto
Dutch protologism. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It is attested here and also in the subtitle of an article about Heleen van Royen (so NSFW) here. Perhaps someone could check Usenet? Should at least be tagged as rare if it passes. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  12:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It's mentioned here. I don't see anything on Usenet. - -sche (discuss) 16:20, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Also used as a title here, but whether that should qualify as a use is rather arguable. As an aside, it turns out that it was also the title of a column about car photos in the 70s. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  19:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

miinibaashkiminasiganibiitoosijiganibadagwiingweshiganibakwezhigan
Sounds like a "dictionary-only" word. Any takers? SemperBlotto (talk) 11:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * And is that really one word? This looks like a long descriptive phrase with all the whitespace deleted.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 04:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't forget that this is a polysynthetic language. It's not a long phrase, it's a compound of compounds, with affixes filling the role of particles instead of separately. Here's a page showing the morphology and related words. You can even hear it pronounced. Given Ojibwe's LDL status, that might even suffice. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:53, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * , my comment was actually inspired by my study of a different highly agglutinating polysynthetic language, Navajo, where we find things like -- a long descriptive phrase, literally parsing out to "the thing that's a car that crawls about and has a cannon and people sit on it".  So when I see super long words like the one above, and then I see it broken down, I find myself wondering if this is really just a typography problem where someone decided to remove the whitespace.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 15:47, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The key question is whether the University of Minnesota's webpage counts as durably archived (I'm on the fence here). Secondarily, they spell it with a bunch of hyphens separating morphemes, so if we do keep it, we probably ought to move it to match their spelling. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:08, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note that the UMN website has a shorter word, lacking the badagwiingweshigani component (see also badagwiingweshin) in the entry taken here from the Anishinaabemowin website. --Lambiam 11:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

They may be putting the hyphens in solely as an aid to the reader, the way Russian dictionaries put accents on that aren't used in  normal writing. There are other examples of this such as biinji-gizhaabikizigan, though I cant say for sure that hyphens are never used in ordinary writing in Ojibwe  either. — Soap — 13:38, 30 March 2020 (UTC) Okay I see native speakers using hyphens, but it still could be that one dictionary is using them to show the morpheme boundaries as an aid to the reader when they would not be used in ordinary writing. — Soap — 17:42, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the very long delay, but I forgot   about this. user:CJLippert replied to me on Wikipedia and the answer is here. — Soap — 23:52, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

So to sum up, the current spelling we have for this word is fine. Some linguistic dictionaries will add hyphens, which would make the word miini-baashkiminasigani-biitoosijigani-badagwiingweshigani-bakwezhigan, a policy which we seem to follow at least some of the time. But it is still definitely a single word and should not be written with spaces. Is it a dictionary-only word? I think not, because it's quite easy to find this word being used online on sites that aren't dictionaries. I would say that nearly all people using this word are specifically choosing it because of how long it is, but that hasn't stopped us from including other very long words. (Also, we never said this was the longest word in Ojibwe, since after all the part that means blueberry is just miini ... a blackberry pie would be a few syllables longer.)
 * I note, as said above, that this word also seems to be in circulation without the fourth morpheme, producing the slightly shorter miini-baashkiminasigani-biitoosijigani-bakwezhigan. — Soap — 01:45, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Pinging, who knows more about this language than we do. A lot depends on the context: if it's not accompanied with the normal morphology associated with similar words in similar contexts, it might be more like a mention or an example sentence than an actual use. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Am I correct in understanding that the remaining question is only whether the term should be spelled with or without hyphens, since its existence as a word (with no spaces, despite the length) is demonstrated by the Ojibwe People's Dictionary? Unfortunately, I don't speak much Ojibwe at all and haven't read enough literature in it to have a sense of whether this would most often be written with or without hyphens. Online, I find various mentions of the hyphenated word, vs only a few unhyphenated examples (often low-quality or embedded in Russian); based on that and the Ojibwe People's Dictionary, it seems it should be moved to the form with hyphens. As to why it's not spelled with spaces... as Chuck said in an early comment, some languages prefer strings like this, parsed as words (with or without hyphens: e.g. Nuxalk has some rather long strings with no spaces or hyphens, nor even vowels or syllable breaks), where other languages (like Navajo) might prefer to use several separate words parsed as forming a long descriptive term. - -sche (discuss) 03:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * : This isn't in the Ojibwe People's Dictionary. Rather, a form with fewer components is: miini-baashkiminasigani-biitoosijigani-bakwezhigan, which I've just created. AFAICT, we generally hyphenate Ojibwe compounds, as does OPD. Compare akiiwe-wiigiwaam, aabita-niibino-giizis, gichi-manidoo-giizis, etc. I can't comment as to whether the hyphens are used in actual texts written in the language, because almost all hits I've found while searching for the preceding three terms on Google are mentions embedded in other language (usually English) text. Exceptions include this tribal constitution and this journal article, both of which use the hyphens.
 * As an LDL, one source suffices for Ojibwe. However, WT:CFI still says that "the community of editors for that language should maintain a list of materials deemed appropriate as the only sources for entries based on a single mention". About Ojibwe is silent on that (as it is about hyphenation), but based on actual practice, OPD would undoubtedly be in that list. Would the current source pass muster? IDK. There may be others. Almost all the Google hits are just sites about long words, though.
 * Btw, I strongly suspect that the more normal word for blueberry pie would be miini-biitoosijigan, but ironically that isn't in OPD and barely registers on Google. OPD does have miskomini-biitoosijigan (raspberry pie), though. 70.172.194.25 09:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

= April 2020 =

KBC / ABC
German. Probably only used in terms like /, in which at best there is a pseudo-prefix  /. --Bakunla (talk) 05:53, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Cited ABC, will look for KBC later. Used in a variety of hyphenated compounds. It's clearly a common initialism, and being a "pseudo-prefix" isn't really an argument to delete it, since by definition it implies it is really some other POS, presumably that of its constituents (i.e. adjective in this case). —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 02:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

 * isn't cited yet, only some examples for terms like and  were provided. It's comparable to terms with Langzeit- ( doesn't exists). Maybe compare with:
 * wissen.de which has it as Langzeit... It says: "in Zus." = in compounds, which is true like: = 🇰🇲.
 * de:Langzeit- calls it a bound lexeme ("gebundenes Lexem") which they distinguish from affixes and also from "affixoids" (like de:tod- which they call prefixoid ("Präfixoid")). In en.wiktionary however bound lexems and affixoids are simply given as affixes.
 * duden.de while having some terms with Langzeit- has nothing like Langzeit, Langzeit-, Langzeit... but it lacks some affixes, affixoids or bound lexemes. (tod- is an example which they have and they call it prefix.)
 * --2003:DE:372E:DA74:2560:4D6F:A0D6:B2F5 15:05, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * "In en.wiktionary however bound lexems and affixoids are simply given as affixes"—not really, Wiktionary has things like only used in precisely for bound lexemes and generally those entries are not formatted as affixes. As for Langzeit-, in all but one of the existing entries in Langzeit- the term is straightforwardly broken down to lang + Zeit, the "affixoid" category with one entry you linked is not the standard practice. If we're following de.wikt, de:ABC has its own entry and is simply noted as "meist in Wortverbindungen gebräuchlich", which is comparable to the standard practice to en.wikt. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * If de.wt's "meist in Wortverbindungen gebräuchlich" (meist = mostly, not only) is factually correct, then it deserves an entry at ABC. Question is, is it correct? --2003:DE:372E:DAD0:B169:E28F:1253:8DB8 21:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Λεώνη
Greek for León, Spain. According to Wikipedia it's Λεόν. Ultimateria (talk) 05:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * That article on the Greek Wikipedia gives Λεώνη as the “Hellenization” of León and Llión. --Lambiam 08:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , could you please take a look at this? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 03:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes @Metaknowledge, it is as Lambiam explains. Many cities have both variants: phonetic unadapted simplified spelling and -usually older style:- adapted with declension. But The female's name is only Λεώνη, not Λεόν, @Ultimateria. ‑‑Sarri.greek ♫ | 07:45, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * @Sarri.greek: In this edit summary, you stated a willingness to add quotations. When you have the free time, it would be nice if you could do that, so we can close this RfV. (You can even just send me links to Google Books or similar and I'll do the rest, if desired.) 70.172.194.25 08:05, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Happy New Year. No need for quotation. A google search for "Λεώνη" "Ισπανία" (Spain) gives numerous examples with snippets and titles for given name and placename (of no other interest). I verify that both definitions exist. ‑‑Sarri.greek ♫ I 11:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

= June 2020 =

อุตสาห
Thai. This seems to be a morpheme, not a word. I'm not sure how to clean up the entry, or whether it should remain when fixed. According to the (Thai) Royal Institute Dictionary (RID), the independent word is (note the tone mark and cancellation mark), yielding the unbound pronunciation shown, while  is a trisyllabic prefix, notated  in the RID. (The Thai of the RID does use hyphens.) The RID also reports a trisyllabic stand-alone form,. Before one spelling reform, if the word existed (evidence?), the trisyllabic unbound form would have been spelt the same as the challenged lemma. --RichardW57 (talk) 11:09, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

 * You will find lots of อุตสาหกรรม (อุตสาห + กรรม) in search results, and some rare compounds like อุตสาหการ (อุตสาห + การ). In Wiktionary, every form of a word can have its own page, that is, we can have อุตสาห, อุตส่าห์, อุตสาหะ, อุษาหะ, อุสสาหะ, and อุสส่าห์. --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:37, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The compounds you cited are evidence for, are they not? I'm not sure how to link all these forms.  Linked they should be.  Is the etymology of อุตสาหกรรม , , ,  or even ?  Or ? And why doesn't the latter link to a form with a hyphen?  Amusingly, อุตสาหกรรม gets broken between lines with a hyphen (at the morpheme join) in the 1999 edition of the RID.--RichardW57 (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

If อุตสาห is now only the combining form (the disyllabic nonocombining form has vanished since I raised this RfV), why is its part of speech 'adjective' as opposed to 'prefix'? --RichardW57 (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I added . Thai lemmas here do not have hyphen for prefix/suffix because they have same meaning of its full word so prefix/suffix will be written on the same page, unless they are spelled different. And Thai lemmas can always attach to another word even they are not prefix/suffix (a noun can modify another noun, etc), like Chinese and other languages in the SEA region. In case of อุตสาห, the dictionary said:

อุตสาห-, อุตส่าห์, อุตสาหะ น. ความบากบั่น, ความพยายาม, ความขยัน, ความอดทน, ใช้ว่า อุษาหะ อุสสาหะ หรือ อุสส่าห์ ก็มี. ก. บากบั่น, พยายาม, ขยัน, อดทน.

and

อุสส่าห์, อุสสาหะ น. อุตสาหะ. ก. อุตส่าห์.

 * that means the entry อุตสาห should be noun (น.), since morpheme cannot be verb (ก.). อุตส่าห์, อุตสาหะ, อุสส่าห์, อุสสาหะ, and unmentioned อุษาหะ are full words. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

 * No, it means the preceding combining form is written in words as "อุตสาห", while as a whole word it is or .  The rest means that the word forms are both nouns and verbs, and that there are yet other spellings in use.  Taking the RID as a whole, it's not clear to me what the status of  is; unlike the other forms, it has no entry of its own in the RID.  Note there is no entry ' in the RID; the entry is '. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

 * There are two main modes of noun compounding in Thai. Indic words are combined in the order (modifier, head), and the first element usually sprouts a linking vowel and the restoration in speech of the silent final vowels, and often clarification of the phonation of a final stop.  There may also be spelling changes.  This the old Indo-European order, still seen in English compounds like coalmine.  The native order is (head, modifier), and it is often not clear whether this is syntax or word derivation.  The first element may be modified, e.g. by the vowel shortening, but this is not visible in writing.  There are then a few anomalous compounds, like, with native ordering but still a link vowel. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

 * Note that in this case that the noun and its compounding form are written differently. I believe there is no big problem with giving the etymology of the compound as ; what is uncertain is whether it is a compound of the 2- or 3-syllable form. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

 * I notice that Octahedron80 has sneakily changed the part of speech to 'noun'. With that change, the entry is clearly a candidate for deletion, as there is no noun  in correctly spelt modern Thai. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:32, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I have originally created it as a noun, since the PoS distinction in a language such as Thai is blurred, especially for compound words. I was guided by its meaning and my Thai is below average.
 * It's was reasonable to change it to noun. The term is present in Sanook dictionary. There are so many derivations. Please keep the word. should be the alt or the main spelling, IMO. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not a word in modern Thai! The Sanook dictionary is a compilation of other dictionaries.  Which one are you citing?  The headword from the RID looks corrupt, but perhaps it's from so old a version that the hyphen wasn't there.  A 1950's book teaching Thai laments that the spelling  represented both of what are now written as  and . --RichardW57 (talk) 10:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Here's the link. What are you suggesting? I don't think it's very typical to have Thai entries with hyphens. Another solution, like having a component as SoP may be required. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 11:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm stating that as a copy of a recent RID dictionary, the headwords in the Sanook dictionary are corrupt. I have one other big Thai dictionary, and that also shows combining forms with a hyphen.  It seems that the correct way forward is to:
 * Mark this entry as a 'noun form', the combining form of and .  (I have jocularly referred to Thai as having a genitive case.) --RichardW57 (talk) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Use first of these forms as the central lemma, referencing compounds to it. --RichardW57 (talk) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * On those two pages, say, in the usage notes, how compounds are formed and handled. Display this entry with a hyphen, which is the expectation of readers who have used a good Thai dictionary. --RichardW57 (talk) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * A longer term solution is to change so that it expects Thai prefixes to have hyphens, and rename this entry to the hyphenated form, as seen in good dictionaries.  Special handling will be needed if we can find evidence of the use of the challenged word's form as a noun. --RichardW57 (talk) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Michell's 1892 dictionary has, but curiously indicates a disyllabic pronunciation. If that had been entered as a noun, it would be right to keep it as an obsolete spelling. --RichardW57 (talk) 13:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Hundreds of words are in the same case like this. For example แพทย/แพทย์, อินทร/อินทร์, ศาสตร/ศาสตร์, ธุร/ธุระ, etc, if you want to look into it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:49, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes. They need to be dealt with.  I intend to create a template for noting the existence of a combining form.  I think I'll call it .  Its expansion may need rework, as head-initial and head-final compounding are different, but I couldn't think of a snappy way of saying that to non-linguists.  For,  versus  exemplifies the difference. --RichardW57 (talk) 08:47, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

German "Suffixes"
--Marontyan (talk) 10:02, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , /, in place-names: Instead of being formed with the suffix, rather the place-names are borrowed, e.g.  from Low German or Middle Low German.
 * / in surnames: Rather from place-names, e.g. from the German place, influenced by Slavic.

 * Did @Marontyan mean that these should not be listed as German suffixes? If so, I'm inclined to agree, on the basis that I doubt German speakers would either attach a meaning to them or use them for new placenames. On the other hand, they are clearly recognisable components of German words and there are precedents for this such as and  from Norse placenames borrowed into English. I don't know how to resolve this. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 16:46, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

 * Two possibilities:
 * Delete as not German and German terms being borrowed (Horowitz from Slavic, cp. ).
 * Add label and note, "not productive", "only occuring in borrowings".
 * --09:00, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

сука
Russian. Rfv-sense "(vulgar, offensive) promiscuous slut". Originally added by an IP (with the wrong template) with the reasoning: "Reliable source needed for that use of the word" in diff. — surjection ⟨ ⟩ 21:40, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * There are lot of senses in this word. But of course it also has the sexual connotations associated with dogs, actually more than the English which often refers to the pesky behaviour of dogs (→ ), so translation is not one to one. Maybe all those senses you find for  in pornographic sites on the web are examples for this gloss. Fay Freak (talk) 20:32, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I would say not necessarily promiscuous, but a slut in some quasi-positive sense, more like a sexually attractive sophisticated woman. --GareginRA (talk) 12:34, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

= July 2020 =

New Saxon Spellings
See the search results. The Wikipedia article was deleted. --B-Fahrer (talk) 14:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

= September 2020 =

denk (Afrikaans)
Afrikaans. Rfv-sense of "thought", all I find are old-fashioned verb forms or parts of compounds. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  14:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * "maar hy hat het iets in hom gehad wat buite die denk van ons volk gereik het" "maar vir die denk moet ons onderskei - en altyd onthou dat dit ons is wat die onderskeiding gemaak het.". I suppose the translation "thinking" may be better, but there is definitely a noun in this form. Thadh (talk) 15:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * These are basically substantivised infinitives, like Dutch het denken. So yes, the translation is "thinking". I don't think they are lemmatised separately. ? ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  19:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

= December 2020 =

ကောန်ညာ်တြုံ
According to a complaint of a native Mon speaker (Special:PermaLink/61255799/; File:You stop hurt my language.jpg), these two spelling variants for are non-existent. I googled these two and failed to obtain favorable results though some of their components ( /, ) are attested. --Eryk Kij (talk) 10:46, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

 * For ကွေန်ၚါ်, go to to look for "ကွေန် ၚါ် ". (That site uses space between compound).
 * For ကောန်ညာ်, here is my evidence พจนานุกรมไทย-มอญ สำเนียงมอญลพบุรี(p122lost).pdf (2007) look at page 70. It is intentionally spelled like that.
 * တြုံ is a word that can be added any noun expressing male.

 * About its author, จำปี ซื่อสัตย์, I don't know if he is still alive. He must be 90 years old now.

 * Anyway, you should copy my another dictionary too พจนานุกรมมอญ-ไทย.pdf (1984).

 * And if you can open sqlite database, also take this too Mon-Thai Dictionary.sqlite. I extracted from this mobile app.

 * --Octahedron80 (talk) 16:48, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * @Octahedron80 Thank you for your explanation. I have difficulty understanding Thai, so it would be harder without you. OK, some combinations of the components are indeed attested. Then, is there any source that shows each of the spellings from beginning to end? Even some parts of them are attested, it would be another matter whether these two combinations are documented as they are. The variants listed at the current version of  are of course OK, but when it comes to the forms seen at, things are quite uncertain. Your attitudes gives the impression that you could create an entry *徒葩 as a spelling variant for Japanese  since  both   and   are read as hana and have the sense “flower, blossom” in common, therefore they are always freely interchangeable—no, no, actually it is not! We cannot do such a horrific deed without complete evidence —otherwise, what we do will be perfect invention! --Eryk Kij (talk) 20:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

 * About the whole word "ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ", I was not the one who created it at first, I renamed to another form and, after 咽頭べさ was mad, then I reverted back. (I cannot rename same page twice so I edited it instead.) I can only verify ကောန်ၚာ် and တြုံ solely. You may ask him about "ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ" if there is some evidence either. (It should be documented somewhere / or it is just SOP?) I could remove alternative forms of "ကောန်ၚာ်တြုံ" if there is no evidence, even their parts have.--Octahedron80 (talk) 00:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

 * By the way, 咽頭べさ mistakenly put some unknown texts into IPA template in many words; I assume he does not know IPA. I must follow his track to cleanup this mess. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * @Octahedron80 I agree with you on this point. I asked him about this topic (it seems something other than IPA, then what is it?) before, but he has made no reply so far...--Eryk Kij (talk) 09:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

 * A few observations: First, the self-assessment by this editor as "en-2" is rather generous. Figuring out how much they understand our policies is likely to be a challenge, and explaining anything doubly so.
 * Second, it's easier to take the word of a native speaker as to the existence of something in their language than its non-existence. Unless they're familiar with all the other dialects, they could be just as ignorant as non-speakers about the vocabulary of people a couple of valleys over.
 * Also, in an environment where their language is actively discouraged, one would expect a certain prescriptivism that sees variation from what they're battling to defend as an attack (that environment would increase isolation between speakers, as well, which reinforces my second point).
 * Of course, I have no direct knowledge, so I could be completely off base. I would rather bend over backward and walk on eggshells than risk piling on with those around them who don't want to hear their language. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:05, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Please don't worry, I have no doubt about the existence of the term itself, since I am able to find its records through Google Search. What he (yes he, judging from the audio records) and I regard as a problem is which combination is allowed to spell and which is not. --Eryk Kij (talk) 08:29, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * >Unless they're familiar with all the other dialects, they could be just as ignorant as non-speakers about the vocabulary of people a couple of valleys over.
 * Of course, I understand this point. That's why I have made this edit. Mon language has numerous dialects but no official standard variety is seen while something similar to it exists (Bauer 1982: xvii; Jenny 2005: 30; Jenny 2015: 555). Thus, even if a certain word itself is attested in a material in terms of pronunciation and spelling, there is NO guarantee that we can apply it directly to other dialects. --Eryk Kij (talk) 09:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Jeju terms for modern concepts
As categorized by UNESCO and as discussed in, fluent speakers of the actual Jeju language were all born in the 1940s or earlier. The following terms relating to modern concepts are not likely to be found in traditional Jeju, which was spoken solely by impoverished peasants. As what is now spoken in Jeju Island—an indubitably Korean dialect—is not what we mean by Jeju in Wiktionary, I believe these entries should all be deleted unless someone can provide an actual early attestation (preferably from the very first academic studies of the dialect, in the 1960s). The Digital Museum for Endangered Languages and Cultures or the NIKL dictionaries ported at Urimalsaem is not necessarily reliable in this regard, since they do not really make this distinction.

Making the distinction between traditional, soon-to-be-extinct Jeju and Category:Jeju Korean is crucial for maintaining some integrity in Category:Jeju lemmas. The most credible dictionary of Jeju,, does not bother with these modernisms and I believe we should follow their lead.

 * To anyone who's going through these, please do not delete them for now, as I'm finding cites and am planning on making a complete update soon, but have been behind recently. Thanks! AG202 (talk) 07:43, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

 * I know that your opinions have changed a lot since this comment and that we've been able to find a TON of material made in Jeju, so I don't fault you at all for making them at the time. Since the start of the revitalization efforts, there have been more materials being made in native Jeju by Jeju natives (and not in ) and more lexicons being made, so I don't necessarily agree with saying that everything must be from pre-1960, as even if the only Jeju speakers were born in the 1940s or earlier (there are younger Jeju natives but they're more rare), they'd still be able to make up new terms for things that have come into play since then. However, I have deleted the senses that I am completely unable to find and don't think that I will find, per the RFV guidelines. Additionally, the cites that I have found have been written by-and-large in native Jeju and not Jeju-tinged Korean, by or the with consultation of native Jeju speakers and have been published either by the Jeju Preservation Society, the Jeju Provincial Government, or in related Jeju studies. AG202 (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

ᄉᆞ훼
Wasei kango for "society", not a traditional word. I think it should be deleted entirely because the actual form in modern Jeju speech is likely to be (due to the loss of ), which is pronounced identically to Standard Korean. The word represents an intermediary stage between "true" Jeju and the modern Jeju-tinged Korean, and I do not think we should categorize this stage as Jeju.

 * FYI, the historical Korean reading for 社 was 샤, not ᄉᆞ. So it cannot start with ᄉᆞ in Jeju. --172.58.16.111 06:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

RFV-failed and I've moved the sense to. However, I have added the other, as that is cited in. AG202 (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

ᄌᆞ영거
How many bicycles existed in Jeju before South Korean industrialization? This form is a dialectal pronunciation of, a term which was definitely used in many mainland dialects in 1945, so it could well be a post-1940s introduction into the island. Should be changed to under the Korean header with ko.

 * On the other hand, the historical Korean reading for 自 was ᄌᆞ. So it can start with ᄌᆞ in Jeju. --172.58.16.111 06:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Cited. AG202 (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

RFV-passed. AG202 (talk) 06:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

관광객
This word is not attested in Korean in the "tourist" sense before the 1910s, and is a Japanese import. How many tourists were in Jeju before South Korean industrialization?

Cited. AG202 (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

RFV-passed. AG202 (talk) 06:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

기념관
"Memorial hall" in the modern sense. Also likely to be a modernism.

RFV-failed. Was only able to find it in one source, and it doesn't seem like an actual usage, but just in a name. AG202 (talk) 00:06, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

냉장고
"Refrigerator". Refrigerators were not common in South Korea until the 1970s.

Cited. AG202 (talk) 06:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

브랜드
English loan meaning "brand" (as in a perfume brand, etc.). Highly unlikely to be found in traditional Jeju.

RFV-failed. I don't think we need this entry anyways. AG202 (talk) 06:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

사진끼
"Camera".

생물권
"Biosphere" in the modern scientific sense.

RFV-failed. Was only able to find it in the name of something, not an actual usage. AG202 (talk) 00:06, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

선풍기
"Electric fan". Electric fans were not common in South Korea until the 1980s.

악매
"Demon, Devil". Has Christian connotations to me as a native speaker of Korean, and not found in or other sources on Jeju religion; the very concept is alien to Jeju religious practice. Likely a late Christian introduction; the date is unknown, but Christianity was very marginal in Jeju until the 1950s and is still not particularly important there. If it fails RFV, should be changed to the Korean header with ko.

조선시대
A modern historiographical term that could not have existed before the 1950s.

주인공
"Main character; protagonist" in the modern literary sense, probably from Japanese.

텔레비전
"Television". Did not exist in Korea before the 1950s.

RFV-failed. Most common translation is. AG202 (talk) 06:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

풍력단지
"Wind power plant".

decyn
Dutch. These seem unattestable. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  15:33, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how chemical CFI works, but compounds with decyl: N,N'-bis(10-(p- methoxyfenoxy)-decyl)-p-diaminobenzeen, di(n-hexyl,n-octyl,n-decyl)ftalaat decyl-trimethylammonium, plain decyl: . Thadh (talk) 18:18, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * That is a systematic name but has Dutch spelling of components, instead of, etc.  A paper from 2009 talks about chemistry translation: doi:10.1021/ci800243w.  I think di(n-hexyl,n-octyl,n-decyl)ftalaat appearing in a Dutch paper can be used to support , , and  (= , I assume). Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

رست
Persian. I can't find this term in any reputable dictionary. -- 22:13, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * @Victar: --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * @Victar: Repeating the call. Do you still insist on the verifications? I won't be able to add citations in Persian, I am afraid, need native speakers. I have found the term in another dictionary English-Persian Persian-English (it requires registration and this dictionary can be borrowed for an hour). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:03, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Anyone? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:41, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I found it only in Amid dictionary. It's a relatively smaller Persian dictioary containing words found in the late Persian literature. The Amid dictionary of the Vajehyab website has cited a couplet (I guess it is based on the revised edition of the Amid Dictionary). --Z 07:08, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Imme
German. Sense: a swarm of bees. --幽霊四 (talk) 14:30, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * 幽霊四: If you just looked into the darn standard references instead of the Duden which covers only the last century you wouldn’t need to request. Especially impudent if the sense is explicitly labelled obsolete. Here a selection of attestation-based dictionaries: FNHDWB, DRW, Grimm. Etc.. With varying spellings of course, but we wouldn’t want to have the word under etc. either and as a rule we unify, if you didn’t know. Case closed, newb without user page? Fay Freak (talk) 15:01, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Grimm: It's "imme, m.". Different gender (and also different capitalisation). Also Grimme covers more than New High German.
 * DRW:
 * Examples have "ein immen", "ain imp", "ein unverfolgter impen", "ein imme", so often have other forms and where the gender is revealed without any doubts [i.e. in "ein unverfolgter impen"], it's masculine.
 * Meaning: "Bienenstock und -schwarm" (bee-hive and bee-swarm), that's different from the entry. (Is it even both bee-hive and bee-swarm (a single sense) or either bee-hive or bee-swarm (two senses, though sometimes/often hard to distinguish?)
 * DRW's quotes are incorrect as can be seen by the 1709 Mutach quote for Impen at Talk:Imme. ("Normalization" in a quote makes the quote incorrect - a correct quote keeps spelling including capitalisation of the original work. In case of Impen also the page-number is wrong: It's 41 and not 40.)
 * "I Bienenstock und -schwarm" with "den hochflugk der impen lassen wir" looks like it could be wrong too: It could be a feminine singular genitive der impen of imp/impe/impen = "swarm of bees", but also a plural genitive with the second sense "bee".
 * DRW also includes OHG, MHG and MLG, so many quotes are insufficient for German.
 * FWB (= Frühneuhochdeutsches Wörterbuch, this is the abbreviation used there and not "FNHDWB"):
 * Sense "1. Bienenschwarm, Bienenstock" with "sehet an die immen, die machen das honig aus der edelsten manna aller blumen" looks like it could be wrong too: it's immen pl. = bees, so rather an example for sense "2. Biene".
 * "Etc.":
 * Adelung doesn't have this sense. "Im Friesischen Ihme, in andern gegenden Ympe, wo es auch einen Bienenstock bedeutet" refers to Frisian (East Frisian Low German or Frisian Frisian?).
 * BMZ and Lexer are for Middle High German.
 * ElsWB, PfWB are for dialects which aren't part of German in Wiktionary.
 * -幽霊四 (talk) 15:36, 21 December 2020 (UTC) & 幽霊四 (talk) 00:20, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Because of the grammar of the Early New High German texts, in many cases it is not clear which gender the quotes have – you do not seem to understand the grammar, “ein imme” can also be feminine back then; especially in Bavarian areas also “ein immen” –; in addition to what FNHDWB says that in many attestations it is not clear if a swarm of bees or bees as individuals are meant. However I see from some quotes there clearly that the meaning of an individual bee has also been masculine. So a solution is to change to masculine and have a feminine POS as alternative form because the feminine is only a modern perversion of some poets and it does not matter whether it has recently been used more often as feminine since it is not often at all; or give in the head and then  immediately after. In any case the way you requested here is to be reprehended since someone dealing with it and not knowing where to search German could have, because of nobody answering, just deleted the sense while at most a gender switch would have been appropriate. And no, capitalisation is irrelevant, New High German nouns get added capitalized even if they died out before capitalisation of nouns was a thing, and those liberal writers who do not follow the capitalization rules in modern times are treated as if they have written their texts capitalized regularly, because otherwise it’s confusing. Fay Freak (talk) 17:41, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you point me to the rule that says we unify? I was under the impression it was a contentious thing, done on a language-by-language basis. And WT:About German says "Wiktionary includes all attested spellings", so as a rule, we don't unify German. Perhaps instead of harassing the "newb without a user page" you should check what the rules actually are?
 * Just verify the damn thing, Fay Freak. The general rules say that we need cites for any words, not cribbing from dictionaries. We can quibble about stuff after we have a suitable number of citations.--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:05, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you point me to the rule that says we do not unify and have to find every sense in every spelling in every gender three times? No, because it’s not true. The word is not “spelling”, hence unifying. I have proven it also on various places, as for example by the fact that one can attest from audio, or texts written scriptio continua, etc., e.g. above under Requests_for_verification/Non-English, also on Requests_for_verification/English I noted that “we cannot derive from the mere entry layout practice that for alternative spelling pages entries are cloned the requirement that each such sense or even only part of speech needs three citations”. The fact that one needs to argue for certain interpretations of the law does not speak against the stance of him who argues.
 * I have shown attestations above; the dictionaries give quotes. Can you demonstrate me a rule that we need cites typed off into the page and that referring to dictionaries quoting the senses or spellings, e.g. even other Wiktionaries, wouldn’t suffice? The fact that we constantly have too little personnel and are underpaid suggests otherwise, as well as the fact that blind quotes of quotes given in other sources are avoided in science.
 * You don’t seriously suggest we should have this word under or  or perhaps  or  because of not being quoted in the modern spelling and the particular gender and particular sense? Because “we operate under the tyranny of entry titles”?
 * I have presented multiple ways of representing the word. You speak of harrassing but it is perfectly legimitate to point out that his request was unclear in concerning the particular gender so it could have lead to excessive deletion of a known sense, and a fact that one is negatively disposed towards users who do not state their language levels on their user pages, and I do not forgo to notify particularly newbs of uncomfortable truths, because they in particular have to get to know things. If “newb” is an offensive then one shall forgive me because I am not responsible for every neutral word’s meaning being ousted by connotations to an extent that we cannot communicate without a nimb of aggression. Language hasn’t been made for the internet. Fay Freak (talk) 15:58, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, WT:About German says "Wiktionary includes all attested spellings". You shouldn't say "as a rule we unify, if you didn’t know" to a newb, if there are established users who would argue against it. There's a difference between arguing for a position, and informing someone that a position is the rule.
 * Nice change in standards of evidence, if you make a claim, you don't have to provide evidence. If I make a claim, I have to demonstrate an exact rule. Have I been wasting my time on RFV when I could have just responded by "check out Google Books"? When I added cites to Uno, people disagreed that some of those cites were appropriate cites: see the archived discussion on Talk:Uno. It would have been a lot harder to have that discussion had I and other people not copied the text into the article. In this case, the user has disagreed with your cites; it would be much easier to work with if the cites were here where we could read them, instead of just handwaves at dictionaries.
 * Yes, I seriously suggest we should have this word under the spellings it's used under. As you quote a vote, you know that this is not an uncontentious issue at Wiktionary--Votes/2020-09/Removing_Old_English_entries_with_wynns closed 9-4--and the vote you quote is very limited, as wynn can be replaced one for one with w in all cases in Old English. We shouldn't have to map from a spelling used in real life to some arbitrary spelling invented by a dictionary writer, us or someone else.
 * You don't distinguish "uncomfortable truths" from "Fay Freak's opinions", and this is not the first time I've seen you do this. Here's an uncomfortable truth; you'd be running a chance of getting blocked on some other English Wikis, and acting like it's other people's fault and "Language hasn’t been made for the internet." is absurd when many other people manage to follow these rules and newb says "(Internet slang, sometimes derogatory)", so yes, it's made for the Internet, and it's always had that negative meaning. And while "newb" may be somewhat problematic, the fact you're asserting Fay Freak's opinions as "uncomfortable truths" that they obviously should have known (despite the fact you can't cite any place on the Wiki where they could have learned those "truths") is much more problematic. As is saying "the way you requested here is to be reprehended", which condemns the person instead of focusing on the action, say, "an RFV on a word could cause it to be incorrectly deleted." Which is itself garbage; if someone feels a word needs RFV, they should feel free to RFV it. There are points someone RFVing a bunch of words that are going to be kept could be a problem, but I'd say that's never the case for words that might get deleted; nominating words for RFV should get cites added, making them clearly attested words, and in many cases get definitions refined and separated out.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:43, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I have added a few cites, though it is advisable that a native speaker looks it over. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  15:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Dievoort
Dutch, two senses: "(chiefly Belgium) A place name" and "(chiefly Belgium) A surname with the prefix van". The second sense exists at Vandievoet or Van Dievoet because that is how Flemish names work, the first sense does not seem attestable in use; although there are mentions of a hamlet in Ukkel (Uccle). ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  18:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * What is your view on this? ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  18:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't know the place myself, but seems to be a place near Breda: . The place in Ukkel is indeed called, not Dietvoort. Morgengave (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Cleaned up, but don't have access to Buiks (1999) or (1992) where Dievoort is apparently mentioned. I did find this though: https://erfgoed.breda.nl/upload/downloads/4_7_buiks_Hout_low.pdf (pp. 991-92), where the place near Breda is only called Dietvoort, but there was a place near Meerhout called Dievoort. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 00:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

drieken
Dutch. This could in theory be related to drek, but it is absent from many dialect dictionaries and I cannot find it used (results are scannos for drinken, drukken, etc.). ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  13:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you think this lemma might be something or does it seem ephemeral? ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  17:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Never heard of this, and it's not in the (amateur) Vlaams woordenboek, which is with its ~34000 entries quite elaborate. So I suppose if it exists (does it?), it's likely part of a Dutch-Dutch or Suriname-Dutch dialect, or slang (which could explain its non-attestation)? It's a pity that the entry creator is anonymous. Morgengave (talk) 17:44, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * All right, that seems to rule out Belgian Dutch. It might be from dialectal usage in the Netherlands or a borrowing from Westlauwers Frisian or Low Saxon, but I did not find it in the eWND. Surinamese Dutch seems very implausible to me because of the vowel change that cannot be explained as a borrowing to Sranantongo and back. That said, I'm willing to wait this one out until libraries reopen. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  18:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Sounds familiar, but I think that's a false memory. Did some searches, all came up dry. Maybe something highly local that doesn't appear in any written text. Alexis Jazz (talk) 12:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I think it might be a misspelling of drieten.

= February 2021 =

angiosperms
Translingual. Looks English, cp. ,, . --幽霊四 (talk) 01:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC) (with ), (with ) and similar searches (with other articles, with forms of translations of be, excluding the) brought up:
 * Depending on the outcome, possibly to add:, , (also cp. ), , , , , , . --幽霊四 (talk) 01:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Clades are tricky, because many of them don't have an accepted conventional taxonomic name. The taxonomists working on them give them an informal English name, and other taxonomists use them like the conventional Latin-based taxonomic names- which we treat as Translingual(language code mul) because they're used in a great many languages without being a part of the languages. These English-based names for plants are technically invalid according to the taxonomic code, but they're definitely used in taxonomic contexts.
 * This particular one is odd because the clade has a normal taxonomic name, Angiospermae, and there's nothing about the formation of that name that precludes it from being validly given any rank above superfamily. It doesn't seem necessary to use an English-based name in non-English usage. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * And yet it is so used. DCDuring (talk) 06:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * IMO, none of these are Translingual. They were all created by DCDuring, who has no training in relevant fields and seems opposed to the distinction betwen taxonomic and common names used by workers in the actual field. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Is angiosperms (and are the others) used in multiple languages?
 * French "les Angiospermes"
 * German "Angiospermen (angiosperms): Bedecktsamer; Pflanzen, deren ..." which is only a mentioning of the English
 * My search wasn't exhaustive, but I didn't see any non-English usage. --幽霊四 (talk) 09:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If it is then it still does not mean it is translingual. In other languages there is still in principle a distinction between the native language and Translingual even if the terms look the same 100% (which they don’t, due to capitalization). Fay Freak (talk) 14:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Just move to English. It is formally clear here what is translingual and what English. Fay Freak (talk) 14:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's English. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 15:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This is not a vote. That might be appropriate in RfM or RfD. There is attestation in scholarly journals for the terms being used in a manner indistinguishable from the Latinate taxonomic names. There is more abundant attestation for Angiosperms. DCDuring (talk) 05:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed that this shouldn't be a vote. It's how it's used that should determine what language header it goes under, not a prescriptive standard. Our Translingual section should be just as descriptive as the rest of the dictionary. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 06:20, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Re "There is more abundant attestation for Angiosperms": Is there? Google Books is not case sensitive, so searching for angiosperms and Angiosperms brings up the same results. As I searched, I didn't see more for the capitalised variant. --幽霊四 (talk) 12:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I found abundant attestation for Angiosperm in use parallel to Latinate taxa at Google Scholar. I searched for "clade Angiosperms". DCDuring (talk) 17:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * “manner indistinguishable from the Latinate taxonomic names”. Cannot such reasoning. It’s not only the manner, i.e. the context in which it is used which indicates which language something is. This is the same irrational approach that declares long Latin or Greek bonmots “Danish”. The  is unambiguous about which language it is (and one can hardly with more quotes show that something is more translingual or more English; “eudicots” will not look less English because there are quotes in some other language that has the same pluralization practice, so it is true it is more RfM matter and not RfV matter – though even better, somebody who is able to sharply distinguish can just move/transform such entries for he can rationally defend it). Fay Freak (talk) 13:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The only use in a work not in English is a section of an unpublished Czech thesis which quotes from the English language product of the adding a few Czech words in.  Elsewhere in the thesis the word is treated as Czech, for example "angiospermní: krytosemenné rostliny, jednoděloţné a dvouděloţné" (angiosperms, plants with hidden seeds...).  This supports a borrowing or parallel formation, not a multilingual word. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 13:24, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's very hard to find usage, because of the huge number of false positives due to English titles in their cited references. It's also true that there are taxonomists who don't view APG clade names as valid for taxonomic use and therefore don't use them translingually. Also, this term seems to be much less common than those for which there is no validly published conventional alternative. I was able to find a few that I would argue show translingual usage. I could probably find a few more, if necessary. Most of these are in tables rather than in running text, but I would contend that such is how taxonomic names are often used. Here (on page 10 of the pdf) is one of several where the APG names are contrasted with the standard classifications, but they are both treated as the same sort of thing. This pdf has it at the beginning, while this pdf follows a common Chinese practice of a mixture of translingual and English glosses in parentheses throughout the text, but has a table on the 5th page (numbered 524) where the clade names are in a context that has everything else in either taxonomic Latin or Chinese.
 * As for whether these are durably archived: the taxonomic codes, until fairly recently, explicitly required what basically amounts to durable archiving for anything taxonomic to be validly published. As far as I know, it's still very much the practice, with some online journals going so far as to print a limited number of hard copies that are placed in selected libraries to satisfy such requirements. As far as I know, theses for academic credit are all archived with the educational institution, and government publications are archived as well. I can't guarantee that all of these specific articles are durably archived, but there's a high probability that they are. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * "Here (on page 10 of the pdf)" - page 19 of the PDF, page 3 of the actual work, where it begins with and which also has core eudicots? That looks like a mentioning of APG – English? In the bibliography sections, it mentions Catálogo de las Angiospermas y Gimnospermas del Perú.
 * "This pdf":
 * It doesn't look durably archived.
 * It's mentioning English wikipedia, FAO with APG in URL. It could copy English stuff. "United Emirats arabes unis (Arab Emirates) (Arabe, Arabic)" also looks strange regarding the language.
 * --幽霊四 (talk) 19:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

eudicots
Translingual. Looks English, see also, also as there are non-English translations. --幽霊四 (talk) 01:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * 幽霊四: If it “looks English” then spare us such requests and move to English. Nothing would get lost. Fay Freak (talk) 15:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's an English plural noun. The taxonomic clade is Eudicots. SemperBlotto (talk) 19:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I would add a request for as well, with the same reasoning.
 * has "der Eudicots" (gen. pl., gender not revealed) and "die core eudicots" (pl., same; with italics), but it's just one source, not sufficent.
 * has "Der Name Eudicotyledonae (engl. eudicots)", giving two reasons why it doesn't look translingual: 1. It's English. 2. There's an alternative.
 * has it in French, but with quotation marks and also "higher hamamelids" (with quotation marks as well) which is even more English.
 * has "Les Eudicotylédones (Eudicots)", "des Eudicots", "Les Rosidées". Could also be regular French, or not?
 * --幽霊四 (talk) 19:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It intuitively doesn't feel like a translingual taxonomic name, since it's not Latin. But maybe there are exceptions. I don't know enough to say for sure. and, experts on taxonomy. 70.172.194.25 08:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not an expert, but in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It's tricky, because it isn't part of the standard Latin-based Linnaean nomenclature. The uses English in the names for their taxonomic entities rather than Latin, and they're more interested in the tree structure than in assigning standard names for every rank- but they're describing things that don't have a name otherwise. I would call the result a parallel, unofficial naming system, but it's used in multiple languages, which makes it translingual. It's not the system for taxonomic nomenclature, but it has its role. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It functions just the way the officially (ICZN, ICTV, LPSN, etc) sanctioned taxa do, as lamiids, rosids, eurosids, and a score or more of other APG clade names. It is neither here nor there, but I "feel" it to be a formal taxonomic name, as much as, say, the names of species of viruses (eg, Human alphaherpesvirus 1, which looks like a normal English NP, with an English adjective preceding the head). DCDuring (talk) 16:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

kakilima beratap
Indonesian. Sent from RFD. — surjection ⟨ ⟩ 10:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

 * See also Requests for deletion/Non-English. I am not sure about the orthographies of various terms, but, literally “five foot”, short for ””, can by itself mean the walkway under an arcade, usually housing shops. It is to be expected then that such an arcade is called a kaki-lima beratap. At least one dictionary lists the term; and the term is used here. The issue seems to be more whether this is not a good old SOP. (Aside: we also have an entry , whose status seems dubious to me, just like “the shop on the corner” may often be a convenience store, but does not necessarily mean that.) --Lambiam 22:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

A Translingual Symbol sense 5
 A system of paper sizes with similar proportions, as A0, A1, A2, etc.

Is the letter "A" used alone (in any language, since this is Translingual) to refer to a paper size system? I would make a claim that uses like "the A paper size system" do not support the inclusion of this term. Please argue with me on this though! This, that and the other (talk) 10:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Attributively at least: A paper sizes. Fay Freak (talk) 09:54, 12 February 2021 (UTC) Still a strange thing to include in such a place in a dictionary. Fay Freak (talk) 09:59, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

A Translingual Symbol sense 6
 An academic grade lower than A+ but greater than A-.

I dispute that this is used translingually, even if the definition were to be worded more generally. I contend that letter grades are only or largely confined in the Anglosphere. This, that and the other (talk) 10:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Some (if not many) Dutch primary schools use letter grades (E-D-C-B-A) interchangeably with digits (1-10). also uses these. Thadh (talk) 11:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think few primary schools actually use those as the actual marks rather than as a mere secondary encoding of onvoldoende, voldoende, goed, etc. In any case, its marginal use by Dutch schools seems not much of an argument for its translingual status. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It is kind of likely that in some Pacific islands and African colonies this system has been taken over, without school education taking place in English. Fay Freak (talk) 09:56, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * @Lingo Bingo Dingo This is something I've noticed actually. Is "Translingual" supposed to be a catch-all for a lot of languages or all languages? Because I've seen it heavily lean Western European, especially with punctuation marks, while many other languages would not use them as such. It's truly confusing to me. AG202 (talk) 02:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @AG202 I've always treated it as "a lot of languages" - "all languages" would be a literally impossible bar to pass. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes 19:18, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

baykuş sineği
Turkish. Literally "owl fly". The definition is inconsistent, assigning the supposed insect to two distinct orders (Neuroptera and Diptera). I was unable to verify either meaning. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * People are saying this on the internet, example 1 and example 2, with pictures and descriptions leaving now doubt about the identification. The uses postdate the 2009 creation of the Wiktionary entry though, and there is a possibility people on the internet coined it after the English. On the other hand I do not believe the original editor had a need to make up names for all flies and he had to take the names from somewhere, though his name be literally Sinek. A Turkish Wikipedia article on the animal, a frequent source of such coinages, never existed. Is it possible that entomology works a badly indexed? In particular I am skeptical about Google Books providing even a sketch of the Near East’s zoology. By now it is proven Google systematically skews the portrayal of science in favour of the American hegemon.
 * A question has always to be posited: What else is it called? We have learned that even the caperberry in Finnish struggles with the CFI. And we are repulsed by an untrue statement in a translation table that there is no name at all in so bulky a language, for so unexotic an organism. Fay Freak (talk) 21:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I have no problem holding Turkish to lesser standards than English. (By precedent, if not rule, as nominator I can withdraw the RFV if I am satisfied and nobody objects.)  I am not counting durable citations on my fingers, but looking for sufficient evidence of use.  For some other derivatives of sinek I found that evidence.  For the ones I nominated, I did not.  There are many species that in ordinary English are simply "bugs".  And there are people trying to prescribe names contrary to common use.  Somebody who lives in Turkey and has taken an entomology course there will have much better insight than I could get reading literature from 8,000 km away.  (Perhaps I will look up some entomologists and email them about common names.)  The dominance of English and German in entomological literature gives those languages an advantage in popularizing vocabulary, whatever Google's prejudices may be.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 23:51, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I’m a bit unclear as to what the issue of relative standards is. Compare, used for various fly species in different families. There is no lack of mentions that establish the several identifications with taxonomic groups, but in uses the specific identification is generally impossible to establish. Even if someone files a durably archived report of having been bitten by a sandfly in New Zealand, how can we be sure it was not a biting midge, with the reporter being a visiting Australian? Do we truly hold English common names for critters to the high standards of CFI? --Lambiam 14:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This definitely a problem (to figure out which sense of a word is meant, in many cases), compare, which has been RFC-tagged as needing to have separate definitions matching , but ... good luck figuring out which of the meanings is meant from any particular use! - -sche (discuss) 03:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No, it was always conceit to require that not only occurrences convey meaning, but they also convey all of the meaning and prove it alone. The nature of a use is that it does not convey meaning. Paradox, paradox, but evident; uses at large presuppose meanings having already been conveyed, though to them by their impressions. People employ the metric system without outlining what a metre or a gramme is. The more exact you want to be the more you have to look around. Paradox in discerning language, a holistic scheme!
 * Criteria for inclusion is only superficially an essential distinction and inherently irrational, it is a private language of analytic philosophers and you play a language game pretending that you conform, instead of owning it is fashionable nonsense. Fay Freak (talk) 05:33, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

kara sinek
Turkish. Rfv-sense. Might also be spelled. The house fly sense is well attested. The stable fly is generally similar in appearance (except it bites) so you could easily have one word meaning both. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:02, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

 * In English the designation black fly is used for various flies in the genus . Likewise, in Turkish the term kara sinek may be used for them, like here and here (as a search key) for the genus, and here for S. erythrocephalum. After all, they are flies, and they are black. The same cannot be said of the stable fly (Stomoxys calcitrans). Both are blood suckers, and they are often mentioned together as being biting flies, so I wonder if there has been some generic confusion. --Lambiam 00:15, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The name is used in English for the whole family Simuliidae. Simulium is the most common genus.  When I looked I didn't have the sense that kara sinek in this sense was citable or common.  It was used, but not often.  It may meet CFI or be in regular use by entomologists.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 11:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Stomoxys calcitrans is rather black in this photograph, though, so this may simply occur in a description as a SOP. --Lambiam 00:27, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I would not be surprised to learn that is used like, by ordinary people to refer to large flies found around the house and in formal writing to refer to Musca domestica.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 11:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Of course. Rather in general, in informal contexts people commonly use terms that do not respect recognized taxonomical categories. I’ve heard (“louse”) used to mean “flea”, and  (“mouse“) for “rat”. The use is even looser for fish names and botanical names, which I think is the case for many other languages too. The use in written texts generally has a better correspondence, though, between the intended sense and that of taxonomists.  --Lambiam 23:10, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Serbo-Croatian entries by Lumbardhia

 * (etymology 2)
 * (etymology 2)
 * (etymology 2)
 * (etymology 2)
 * (etymology 2)
 * (etymology 2)

See Talk:štaljba, Requests for verification/Non-English. — surjection ⟨ ⟩ 13:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

 * is already said in the first volume of to occur only in ’s dictionary, it is an occasional formation along with, , , and should be deleted. I have added the better-used base adjectives to  which should suffice.
 * as well as have allegedly been used in Kosovo, but it is too specific to be found.
 * is used here and there defined: Kaluša redovno ima veću pegu i na telu, najčešće na grudima, na trbuhu, na sapima u blizini korena repa, tamne noge do kolena i skočnog zgloba ili su noge poprskane pegama kao i kod ostalih domaćih pramenki. The bibliographic information and digitization status of these works is insufficient for me to format quotes.
 * I do not find at all.
 * are hard to search but are attested, given quotes in Речник српскохрватског књижевног и народног језика, in the ends, where it is continued in better known 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬. The etymology is more doubtful than its existence.
 * has many attestations, e.g. quoted in.
 * ,, are too hard, specific cheese manufacturing terms it seems, with much homonymy, so one can’t try too much.  I see related by mentions in ’s book Serbo-Albanian language relations page 106 as a rather recent word but used by Albanians only in few places, so it is not worth it.
 * only in works discussing Albanian words in Serbo-Croatian, and again from.
 * was the normal word for duck in some spots of Serbia, a whole isogloss but rural enough to escape the purview of the written language, however surely attested; I have added one quote from a Croatian who wrote a lot and probably picked it up there.
 * is mostly known from ’s dictionary, where it is given as Montenegrin – from a time when a bunch of mountain shepherds barely anybody of whom could read and write; however you find  in brackets after, which looks like some Serbian doctors knew that it is called so in Montenegro. With the advancement of medicine, a lot of disease names have vanished, as is a common experience if you deal with them in any language. Evidently, the word must be labelled “obsolete”.
 * So, after four hours for this list, I am positive about the nature of, , , , , the rest falls through the sieve for this decade. Fay Freak (talk) 01:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Here, on the other hand, I repeat my opinion of one year ago: I don’t think Lumbardhia made anything up, or intended to do so—while Surjection’s general suspicion of agents of the Albanian cause introducing fakes seems to be true, as there must be the liars somewhere and Albanians are known as deranged due to their recent history—, but these words are all traceable to dialectological literature, and to the extent I have outlined that one day one year ago the words are found in literature. Fay Freak (talk) 04:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * After many years, deleted the ones not considered likely. The others still need quotes. — S URJECTION / T / C / L / 08:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * After many years, deleted the ones not considered likely. The others still need quotes. — S URJECTION / T / C / L / 08:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

= March 2021 =

val
Rfv-sense: Dutch, "An East Indian weight for silver and gold." I can't find evidence for an Indian customary weight with a name anything like this. The etymology claims it's "From, called after the resilient seeds of Abrus precatorius." However, I can't find any such Sanskrit word; also, the unit of weight named after Abrus precatorius is the ratti, apparently also called Ratti in Dutch. —Mahāgaja · talk 19:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I added a quote, earliest reference mentioned in http://wnt.inl.nl/iWDB/search?actie=article&wdb=WNT&id=M073176&lemmodern=val&domein=0&conc=true (seems to be source of etymology). The notes to the English language edition of the cited work mention that "at present" in Gujarat 1 val = 3 rati : 16 val = 1 gadiana : 2 gadiana = 1 tola https://books.google.com/books?id=w1rbCmQOs4YC&lpg=PA329&ots=LoiWGCdwGi&dq=%22pecha%22%20paisa%20india&hl=nl&pg=PA21#v=onepage&q&f=false --Appolodorus1 (talk) 21:51, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

تهلوك
Arabic. --37.42.165.198 18:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

 * Arabic Wikisource has a work by called "Kitāb laysa fī kalām al-ʻArab", ليس في كلام العرب, and a naive search brought it up. Can you check whether this word is used there in the right sense? If not, do you know where else to find attestation for this? 70.172.194.25 05:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

 * Well, it is given an example of maṣdar with a quote also found in Lisān al-ʕarab the further context of which I see not. Too bad we only know it as a kind of a copypasta. Fay Freak (talk) 06:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
 * While Modern Standard Arabic is a well-documented language and therefore subject to stricter attestation rules, according to my understanding Classical Arabic is exempt. So, under the more lenient standards, this could probably pass, but that would require someone to actually add the quote from Ibn Manzur and/or Ibn Khalawayh to the entry, and maybe to label the term as classical/archaic/rare if applicable. 70.172.194.25 08:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

abaissement, abaissere (Norwegian)

 * Moved from RFD.Gamren (talk) 17:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't think these are actual words used in Norwegian, there are no hits for either one in the Bokmål Dictionary nor the Norwegian Academy dictionary, also nothing on Wikipedia or the Norwegian Lexicon. Google searches didn't give me anything for a Norwegian use of these words, only French. Supevan (talk) 16:18, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It mostly seems to occur in the phrase .__Gamren (talk) 19:29, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

صخم
Arabic. — Fenakhay ( تكلم معاي · ما ساهمت ) 08:17, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

 * , Steingass and Hava have this, and Lane apparently cites "صَخَمَتْهُ الشَّمْسُ" (the sun burnt him) to al-Qamus al-Muhit. 70.172.194.25 07:17, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

= April 2021 =

eetpiraatje
Dutch. Another unattested diminutive. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

 * This one is attestable, but only in a few tweets, which are not durably archived. 70.172.194.25 05:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

eeuwwendetje
And another one. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:31, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I can confirm that this seems unattestable, even online. 70.172.194.25 05:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

eeuwwisselingetje
And another one. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:33, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I can confirm that this seems unattestable, even online. 70.172.194.25 05:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi LBD, as there's no Wiktionary policy on regular diminutives in Dutch (should we always include them as they help users form the diminutive, or should we only include them if they have three durable attestations?). I would honestly not pursue a verification & deletion campaign. I don't see any value in this at all, and it may siphon time away from real things to improve. Morgengave (talk) 13:26, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * WT:CFI -> 3 cites. Diminutives aren't even inflected forms, but derived terms. Also, for dubious inflected forms there could be RFVs as well, e.g. for plurals when the term is (thought to be) singular only, uncountable.
 * The point is that any Dutch user at any time can apply such a regular diminutive - usage would be considered correct and unremarkable. These are not dubious grammatically - there are just so many nouns in Dutch that not for every noun, you can find durable attestations of their regular diminutives. This also means that at any moment in time such an unattested diminutive can "appear" in newspapers and books, making these deletions likely temporary anyway. This is not the case for uncountable words - a plural here would just sound wrong. I won't oppose the verification-to-deletion process of these diminutives btw; I just find it a waste of time. Morgengave (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * What I like about the English Wiktionary is that it is a very empirical dictionary. Removing entries for unattested diminutives would make our Dutch coverage more empirical and prevent shitty mirror sites from spreading misinformation. Moreover, the view that unattested diminutives qualify for inclusion is not uncontroversial outside the Dutch-language editor base, though I do not presume to know what the majority view is. I can agree to displaying unattested diminutives, but woudl rather not agree to linking to them. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  15:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I respect that pov. I never create unattested diminutives myself, and generally (following our chat) even follow your way of working of not even displaying unattested diminutives in new lemmas (so that no red link appears). But deleting existing entries just seems pointless. These diminutives are not wrong in any shape or form. Morgengave (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

, why aren’t diminutives inflected forms? MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

entrecôtetje
Dutch. Unattested, seemingly erroneous diminutive of a superseded spelling. The Woordenlijst gives entrecoteje as the accepted spelling and although that one is also a rare beast, it may actually be durably citable. Anyway, that would suggest that the diminutive of the superseded spelling is entrecôteje. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  13:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Isn't it entrecootje? Durable attestations:, , Morgengave (talk) 15:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * That is not on the Woordenlijst Nederlandse Taal, so it is probably superseded, but I certainly do not mind its inclusion if it is durably attested. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  16:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, the attestations seem durably archived - and recent (2016, 2021) so likely only "superseded" in the eyes of linguists. Using a Google Search, that spelling also seems more frequent than "entrecotetje" which sounds a bit awkward and stilted. I can't imagine a native speaker (at least in Belgium) seriously use it in speech. It does raise an interesting point, which the Woordenlijst may not cover, namely that dimunitives that lead to a "-tetje"-ending (if a schwa) do rarely occur and are (in Belgium) often shortened in a regular way to a "-tje"-ending (at least this seems to be the case in Belgium). Besides entrecootje, I am immediately thinking of (from gedeelte),  (from gemeente),  (from brochette; this diminutive recognized by the VRT: ),  (from camionette; the stress differs and hence not pronounced the same as camionnetje, the diminutive of camion), and  (from groente). Morgengave (talk) 17:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
 * "Superseded" and "unofficial" (perhaps more appropriate here) only makes a claim about the official status of a form, it does not suggest that it is out of use. I should also clarify that entrecotetje is not the official spelling either; the prescribed form is entrecoteje, which looks awkward but whose pronunciation is equivalent to entrecootje... or so I presume. I agree that sequences with containing two schwas are awkward to pronounce. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  17:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

ثمر
Arabic. Rfv-sense: "(collective) the typically sweet- or (less commonly) sour-tasting produce of plants, fruit, fruitage" --5.245.69.225 02:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Searching on Google appears to yield many results of modern-style writings (that is, ones that might be dismissed as solecisms). There are, nevertheless, a few medieval-style results like this one that seem to capture the meaning of "fleshy plant products". Modern Standard Arabic occurrences though are far more frequent in this sense. Roger.M.Williams (talk) 19:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Fix your link! I abstain from this issue, dealing with so microscopic a sense distinction. If you see such senses then it is perhaps you who could … ehm add at least one clear quotation. If it’s from the web maybe an occurrence by an image makes it clear. Fay Freak (talk) 22:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

= May 2021 =

kamelåså
Norwegian Bokmål. Does anyone actually use this word in writing? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 00:17, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think these are two examples:, . BTW, I don’t see how this demonstrates a difficulty with the understandability of Danish; to me it seems an issue of lack of knowledge of the specialized vocabulary for hardware items. If I was working as a newbie clerk in an English hardware store, and a customer asked for something I’d never heard of, such as a spiglet, I too might not understand they were using a made-up term.

etveen
Dutch, "a peatland repurposed as a pasture", uncommon indeed. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  17:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Do you have any insights on this? ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  19:32, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * This is said to come from etten (WNT, also in MNW) + veen; see entry etveen in De Zaansche volkstaal. --Lambiam 20:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I managed to find one clear use. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 13:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

 * This use supports the notion it is a term.  --Lambiam 13:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It does seem that way. Do you think we can use the citations from De Zaansche volkstaal? Because I don't think we're going to find those sources online and I'm not going to go to the Assendelft archives. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 19:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

= June 2021 =

geweer
Dutch, RFV-sense of "resistance, opposition, defense". Is this citable outside in het geweer komen? The WNT does not have a separate sense "resistance, etc." ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  07:25, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Earlier the lemma had a sense “(absolute use only: het geweer) A defensive attitude or position”, which I removed in December 2020 by this edit. --Lambiam 00:28, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

cunta
Old High German: “female genitalia”. Tagged by 88.64.225.1 on 26 June 2021, not listed:
 * “It's possible, but the form would obviously be irregular in High German. As of now it is not given in the Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch. The source is not scientific and it doesn't strictly say that the word is High German. It only says that it was found by a contributor to the Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch, which doesn't rule out that the gloss may be Old Saxon or Low Franconian.”

J3133 (talk) 16:29, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, the word is given as an example of a German word and attestation in an Old Dutch work is particularly unlikely, so the real problems are the apparently irregular form and the fact that this is a rather unusual source. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  16:56, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

 * Source has:
 * "Zahlreiche deutsche Wörter aus dem achten bis zehnten Jahrhundert sind nur als Anmerkungen und Übersetzungshilfen am Rand oder zwischen den Zeilen lateinischer Texte überliefert. Tausende dieser sogenannten Glossen wurden erst in letzter Zeit entdeckt und untersucht. Zu ihnen gehört „cunta“, eine vulgäre Bezeichnung für das weibliche Sexualorgan, die als Übersetzung von „pudenda“ am Rand einer kirchengeschichtlichen Handschrift des neunten Jahrhunderts auftauchte."
 * It's only saying "German", and doesn't clarify whether it's "High German" or "High and Low German". And if it's the latter, it's open whether Low German would be "Old Saxon" or "Low Franconian and Old Saxon". Also as it's only a gloss: If there are no other glosses near to it with clear Low or High German features, who knows what language the gloss is in? --16:04, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

= July 2021 =

jahoor
Dutch. Typically written as two words, it turned out harder to cite than I thought it would be. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * ,, , , (some of these might not be durably archived) Thadh (talk) 13:36, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

apragod
Scottish Gaelic. Per a comment on the talk page. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:40, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

 * 2003, Colin Mark, The Gaelic-English Dictionary: "apragod, -oid, -an nm [noun masculine] apricot"
 * As it isn't a WT:WDL (maybe 'member ), this could be sufficient for attesting. (It's also older than the WT entry, hence not stupiditly copied from bere.)
 * Additionally:
 * 1883, John Cameron, Gaelic names of plants (Scottish and Irish): "P. [Prunus] armeniaca—Apricot. Gaelic: apricoc. Welsh: bricyllen."
 * 1825, R. A. Armstrong, A Gaelic dictionary, in two parts: "Apricot, s. [substantive?] Seorsa meas." [= kind of fruit?]
 * 1780, William Shaw, A Galic and English Dictionary. Containing All the Words in the Scotch and Irish Dialects of the Celtic, that ...: "Crann-apricoc. Apricot-tree." & "Apricot. Seorsa meas, ubhal apricoit." [= kind of fruit, apricot apple?]
 * There seem to be several spellings around: both Am Faclair Beag and LearnGaelic.scot give both and, while Scottish Gaelic Wikipedia (which doesn't count as durably archived, I know) gives both  and . Three paper dictionaries on my bookshelf all give only . Overall, it looks like most modern dictionaries prefer the spelling , so I'd suggest making that the primary entry and making  an alt form of. —Mahāgaja · talk 12:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

net (Dutch)
RFV-sense of "television network"; I only know this in either the specific sense "television channel" and the general sense "network", especially used for the Internet. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  08:01, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Rfv-sense Net meaning tv network in not in my VanDale Nederlands Als Tweede Taal (NT2) dictionary.

BUT in both the Netherlands and Belgium there are nationwide tv channels so tv networks are not necessary and do not really exist.

However the American sense of a tv network is sort of applicable to these nationwide channels.

= August 2021 =

erbieden
Dutch. Tagged by User:Lingo Bingo Dingo, but not listed — surjection ⟨ ⟩ 08:48, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

 * DWB 2 mentions: "mnl. nnl. erbieden". (BTW: Luxemburgish, Ripuarian MHG.) --19:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * WNT has two citations of the verbal noun erbieding from 1642, marking the verb as verouderd (“obsolete”). --Lambiam 08:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I was probably curious whether this could be cited as Dutch or as Dutch Low Saxon/Low German, the latter of which corresponds to the local lects in the eastern Netherlands. The er- prefix is also very rare and unproductive in actual Dutch. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  08:33, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

fekalia
Norwegian Bokmål. A word of dubious existence, not listed in any major dictionary, and I was unable to find much about it on Google. Supevan (talk) Supevan (talk) 11:44, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I've added one. There's another one that talks about an ampoule full of "soft fecal matter" (bløde fekalia).__Gamren (talk) 13:44, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

တလိုင်း
This is Round 2 relating to History assassination fraud problemတလိုင်း တႆးလႅင်.

I am challenging the meaning 'Tai Laing'; the previous discussion established the meaning as 'Mon', but we are now facing an edit war over the meaning. It's conceivable that the word has had both meanings, but I see no evidence of the meaning 'Tai Laing' being used in Burmese. Moreover, 'Tai Laing' shows every appearance of being an autonym, though I don't know how seriously we should take the claim that they are a branch of the Tai Daeng of Vietnam. --RichardW57 (talk) 22:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

 * I don't see that the previous discussion established that; the only evidence pasted directly into the thread (by someone who didn't sign their post) was Judson's Burmese-English Dictionary, which has "တလိုင်း, n. a Peguan Talaing, [..]" (a dictionary being enough for a LDL). I've tagged the "Mon" sense with RFV, too, so both senses are now tagged: let there be citations/references added to the entry for whichever one(s) are attested (I added the reference for the Tai Laing sense). - -sche (discuss) 02:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep 'Mon'. Actually, you added the well-nigh clinching reference for the 'Mon' sense!  I can't see which bit of Talaing you didn't understand.  I've used the Judson template to link to a later edition of the dictionary.  I'm not sure whether to add a mention to complete the definition of Talaing.
 * It may be worth noting that the Talaing live south of Shan State while the Tai Laing live north of Shan State, in Kachin and points west. --RichardW57 (talk) 07:37, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

 * Re "I can't see which bit of Talaing you didn't understand": well, as I don't like to time travel, at the time I commented I c0uldn't see any part of that entry that you created several hours after my comment, but I realize now the Tai Laing and Talaing are distinct. - -sche (discuss) 19:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

 * ,Did you know that Ta Laingတလိုင်း is a hate speech invented by the extremist Dog Burmese people? the fact that you are trying to express the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း, coined by the extremist Dog Burmese people, is a human animal that encourages extremism, if you are trying to express the Ta Laingတလိုင်း term coined by extremist Burmese people, it means that you are also trying to attack the Mon people. I did not believe that you would become an educated animal, if you are a real human being, you will never ruin someone else's history. The fact that you are now fabricating the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း as Mon just shows that you are an extremist terrorist, do you have strong evidence that the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း is Mon? when the Mon people object that the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း is not Mon, you are trying to be Mon is an extremist act, have you received a vote from Mon people to describe the term Ta Laing as Mon? Ta Laingတလိုင်း is an objection because is not Mon. Do not show propaganda books published by extremist Dog Burmese people as evidence of Ta Laing terminology, there are many Ta Laingတလိုင်း related propaganda books published by extremist Dog Burmese people. Those who believe in the propaganda Ta Laing book released by extremist Burmese people are ignorant animals, you should collect votes from Mon people to describe the term Ta Laing as Mon, now you are accusing Ta Laingတလိုင်း of being Mon, this is very rude, if you are a real polite person, you should describe Mon as Mon, you are very rude when you now describe Ta Laingတလိုင်း as Mon.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 12:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The issue of this term being offensive and another term being preferred seems like something to resolve by adding the label "(offensive)" or "(now offensive)"; also, we should expand the etymology to note the folk etymological interpretation which has led to it being considered offensive. But apparently the sense does exist (in the past) after all. - -sche (discuss) 19:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be surprised if the term still existed as a way for Burmans to bait Mons. According to WP it still exists in a technical sense for poetry. --RichardW57 (talk) 20:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Shans, not just Tai Laing
Dr Intobesa has given a different account in User_talk:RichardW57. I think we've been misled because of the development of the Burmese digraph "ui". It seems that the Shans and the Mons became allies in a revolt in 1740 and consequently came to share an appellation. If this story is correct (I've verified none of it as yet), then we can even merge the two 'etymologies'. We still need verification for the initial and linking senses of the word under the new explanation, and the 'synonyms' for Etymology 2 need to be checked. --RichardW57 (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , Tai Laing is the spelling of ထႆးလႅင်, there are two types of spelling of Shan people. The Shan people use the spelling of the Shan language vocabulary used in English in two different spelling words, ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆးယႂ်ႇ or ၽႃႇသႃႇထႆးယႂ်ႇ, the spelling of the word ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး was used by the Shan people to mean the whole Shan language. The Burmese people call Thai and Shan is ရှမ်းShan, but in the literature they are divided into Shan, Thai. The Mon people call Thai, Shan, Laos is Siemသေံ, but in the literature they are divided into သေံSiem, သေံဇၞော်Siem Hanok, သေံလဴSiem Lav, see definition below.

The word Tai Laing is probably the pronunciation of ထႆးလႅင်, so it could be Ta Laingတလိုင်း, see also the following explanation for words with the same spelling pronunciation in English, Shan, Thai, Burmese.
 * 1) (သေံSiem) definition=Thai
 * 2) (သေံဇၞော်Siem Hanok) definition=Shan/ the spelling word Siem Hanok is the same as the Thai spelling ไทยใหญ่Thai Yai.
 * 3) (သေံလဴSiem Lav) definition=Laos
 * 1) (Shan=ထႆး) (English=Thai) (Thai=ไทย) definition=The (ထႆးThaiไทย) spelling shown here is the same for all pronunciations.
 * 2) (Shan=လႅင်) (English=Laing) (Burmese=လိုင်း/example=Ta Laingတလိုင်း) definition=The (လႅင်Laingလိုင်း) spelling shown here is the same for all pronunciations, Shan people can use two spellings ထႆး or တႆး. example=Shan languages can be said to use this ထႆးလႅင် or တႆးလႅင် term, consider the current spelling usage of Shan people in Burma and Shan people in Thailand.
 * 3) Shan=(ၽႃႇသႃႇထႆးယႂ်ႇ) English=(Thai Yai language) Thai=(ภาษาไทยใหญ่) definition=(Shan language) explanation=These are the spelling words used by the Shan people in Thailand.
 * 4) Shan=(ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆးယႂ်ႇ) English=(Tai Yai language) Thai=(ภาษาไทใหญ่) definition=(Shan language) explanation=These are the spelling words used by the Shan people in Burma. I am a qualified writer in literature, learn the vocabulary spelling that I have explained in detail, I would also like to warn you to avoid accusations that hurt a certain ethnic group on Wiktionary. The Wiktionary is a dictionary website, so only dictionary terms are appropriate, it is totally inappropriate to write accusations that hurt an ethnic group on Wiktionary, thanks.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 10:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

 * And you should be aware of the Shan word တႆးလူင် (I hope I've spelt it right) used for the main Shan group. Unfortunately, I'm having trouble finding it in Thai or Shan script.  The literal Thai transliteration would be ; the form I encounter in English is 'Tai Long' and I can even find a section of the Tai-Lōng Tipiṭaka.

 * , The term Tai Laing has nothing to do with the term တႆးလူင် and ไทยหลวง, the correct pronunciation of the word ไทยหลวง is Thai Luang. Similarly, the correct pronunciation of the word တႆးလူင် is Tai Luang, the definitions of တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang are different, check out the following definitions of တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang.

The words တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang have similar pronunciations but different meanings, let me give you another example, only ထႆးလူင် should be used for ไทยหลวงThai Luang spelling, I hope you understand what I have just explained.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 17:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) (Thai=ไทยหลวง pronunciation=Thai Luang) (Burmese=ထိုင်းတော်ဝင် pronunciation=Thai Taw Win) (English=Thai royal) (other spelling words=Thai=ราชวงศ์ไทย/Burmese=ထိုင်းတော်ဝင်မိသားစု/English=Thai royal family) (definition=The term ไทยหลวงThai Luang and Rachngs Thaiราชวงศ์ไทย means members of the royal family of the King of Thailand.)
 * 2) (Shan=တႆးလူင် pronunciation=Tai Luang) (Burmese=ရှမ်းစော်ဘွား pronunciation=Shan Saw Bwar) (English=Shan royal) (another spelling word in Burmese language=Shan Nang Dwinရှမ်းနန်းတွင်း or ရှမ်းနန်းတွင်းသူShan Nang Dwin Thu) (definition=The term တႆးလူင်Tai Luang refers to the ancient Shan King Family.
 * There's a discussion of the naming of Tai groups at . As I would hope you know, Shan, Thai  and , English ,  and pinyin  are all essentially the same word, but to varying degrees specialised to designate specific groups of speakers.  In some Tai dialects (I can confirm it for Northern Thai, i.e. the dialect of Lanna), the cognate of Thai  has replaced the cognate of Thai  as the usual word for 'big'.  As the article says on p27 from journal, northern Shans "" (call themselves 'Tai Yai' or 'Tai Long'.  'Long' ( is the word corresponding to the [ Thai ] word .)
 * It would seem that Thais use because of the royal meaning of.
 * One can also find the Shans' 'Tai Long' autonym spelt or  in Thai. --RichardW57 (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * What is the "Tai Longတႆးလုင်" you referred to on my user page? --RichardW57 (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

 * , တႆးလုင်Tai Long is the term တႆးလူင်Tai Luang, the Tai Longတႆးလုင် is a spelling word used by the, The တႆးလူင်Tai Luang is a spelling word used by the .--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 06:56, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

= September 2021 =

atpakal
Lithuanian. It is in LKZ etc., but I haven't been able to find any citations for actual usage yet, just the Latvian cognate. 70.175.192.217 17:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Aren’t there two quotes in LKZ? They are from the 19th century notably, and back in the day the current Lithuanian orthography was not invented, one rather wrote it like Polish or German, additionally writing Lithuanian in Latin was altogether forbidden in the Russian Empire, so one should seek different spellings. Where are those corpora? Even for Latvian I do not find Cyrillic spellings. Fay Freak (talk) 18:24, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it does have two citations on LKŽ, but they don't even give the specific text as far as I can tell, just the author (although the texts certainly are still archived, somewhere). Is that enough to support its inclusion? I'm not trying to be overly deletionist, I'm just not sure this is a word that's really used. Maybe it should be marked as rare/archaic. As far as the Cyrillic forms, I guess it would be "атпакал", which seems to yield Cyrillicizations of Latvian on Google (but I didn't look hard). I'm not aware of any specific corpus for Lithuanian of that era (one might still exist). All I know are these ones listed by Vytauto Didžiojo Universitetas. 70.175.192.217 01:34, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * WT:CFI + WT:WDL require three quotes for Lithuanian. --Myrelia (talk) 09:57, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

beleś
Iberian. Existence questioned by User:Arqueolingüística (diff) — surjection ⟨ ⟩ 17:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * as the entry creator — surjection ⟨ ⟩ 17:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Also note the other Iberian-critcial removals by the same user: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Arqueoling%C3%BC%C3%ADstica --Fytcha (talk) 17:23, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * A brief search found that people do believe there was a word beles (allophone meles) in Iberian. But "the community of editors" (WT:CFI) for the language should decide what references to use.  Apparently  had something to say in addition to the links on the Wikipedia page.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:33, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * According with, this is a Kurzname known from the Turma Salluitana. He discusses (p. 597-307, Spanish) his use as a component of Vollnamen. According with Luís Silgo, Schuchardt proposed the relation of Aquitanian Belex and Iberian beleś with Basque belatx (currently spelled belatz "falcon"), and he points that the relation with is possible but unsure as a proper name. Vriullop (talk) 13:46, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The question is if it's actually directly attested anywhere, such as in an inscription. If there's good reason to believe it existed, but it isn't actually attested in a text, it needs to be moved to Reconstruction: space. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

= October 2021 =

promovieren
German. Never heard this one. As far as I know, is strictly related to a doctorate degree, but the linked sense is clearly more general/broad. Duden, pons, DWDS and de.wikt also don't make any mention of this sense. In case this RFV fails, also remove the translation in promote. --Fytcha (talk) 14:47, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

 * The transitive use occurs in the traditional formula conferring the degree, as seen here: „Auf Grund der von Sr. kaiserlichen und apostolisch königlichen Majestät der kön. ung. Tierärztlichen Hochschule allergnädigst gewährten Ermächtigung promoviere ich Sie im Namen des Professorenkörpers dieser Hochschule zum Doktor der veterinärmedizinischen Wissenschaften.“  Here is a more recent, less formal use: ‚Schließen Sie Ihr Studium ab. Dann promoviere ich Sie.‘  --Lambiam 15:44, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * In both quotes, the verb is used in its third sense: to confer a doctorate. Fytcha (talk) 15:50, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Which was, I guess, the intended meaning of sense 1, the only transitive sense listed before you added this third sense. This supposition of mine is supported by the label . However, in the second use I cited, it is not fully clear that the promotion is to an academic degree. --Lambiam 09:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh you're right, it is a possibility that this was the intended meaning of sense 1 by the previous editor. To me they are so semantically different (the English explanations, that is) that I didn't think this was what was intended but I can see the connection now.
 * The context makes it clear that the second use you've cited is also about an academic degree:
 * Fytcha (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * But a professor does not have the power to confer a degree by themselves. The intention may have been, “I’ll be happy to be your PhD adviser”, presumably including an offer of a paid position as doctoral student. Used as such it would be – IMO – an abuse of terminology. --Lambiam 09:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Obviously this was used in the 16–18th centuries just like in Latin, from which the doctorate senses are only particular applications. If you only look at de.Wiktionary, there are three old quotes. Maybe regard less what you have heard and more what was heard in former centuries? I find this usage very natural, however the gloss is wrong, I don’t know what they mean with “promote”, one shouldn’t gloss with just one word or anyone thinks of it what he wants to think of it, it’s actually no meaning at all but an “etymological equivalent”. Fay Freak (talk) 16:25, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The sense that I have submitted to RfV is not labeled as or something comparable, neither is the translation provided in promote that I've made mention of. I find it absurd that you suggest me to regard more what was heard in former centuries when the discussion circles around the modern form of the language. Moreover, I don't think there was anything on my part to explain your gruff tone towards me. Fytcha (talk) 18:36, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You are right, as I said it is badly glossed and labelled, but editors often do not know if something is really not used now and only whether it has been used at all, so you should expect obsolete senses not labelled obsolete, but really, it is kind of easy pickings to conclude that back in the day – in the Baroque style fought against – people just used any sense of the Latin word and then the doctorate sense developed, not just borrowed from Latin discourse. Fay Freak (talk) 19:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
 * BTW: The examples at de:promovieren are misquoted.
 * de.wp: "ein subsidium oder hilff [...] zulassen" – source: "ein ſubſidium oder hilff [...] zůlaſſen" – the Latinate term is set in another front and in zů- there's an small o above the u.
 * de.wp: "Bruderschaffe S. Jofephs" – source: "Bruderſchafft S. Joſephs" or simplified "Bruderschafft S. Josephs" – with (cp. ) and.
 * --Myrelia (talk) 21:06, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * BTW why don’t you correct the typos, as it is a wiki? You have looked into the scans, so do it. Antiqua in Fraktur though is of course hard to mimick, and no grounds to exclude words, as many words which we needs include, or all wälsch words, were written this way.
 * Do not forget to search promoviren for quotes, guys, as this is how the ending used to be written before 1900. Fay Freak (talk) 19:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

dvai
Sudovian. 'Pogańske gwary z Narewu' has =. Not sure where 'dvai' came from. It's included in some webpages though, e.g.. Is that enough? 70.175.192.217 16:47, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

 * Feminine? (like Lithuanian du vs dvi) Thadh (talk) 16:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It's absolutely possible that this form could exist, especially considering, but I'm not sure where it could possibly be attested. Sudovian is mostly known through one iffy second-hand glossary (Narew) that omits this word and through reconstructions based on toponymy (I'd love to know the source for this, if one exists). The source I linked above that has "dvai" also has "astônei" for eight, which is a lot closer to what you'd expect based on other Baltic forms than the Narew form aktiʃ (which looks more like , or some funky sound changes and/or transcription errors occurred). 70.175.192.217 06:07, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I just realized that this could also be somewhere in the works of Hieronimus Meletius. I'm not sure if they're digitized at all, but maybe some source mentions it second hand at least. 70.175.192.217 06:23, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

guglo
Esperanto; is the proper noun (“Google”) used uncapitalized? J3133 (talk) 06:22, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * That section should probably be reduced to something like:
 * google an internet search using Google
 * with the etymology: From the verb, from . Perhaps someone saw it translated as "google" and didn't realize the distinction. — 69.120.66.131 21:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

briginos
The given sources are Latin or Greek and have bricumum, βρικίνη (with variants), briginus, none of them has briginos. Thus it's *briginos, reconstructed from Latin/Greek "deformations". Compare how it's also Vandalic with alternative form. --Myrelia (talk) 18:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * This is not *briginos, this is briginos. Scholars use to not put a star in front of this term, you are just abusing the terms “reconstructed” and “attested”.
 * The given sources being Latin or Greek does not hinder anything, since languages can be attested from mentions. It is no difference whether I put the Latin or Greek texts as collapsible “quotes” or mere ”citations” in a reference section, but the former is more customary for ancient works; yourself you just put Latin quotes in Vandalic entries and German in Old Prussian and the like.
 * The exact form is also attested, in the third quote. briginos, written briginus because the author identified the Gaulish ending with the Latin ending, but this does not make it Latin, the quote literally says it is Gaulish. And it is well known that sometimes an exact lemma form is not attested but only “a deformation”, also known as inflection.
 * Therefore, this RFV is dismissed.
 * It is also dismissed as abusive and futile since we know well that these are all quotes that exist for this word. All quotes are given. Fay Freak (talk) 19:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Quotes are given, but again: none has . Attested are only etc. (By the quote, βρικίνη however could rather be a Greek than a Gaulish term.) Compare with Vandalic  vs., and e.g. Old Prussian  (attested) vs.  (M. Klussis' (re-)construction),  (V. Mažiulis' (re-)construction). --Myrelia (talk) 19:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No conclusion is made from your comparisons.
 * The templates rely on the -os ending.
 * The third quote has briginos, as it has briginus. Fay Freak (talk) 19:23, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Why this antic anyway of moving to the reconstruction space if it is attested? Something mindboggling for you: The word is attested, but none of its forms are. But the forms of a word do not need to be attested all. None need to be. I have attested the term. This is as much as the CFI require. Fay Freak (talk) 19:27, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Wort – Text – Sprache und Kultur has "Gall. *briginos/briginom war mithin schlicht die 'kräftige (i. S. v. sehr wirksame) Pflanze'", with star and two reconstructed forms, and here scholars too use a star. Mithridate / Mithridates (1555) has "Cf. [source], s.v. bricumos, briginos ? «armoise»", with a question mark.
 * And BTW: I haven't put any Latin quote in a Vandalic entry. Also not in Old Prussian (Elbing Vocabulary which I cited is in Middle High German and Old Prussian). --Myrelia (talk) 19:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * You are just citing friends who are also unsure how to use the star. Simultaneously you refer to one source which lacks the star, so you see that it is not necessary, only your personal preference. Under some convention *|the star would be put after the term. On the other hand, often people do not even exactly know how a term is attested, therefore they star forms just to be cautious, without having sighted the loci. But this then does not even tell us whether the term or form is attested, in their view.
 * Still you dodge the fact that the CFI do not require particular forms nor spellings to be attested, only terms.
 * The term linked in the title is attested, quoted. The form is too, we can well claim. Fay Freak (talk) 20:06, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * “Attested”, not in the Latin quotation, but in the English translation supplied by you. Is your strike-through of the heading, as if the issue has been resolved other than by a shouting match, not somewhat out-of-process? --Lambiam 19:38, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * How pedantic do you want to be? It is attested in the Latin quotation. Lemma-forms aren’t even attested always, what if it is e.g. in the plural or genitive? The lemma form would not be a reconstruction. From this derives the rule that we can disregard the inflectional part. And in the genitive the ending in Latin and Gaulish is the same, isn’t it too arbitrary to assume that then there is no “deformation”? But it is still not Latin in any case, whichever form is chosen, there is no evidence for it being Latin but for it being Gaulish. It literally says, “the Gauls call it briginos”, exactly this form, and not “the Gauls when speaking Latin”, the most natural interpretation in this glossary. If a Latin reader in antiquity reads “the Gauls call it briginus it is implied that the ending there is a wee bit different, as quotation practice was not like today. For antiquity standards this is how one has to abstract from the details, the intended meaning of the text. The text behind the text. It says that. Textual witnesses aren’t in that good a state either. Have you looked how the Punic in is attested? It’s a forest of gibberish through which you have to look through to see the trees, it may be even up to the point of a small inexactness the author himself smuggled into the first text(s). A variant reading is not a reconstruction. And it would be an exaggeration to speak of a conjecture, emendation or reconstruction here. That man has no sense of proportion.
 * The request was out of process from the beginning since all attestations were given, something else is requested … Fay Freak (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to reconstruction namespace. FWIW, kids throwing a tantrum can be ignored in our discussions. Akletos (talk) 09:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 * It is a simple test to decide whether a word goes to the mainspace or reconstructed space: Is it attested? This word is, it has (even three) quotes for it, so it is situated in the mainspace. Only kids that blow their tops when they don’t get everything they want try to bend the rules and make representations when they face some edge that diverts them from furnishing their dollhouse. Fay Freak (talk) 18:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Gng
Tagalog. Hi, RFV for, since as far as I know, the correct form of this is , with a period, since this is an abbreviation. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 04:11, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * RFV-deleted. Thadh (talk) 17:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

= November 2021 =

𑜒𑜪𑜨𑜍𑜣𑜄
This is given as an Assamese word in the Ahom script. A literal translation of the word would be [i]oṃrīta[/i]. As we do not list Ahom as a script of Assamese, I believe such an entry needs to connect to an attestation. Unsurprisingly, Google finds nothing but clones of Wiktionary - it takes time for text to appear in Unicode. As added the spelling, I hope he can oblige us with such a connection. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
 * “As we do not list Ahom as a script of Assamese” → non sequitur. We do not list all every scripts in which a language has been written. If I assess that Ahom script was used for Assamese – which on first glance makes much sense but we also have Middle Assamese, so perhaps it does not apply to the present chronolect – I may just add it, and your argument vanishes utterly into thin air. (And then, as you yourself seem to acknowledge, by Pali experience, we don’t always seek an attestation for a word in every script, but I say this as others do not realize this situation.)
 * But no less we want to know from Msasag how or from where he gets these spellings, to assess the situation. Fay Freak (talk) 21:11, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

= December 2021 =

طه
Arabic. Rfv-sense "the prophet Muhammad". This is part of the exegetical interpretation, but does anyone actually refer to Muhammad by this name? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 17:13, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

 * For some background, see . The name is not included in the many . --Lambiam 18:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

-σσω
Is this really an Ancient Greek suffix? 1. re: The definition of the term "suffix": It's not attached to the stem (or another analysable morphological entity), but the outcome of regular sound change involving the closing consonant + a suffix -jō (or of a surface filter operating for a longer period of time; I don't know if this would make any difference). 2. re: Its productivity in Ancient Greek: Can it be shown that there are words formed with -σσω in Ancient Greek rather than in one of its pre-stages? There are candidates for this in the "Derived terms" section (e.g. φαρμάσσω, ἱμάσσω). --Akletos (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I think this not a suffix, just like -ssus in is not a suffix but the result of a phonological process at play in . If this is deleted, the same fate should befall, ,  and .  --Lambiam 10:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Lambiam @Erutuon Perhaps the content of these entries can at least in part be transferred to Category:Ancient Greek verbs with a progressive iota or yod marker (and the cat. be renamed?). Akletos (talk) 20:02, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

bomba
Indonesian. Moved to RFV from an RFD: Requests_for_deletion/Non-English --Fytcha (talk) 15:21, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * ''Also copying over the rationale of the original poster:

The word is almost never used in Indonesian. ind_mixed_2013 corpus from Leipzig did "attest" the word but keep in mind that the corpus is mixed with Malay, but if it's not a Malay word then the word is a proper noun or not widespread enough.

News corpora didn't show anything.

Mahali syarifuddin (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

pindoramygûara
Not sure if it is an Old Tupi term or a Nheengatu one. --TongcyDai (talk) 04:48, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

 * The use of circumflex on vowels is an Old Tupi feature, developed by Antônio Lemos Barbosa (much after Old Tupi became extinct) and used by Eduardo de Almeida Navarro on his grammar book. So, it’s certainly not a Nheengatu term. Pindorama is also not attested on Tupi literature; we don’t know how Tupi people called the land they lived in, just as we don’t know how they called their own language, even though some people coinned the term abá nhe’enga inspired by Guarani avañe’ê. 2804:14D:5C32:614F:A0F0:57F0:E533:C63F 14:54, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

brinar
Albanian. IP marked it for speedy. —Svārtava [t•c•u•r] 06:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * any thoughts? Thadh (talk) 14:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * according to the online lexicons: http://m.fjalori.shkenca.org/, https://fjale.al/brinar, and https://fjalorthi.com/brinar, brinar is an accepted word for a cuckold in the albanian lexicography. seems to be derived from the word bri (brinë in Gheg), a euphemism for a woman donning "horns" for her husband. Lumbardhia (talk) 15:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

дзевяць тысяч
Does not meet criteria for inclusion: is a numeric consisting of two words more than 100. --Jarash (talk) 19:25, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Should be sent to WT:RFDN. Fytcha (talk) 00:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * There're also six thousand, nine thousand, níu þúsund - they show the correct spelling (with space or not?) and the formation (9 * 1000, not 90 * 100). --05:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think maybe the inclusion criteria for numbers are a bit too restrictive. I'm pretty sure we used to make exceptions for numbers above 100 that were sufficiently "interesting". Obviously that is in the eye of the beholder but 10,000 seems it should qualify. Cf., which also exists (and given the complexity of Russian numbers, should arguably exist to help users correctly decline the number and its complement, if any). BTW qualifies regardless as it is a translation hub. Benwing2 (talk) 04:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

= January 2022 =

rajah
Moved from RFD. Reason for deletion: English term of the already existent Tagalog "ladya" and "raha". --Fytcha (talk) 23:32, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-resolved, deleted out of process in . Thadh (talk) 17:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

uçurcu
Following some mild edit warring in astronaut, I've went ahead and created this article so I can RFV it. Pinging. --Fytcha (talk) 03:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

 * Ah, I just realized this should probably have been uçurucu. So just a misspelling of? On the same note, what about fezagir? That one has also been the target of edit warring. --Fytcha (talk) 03:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Turkish has both a suffix and a variant . The latter is attached to the stem of causative verbs, and tends to form words that are primarily adjectives, so the neologism uçurcu is IMO more plausible than uçurucu. The suffix -ci is usually attached to a noun, though, and although the participle uçur can grammatically be used as a noun, it is not in actual use as such. (Compare the words  and , in which the first component is a participle that has an independent existence as a noun.) As to fezagir, one of the ambitions of President Erdoğan is to send a Turk into space to kick off the Turkish National Space Program, and wouldn’t it be nice if they then could refer to this space voyager with an ur-Turkic term, instead of one with (blech) Greek roots. At the end of a lengthy speech, in which he revealed that astronomy and trigonometry had been invented by Turks, Erdoğan said: “Since a compatriot of ours will enter space, it is now necessary to find a Turkish counterpart for the words ‘astronaut’ or ‘cosmonaut’. From here, I call on our linguists and say, come, let us find a Turkish name for Turkish space travelers. Let our 83 million citizens too participate with their original ideas in this quest.” This led to many suggestions, such as semanot, göknot, gökoğul, gökbey, evrenot, gökalp and cacabey. , the administrator of the , proposed the term fezagir. That is, as far as I see, the status of fezagir on sources we accept for attestation: mentions as a proposal for a neologism.  --Lambiam 17:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * when i saw the "uçurcu" i thought it was an ungrammatical form of uçurucu, neither of them used for astronaut nor meaningful so i undid the edit. Then i learned that the translation dictionary of Pamukkale University does have the words "uçur" and "uçurcu". I dont know how does "uçur" means "universe, space" (aorist of uçmak which is intransitive of "to fly" is uçar "he/she/it does fly, something that flies") or where did they found the word but both of the words doesnt exist in the offical dictionary.
 * As for fezagir, Lambiam wrote how it came up, they probably took the word from Uzbek and proposed but nobody uses it as much as i know. MhmtÖ (talk) 10:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * How do we label Turkish words proposed as replacements for foreign borrowings, used three times per CFI, but not in common use? I don't like nonstandard here because some of the words were proposed by a government committee to create and possibly enforce a language standard.  I would not be surprised to find some newspapers did use the government's proposals; at least one newspaper published periodic lists of coinages saying they would henceforth use them to replace Ottoman words.  Yet most of those words did not enter common use.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

senem
Northern Kurdish: nothing at ku.wikipedia or anything that isn't auto-translation site Br00pVain (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Try looking for inflected forms like senemî. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 00:23, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This appears, in Arabic script with French transliteration, on page 270 of the 1879 Dictionnaire kurde-français: "صنم, sanám, idole".   Per LDL rules the Northern Kurdish editing community should decide which sources are acceptable. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 00:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

ھەردەم
Central Kurdish: nothing at ku.wikipedia or anything that isn't auto-translation site Br00pVain (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Page 441 of the 1879 Dictionnaire kurde-français has "هردایم her-dàim, toujors". This is likely a more northern dialect, the dictionary being prepared largely in eastern Anatolia.  A modern Northern Kurdish dictionary has her dem.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 00:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

کتب لغت
Might be archaic but I would like to see evidence that it's not made up. --Optional (talk) 01:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * --Rishabhbhat (talk) 12:20, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

isang daang porsyento
The English entry of this exists because it has a figurative meaning, while I think in Tagalog it's just the literal meaning, which makes this entry SOP. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 11:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

 * @Mar vin kaiser I can't answer this straightforward, but it's hard to tell if an loan translation of an English term is SOP. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 11:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It's pretty simple. If the only definition of "isang daang porsyento" is "one hundred percent", then that's SOP. If you look at the entry, it's referring to the figurative meanings of the term. And also, it's not a loan translation. It's just Tagalog. We didn't need English to enter the Philippines for us to get "isang daang porsyento". We got "porsyento" or "porsiyento" from Spanish. And 100% or "cien porciento" is just "isang daang porsiyento" in Tagalog, similar to if we replace "isang daan" with any other number. If we need "isang daang porsyento" as an entry to know that that's 100% in Tagalog, then we also need "limampung porsiyento", "sampung porsiyento", and "limang porsiyento". --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Mar vin kaiser I'll be find with that, but have you found any attestation that follows the English's figurative sense? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 13:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Technically, I see some, but all of them are translations of English books into Tagalog, where probably the translator just translated word-for-word, giving us this scenario of "isang daang porsiyento" being used with the same figurative meaning as the English phrase. But I can't find any independent usage from that. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

ݢوݢول
Malay. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:29, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 17:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

ݢوݢولڤليکس
Malay. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:44, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 17:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

iskul-bukol
Looking for attestation of this definition. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

 * @Mar vin kaiser I'll be fine removing sense in question, but how would you translate this sentence: "Maputi ka pa di ka tulad ng mga kaklase mong iskul-bukol." Is iskul-bukol here slow learner, or a student who doesn't place importance on academic performance (I don't know what term can express that)? TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 09:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Maybe the general definition of the term "iskul-bukol" is someone who doesn't care about academic performance and generally a slow learner? Because the term alludes to the TV show, so it must be characteristics of what the show is about. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 09:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Mar vin kaiser I can agree to that, but I'm not a batang 90s nor one who watched it. Again, any idea about translating the sentence I provided? I can say iskul-bukol often connotes having more time hanging out with friends, focusing on sports, playing games, engaging in romantic relationships, getting involved in vice, etc.. TagaSanPedroAko (talk) 09:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

ĉipo
I only know the word ĉipa, which means "cheap". I have never seen this word. 14:40, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've added two citations, for a total of three. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Kartoffeldeutsch
Tagged by Special:Diff/93.234.196.139 but not listed. as the creator. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 04:12, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
 * IP is a notorious barrator, normal readers do not request verification of terms included with quote. I could not see other occurrences in the beginning, which only made it more believable that this term was used in, in addition to being added in contrast to the usual meaning of the slur kartoffeldeutsch and the Danish Kartoffeldeutscher. is not found anywhere either for Unserdeutsch, but note the obsolete spelling of the nightshade “potatoe–german” in the article, evidently copied from some archival record.
 * Wiktionary’s “look into Google Books” method to decide about ATTESTEDness is already demonstrated squarely fictitious, you can’t even find the official name of North Macedonia or corresponding demonym in Macedonian there, so it did not ring any alarm, rather this was my reasoning. Fay Freak (talk) 04:29, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

 * Solved, moved it to Unserdeutsch, so LDL criteria apply. See, now we can have it anyway. It’s an interesting entry for our readers even without one being decided about a particular language it would be. Fay Freak (talk) 02:31, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * In the interview the term Kartoffeldeutsch is used only as literal translation of potatoe German for the German speaking recipients of the broadcast, comparable to our |lit= parameter in certain templates. That shouldn't even count as a mention. As long as there aren't other citations this should be deleted. Akletos (talk) 10:59, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, so you think the actual term is (normalized) and it should be deleted as German but moved to English? But how come it is in English if it is in research about Unserdeutsch? Seemingly because Kartoffeldeutsch is used only as a literal translation of potatoe-German but that itself is already a translation of  (owing to speakers having moved to Australia). So even though you be right about it being used only as a literal translation comparable to our  this is twice-translated and the mention of an Unserdeutsch word (as it is all part of that research grant about Unserdeutsch, a language but discovered in the 1970s). So it should be converted to Unserdeutsch. Fay Freak (talk) 12:49, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The chain of transmission of this term and the temporal distance is very long: (A broadcaster reports that) a researcher says that in an interview an Unserdeutsch speaker told them that decades ago a nun had said... Nobody should base any assumptions on such shaky evidence without further corroborating data. Akletos (talk) 16:47, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

💜
Translingual. Rfv-sense: (Internet) feminism. Not found on Emojipedia nor dictionary.com. They seem to agree on a K-Pop sense though. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 17:22, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This is real. Started around 2018 when purple was declared the official colour of International Women's Day. It's used by feminists of all stripes. Not to be confused with "💜🤍💚", which has emerged in the last year among gender-critical feminists, based on the colours used by the (a historical UK suffrage group). Anyway, this can be cited off Twitter, if that counts. WordyAndNerdy (talk) 23:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
 * (Adding to the confusion, 💜🤍💚 is also the colours of the genderqueer flag and used to represent that, too.) - -sche (discuss) 00:59, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The entry was deleted out of process. I recreated it with three Twitter quotes for the feminism sense (and added a BTS sense). Einstein2 (talk) 15:47, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

= February 2022 =

Proteacea
Translingual. Most of the entry could be taken are referring to Proteaceae a long-established plant family. Almost all Google Books hits are for Protoeaceæ (ie, ae ligature). If we are to have an entry we need citations. I've spent time looking, but haven't exhausted BHL or similar sources. So far each alleged hit for Protoacea turns out to have the ligature on close inspection. DCDuring (talk) 01:05, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I have removed a specious reference to the 1911 Century Dictionary . The entry there is for Proteaceæ, analyzed as Protea + -aceæ . --Lambiam 11:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I have emended the entry based on my readings of material at BHL. Although I have not added citations they are available as snippets from the BHL link provided. Is this good enough? DCDuring (talk) 14:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

maski
Romani. Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum by Boretzky and Igla, Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik by Marcel Courthiade, and ROMLEX only list variants of as the Armenian loanword for "skin". --YukaSylvie (talk) 08:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The entry lists two references, an Armenian etymological dictionary and what looks like a Romani-French dictionary. Romani is an LDL, so a single mention in an appropriate source is sufficient for keeping the entry. Are either of those references considered adequate for Romani? —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

vrót, a listed alternative form of Old Norse rót
Can we get a reference for this? I was unable to find it listed in any Old Norse dictionary.RubixLang (talk) 13:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

 * Removed, but this doesn't need an RFV-discussion, as it's not an entry. Thadh (talk) 17:57, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

noro
Romani. I can only find the form noros on the Ursari dictionary of ROMLEX. --YukaSylvie (talk) 04:08, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 17:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

shanshel
Romani. I can't find some form of this word on https://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/soas/ by Ralph Turner, Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum by Boretzky and Igla, Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik by Marcel Courthiade, or on ROMLEX. --YukaSylvie (talk) 09:09, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 17:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

sura
Romani. I can't find this word on Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum by Boretzky and Igla, Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik by Marcel Courthiade, ROMLEX, or a Google Books search. --YukaSylvie (talk) 02:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

jambangan
Cebuano.

jambangan
Tausug.

Both marked as speedy by User:Obsidian Soul with the rationale: "See Wikipedia entry on Zamboanga. jambangan is folk etymology."  as the editors of that page. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 14:48, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * All I know is that the spelling is used as specific epithet for a single species of gecko found in the area of Zamboanga. DCDuring (talk) 15:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Both of the entries are unsourced. I have sourced the Wikipedia entry on Zamboanga City extensively, including this paper which actually identifies the etymology of "Samboangan". Both of those entries are folk etymology which date back to the 1960s (apparently believed enough as to include the herpetologists who named the gecko in 2008). Still doesn't make it true though. The old name is Samboangan. Not Jambangan. Tausug isn't even relevant. Carl Francis is clearly a Cebuano-speaker (like I am). Zamboanga was a Subanen/Sama-Bajau settlement, not Tausug.

 * I don't understand why a speedy on an unsourced entry is this difficult on Wiktionary. Even when I provide sources.--Obsidian Soul (talk) 10:47, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * : That's because Wiktionary is based on usage, not authoritative references. Whether the etymology is right or wrong has no bearing on whether the word in question actually existed. On the other hand, even an ironclad, fully-referenced etymology based on the word wouldn't save the entry if the word wasn't actually attested- it would go in the Reconstruction namespace.
 * If it can't be shown that the word is attested, and an incorrect etymology is the only evidence that the word existed, then the entry will be deleted. Pinging, who would know more about the sources available. Chuck Entz (talk) 12:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * And where is the attestation for "Jambangan"? Here are some of the numerous attestations of "Samboangan" in contemporary Spanish, British, German, and French colonial-era records. I can give you more.

 * Jambangan is a word in Malay (apparently "water jar", "pot", or "vase" from what I can tell). But it is not the old name of Zamboanga like these entries claim.--Obsidian Soul (talk) 16:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The etymology > Zamboanga is obviously rubbish; it is naively based on the Z-spelling of the initial consonant, and doesn't work for a couple of reasons. But I won't elaborate on it here, since this is a Rfv, which does not hinge on a bad (but popular) etymology. (It would only be relevant in a translingual entry Cyrtodactylus jambangan).
 * The Tausug entry looks good, see this entry in the online version of the Tausug-English Dictionary: Kabtangan Iban Maana. Tausug has borrowed heavily from Malay, and I assume that this borrowing precedes the emergence of the folk etymology of Zamboanga. I have no idea if any Cebuano speaker has in their native or nativized lexicon, but I doubt it. But if it is attested in Cebuano usage, we just need to clarify the (wrong, but influential) etymology, and not to delete the entry (NB: if). –Austronesier (talk) 20:47, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * PS: means "flower-pot", "flower-stand", "a moveable flower-bed", "receptacle for growing plants" (per Wilkinson's Malay-English Dictionary). –Austronesier (talk) 20:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

مهتر
Arabic. --2A01:E0A:B69:5160:242C:2020:97A9:DCCE 13:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * One will find quotes relating to occupations in Persia and farther east; noting the references I added. This will be about the same level as “Arabic” . in the quote at . Fay Freak (talk) 17:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

راطب
Arabic. --2A01:E0A:B69:5160:3107:D5CB:1C9:14FD 11:24, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have not found use, though it is included in some dictionaries, and it is an Ottoman variant spelling, and I think serves as the irregular active participle of the mentioned verbs. Fay Freak (talk) 17:43, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

כוץ
Hebrew.

The headword is different from the word used in the example,. Which is which? Sartma (talk) 19:19, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * means "thorn or thistle", which is makes it semantically more plausible. From the discussion of the word on their talk page, it's apparently slang- so they might not have known its proper written form. That said, if everyone spells it, that's how we should spell it. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:34, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

= March 2022 =

kirlikartopu
Turkish. The spaced spelling kirli kartopu exists. That is a translation of, which I do not consider a word meaning comet but an adjective and a noun describing a comet. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 13:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

 * The term was used in that spelling in a question on the Turkish version of . The question was, “Of which of the following is this a synonym?”, with a choice between A: the Moon, B: Venus, C: a comet, D: the Pole star. Many uses found online are quoting this quiz question, as seen here or here, in articles that otherwise use the spelling kirli kartopu. This calque of does (in some contexts) mean “comet”, just like the English original. The  considers the spelling kirlikartopu the correct spelling and lists it like that in its authoritative dictionary, but the spelling kirli kartopu is quite common.  --Lambiam 22:44, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

It seems it is a typo.--159.146.45.126 20:53, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Nope, it isn’t. You can look for this word in the official dictionary of Turkish, published by . I added the link as a reference in the page of the word.

Karaitiano
Rarotongan. as the creator. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 00:38, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

 * It is article-worthy. I am making heaps of new entries about geography in Cook Islands Māori by finding them in an online dictionary. MinecraftGod12345 (talk) 00:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * An interesting case. First, the language: We call the language "Rarotongan", while Wikipedia calls it Cook Islands Māori and says calling the language "Rarotongan" is controversial, as Rarotongan is supposed to be one of three dialects of the Cook Islands Māori language. WT:LT doesn't mention these languages, so it may have never been discussed by Wiktionarians.
 * This dictionary labels Verengiteni as "Mangaia(n)", which is apparently a sub-dialect of Rarotongan. Another site gives "Poneke" as the name for Wellington, which would be from.
 * To verify these names, we just need to find a single use or mention in a durably archived text. The name of Wellington (at least) should be easily cited from any Cook Islands Māori news source, but I can't find any written news in this language. RNZ produces Cook Islands Māori radio news programs, and SBS previously did, but these would not be durably archived. This, that and the other (talk) 01:29, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * In yesterday's RNZ news bulletin the speaker code-switches and just says "Wellington" at 1:31 and "Christchurch" at 0:19, as with other English words like "supermarket" at 3:00 and "campaign" at 3:18. This, that and the other (talk) 12:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

suglamuman
We discussed this before, the word "suglamuman" itself is not used anywhere, not found in publications, misspelling of "suglaguman" only online, the wrong spelling only found in online wordlists. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:23, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

 * Doesn't occur in anything durably archived, though it can be found online. The online occurrences are not particularly numerous. I'm inclined to call this RFV-failed under the rare misspellings clause. 70.172.194.25 07:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I just checked the "correct" spelling and it doesn't have any Google-indexed hits in durably archived sources either. There is a reference, "   Maugnaying Talasalitaang Pang-agham Ingles-Pilipino", but it looks like it would be a dictionary and therefore a mention not a use. In fact, this misspelling has more Google hits! How sure are we that this is a misspelling? Should either form be kept? . 70.172.194.25 17:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It's a popular misspelling. Maybe it can be tracked because of its greater usage. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 06:08, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I can't find either form attested in durably archived sources to which I have access (Google Books/Scholar/Groups, Internet Archive, Issuu). Do you even know of any books that use the proper form suglaguman? Maybe school textbooks that aren't indexed by Google? Regardless, based on what's easily available to me (Google), I would say that as long as suglaguman is kept, suglamuman should be too; the erroneous form has more hits than the normative spelling. So basically there are two options:
 * Call this RfV-failed, send suglaguman to RfV too, and that will probably also end up as RfV-failed (unless real textbooks, etc. turn up).
 * Cite both using Twitter/Reddit and hold a two-week discussion (per WT:CFI) to see if people think the online sourcing is sufficient.
 * How should we proceed? 70.172.194.25 06:51, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * By the way, are you using a registered account? Or is your account name really just numbers? Anyway, the thing is, this falls under a special category in Tagalog lemmas that is currently has hundreds of entries called the "Maugnayin" words. These are neologisms, coinages, done in the 1960's, but not in use today, but many people, though not mainstream, still use them from time to time, especially in saying that this particular coinage is the Tagalog word for this scientific term. Also, if you're referring to attestations in online forums, there was a vote for that some time back, result as far as I understand it is to allow social media attestations for now. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 07:00, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

кодзув
Komi-Permyak. Couldn't find anything. Thadh (talk) 09:39, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I've no modern written sources at hand, but found rather with ӧ: (ködźuv, ke̮ďźi̮v etc.) in most major Komi dialect sources. In case that was not simply your point? --Tropylium (talk) 23:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually, it wasn't, because my dictionary gave only the Russian loanword звезда. Actually, is кӧдзув verifiable? It returns only seven results on google, two of which are Wikipedia, one Russian text mentioning it as a type of embroidment (?), two being a Bible translation, but I'm not sure if it's published, this discussion, and some restaurant menu that I cannot open because my antivirus doesn't let me. Thadh (talk) 11:26, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm just new on Wiktionary, and I have no idea whether this will help you, but I've been doing a little research concerning the word кодзув. According to the Сравнительный Словарь Коми-Зырянских Диалектов (Т. И. Жилина et al. 1961) the word exists in multiple Komi-Zyrian dialects. Also, the Komi-Zyrian Corpus returns some 191 entries, spread across approximatly 100 documents (http://komi-zyrian.web-corpora.net/). However, I've not been able to find the word in Komi-Permyak. In the Коми-Пермяцко-Русский Словарь (Р. М. Баталова et al. 1985), the word кодзув doesn't exist, and I can only find звезда, кӧдзыв, кӧдзыл and кӧдзув, the latter two only occuring in Komi-Permyak dialects. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 19:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 17:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

häsch du morn scho öppis vor
Alemannic German. No results at Google and Google Books and not in Google Groups / Usenet. Possibly too add:, , , (/ gives: ). --Sasha Gray Wolf (talk) 15:07, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

 * That's a bit ridiculous, don't you think? It is obviously correct and the parts are easily attested: häsch du scho öppis vor. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:23, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It's not a verification request for the parts but for the phrase as a whole (I'm not a fan of protologisms if they aren't marked as such). One could also translate, or other phrases but that doesn't mean the translation is used/attested. --Sasha Gray Wolf (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * lol @ protologism. The last link in my previous reply proves that "scho öppis vorha" is used in this way and all other words are separately attested; slight variations of the complete phrase are also found on the internet. Exactly the same argument is true for, see e.g. isch ghüroote. RFVing a phrase that is obviously and patently correct, that is found (with slight variations) on the internet, and whose constituents are attested is just a complete barrator move. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 16:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * IMO this is simply a SOP. The response could be, jo, ich hä scho öppis vor morn. One could then equally ask un häsch du ibermorn scho öppis vor?. We also do not have entries for or . So send to rfd.  --Lambiam 11:11, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * "Phrasebook entries are very common expressions that are considered useful to non-native speakers. Although these are included as entries in the dictionary (in the main namespace), they are not usually considered in these terms. For instance, is clearly a summation of its parts.""Phrasebook entries are supported in the criteria of inclusion by a passage dedicated to them in the section 'Idiomaticity'; they may not meet the requirement of idiomacity other than for the dedicated passage." — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:21, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The rfv tag was placed below the phrasebook label, which is why I did not spot that label when I clicked the section title. --Lambiam 07:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If this is "very common" it should be findable in exactly the form presented. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 13:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Not if the language is generally unwritten. Thadh (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * And also has an unsettled orthography, varying by region, when written (e.g. next to ).  --Lambiam 07:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

 * I don't really have a great interest in Phrasebook entries. Since I was tagged I can only comment that I have certainly heard the phrase used and it's clearly correct and useful for learners, but I am neutral on its inclusion as I have never quite understood what the attestation/SOP requirements are for phrases of this kind. Ƿidsiþ 08:11, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, logically at the very least WT:CFI (one use or mention for a LDL) must be fulfilled. Otherwise people could translate phrases into any other language. Then we could get (cp., ). Or  translated into all kinds of other languages (extinct languages like Gothic, conlangs like Esperanto, living LDLs). And then the situation with phrases would be like with Navajo animal terms (cp. A, B, C, D) or Scots (E, F).
 * What can be found: "hesch öppis bsungers vor für morn", "hesch du no öppis fertig z'mache" . --Sasha Gray Wolf (talk) 10:22, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * There's a difference between adhering to the letter and the spirit of the law. Of course we should be wary of nonsensical literal translations such as the ones you've mentioned, but this isn't a concern here as this phrase is clearly idiomatic and in widespread use (not only confirmed by two speakers but also by analogy as "Ich ha dänn scho öppis vor." is attested). The fact that you've moved another patently correct article to a slightly different spelling   while ignoring the fact that the variant in question  is also widely attested, is pretty strong evidence that idiomaticity and barring protologisms isn't your concern with this ordeal at all. Anyway, I have more productive things to do than squabbling over my native language and wading through the combinatorial jungle just to find that one attested altform among the thousands of correct possibilities. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 10:59, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I propose that we close this under the clear widespread use clause. There might be some variation of this phrase that is attested letter by letter but I'm not going to bother searching for it (even just has many synonyms, all of which have multiple alt-forms). My above comment from 14 March 2022 explains it pretty well. This phrase is legitimate. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 09:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Multiple Basque given names
This RFV affects, , , , , and. All of them have a source (which I don't have access to), but they don't seem to be in use (not even mentioned) anywhere. The closest thing to an attestation I've found is this use of "Xoroko" as a nickname (an affectionate form of ). The author of the book given as a source is a serious scholar so I suspect most of these supposed given names might actually be nicknames.--Santi2222 (talk) 14:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

OCS дѧти
Identical to the verb except with a nasal vowel. A rare variant or just a mistake? — 69.120.66.131 00:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking into it, I'm not even sure is attested with all of the meanings listed there.  appears to be the more common form, and  is mostly just attested in the reflexive phrase . — 69.120.66.131 00:32, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

avel
Ladino. I could find sources describing a Ladino word "aver" meaning "air", which I added as references to the page. There is also "avel" meaning mourning. I could not find any sources describing a word "avel" meaning "air".

If deleted, should be moved to aver as the content is good other than the title. If kept, it must be a secondary form and the main entry should be at aver; unless, of course, it is actually a separate word and not just a variant. 70.172.194.25 02:52, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

keruvim
Ladino. karuvim is in the source I added. keruvim (in the form keruƀim) is in DHJE, but only with the meaning "cherubs", and I did not find any other spelling variant that could be this word. (Note that in Hebrew כְּרוּב and קָרוֹב have different initial consonants, in addition to the subtle niqqud change.) If deleted, should just be moved to karuvim. 70.172.194.25 01:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

maabe
Ladino. Same story as the previous two; a word like it definitely exists, but I can't find this particular form. In this case, mabul is the seemingly right form. 70.172.194.25 02:01, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not exactly an expert on Hebrew, but when I seen a double vowel in a language that has glottal stops, it makes me think one might be present, as in "ma'abe". Another consideration is that is a very common prefix with a number of functions, so you would want to check words starting with aleph or ayin as well. That said, I didn't see anything obvious along those lines, so you might already tried that and not bothered to mention it. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree. It feels like it would be from the root ע־ב־ה or something. Well, the ending is unclear because it could be clipped. Anyway, here's a neat site that lets you search for words belonging to roots with multiple possible characters in each slot, allowing for some guesswork: . I'm not seeing anything, but I might not be looking in the right places (well, if I include yodh, I can find the mabul one, but I assume we're looking for other possible etymons). Special:PrefixIndex/Mem-Ayin-Beth and Special:PrefixIndex/Mem-Aleph-Beth don't show anything promising either. 70.172.194.25 05:33, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Someone back in August removed everything except the etymology from this entry for no obvious reason. 70.172.194.25 07:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

αρbε̰ρ
Moved from RFD. Earlier discussion: WT:RFDN. Thadh (talk) 23:35, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

 * I found άρbε̱ρ in these Beiträge zu einem albanesisch-deutschen Lexikon [Contributions toward an Albanian–German lexicon] and I found the Greek Ἄρβερ on pages 84 and 88 of Nikolaos Georgiou Nikokles' 1855 De Albanensium sive Schkipitar origine et prosapia · Περὶ τῆς αὐτοχθονίας τῶν Ἀλβανῶν ἤτοι Σκιπιτάρ [On the ancestral source of the Albanians or Shkypetars]. Do they help at all? Fruitless Forest (talk) 19:38, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

 * , as editors of αρbε̰ρ and/or as contributors to the deletion discussion, I thought you might have an interest in this., do Άρβερ (Ἄρβερ), αυτοχθονία (αὐτοχθονίας), and Σκιπιτάρ warrant entries, in your opinion? Fruitless Forest (talk) 14:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

 * about Άρβερ Σκιπιτάρ = if there is a PoS 'Transliterations' for nongreek words, similar to Romanizations, probably they could be created with your ref. I am not sure how such unadapted and rare occurrences are handled at en.wiktionary. On the other hand, αυτοχθονία is a normal noun (Standard Modern Greek), spellt with αὐτο- in old polytonic spelling, the word since 1815. (cf.

 * I think αρbε̰ρ, αρbε̰ρισ̈τ, αρbε̰ρίσ̈τ should be deleted & replaced for the following reason: These 'greek' scripts with added latin characters & diacritics mimicking phonetics were created by lexigographers of past centuries and, alas, by the Dialect Dictionary of the Academy of Athens (which ended ingloriously somewhere at letter delta). As far as I know, they have been abandoned for some decades. I understand that the contemporary practice is to lemmatise the closest usual greek script + I.P.A. accompanying it. Here these scripts, could be mentioned (with {lang}, no link) at the main  corresponding Albanian.dialect lemma, with their IPA as described in the dictionary from where they were retrieved. They would be αρμπερ (don't know where the accent was), αρμπερίστ (I cannot see the difference of the two) at arbërisht etc. Source and IPA are very crucial for the presentation of dialects, precisely because a script did not exist.
 * The wikipedia article'Arvanitika' has a list of characters for these script, probably reproduced in more wikis and sites. I tried to find scanned pages of the correspondance referred at @en.wikt via third sources, (I doubt that the particular writers used umlauts and nongreek diacritics when writing arvanitika), but i could not find a scan. If so, the phrase in some lemmata 'script used by Arvanites', ...more likely: 'script proposed by X dictionary'. I cannot be sure; I would need to read the introduction of the source-dictionary. All other similar scripts I have encountered, are constructed by lexicographers, never used by native speakers (who for most dialects, were illiterate).
 * But I am not the right person to verify all this. Whether their lemmatization is justified or not would need verification by a professional expert. -sorry to trouble you, Sir, just for the legitimacy of lemmatizing-.
 * Thadh, please note, that all the templates: Template:list:Greek script letters/aat, Template:list:Greek script letters/acy & Template:list:Greek script letters/tsd were created by anonymi, probably by copying such proposed scripts, with no reference whatsoever. All lemmata with such scripts could be deleted as well as the templates, if the above paragraphs are accepted as correct. Perhaps this issue could be discussed in general in a different page? Thank you ‑‑Sarri.greek ♫ I 22:56, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

гэноцид
Mongolian. Not in any Mongolian dictionary I can access. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:27, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * . Mongolian is an LDL, so I guess this is satisfactory. Thadh (talk) 11:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Never mind, upon further inspection this doesn't seem to be a real book Thadh (talk) 21:55, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This does seem to be in (at least informal) use, but as a borrowing from English. Russian borrowings don't change to .  Are you sure? I'm getting the expected result when I do an ISBN search. Theknightwho (talk) 11:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Missed this ping for some reason. No, I'm not sure. Thadh (talk) 12:53, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

zahut
Ladino. Rfv-sense: "blessing". 70.172.194.25 01:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:03, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

== ⲉⲑⲱⲙ, ⲁⲑⲱⲙ, ϩⲛⲟⲩⲙ, ⲟⲛⲟⲩⲣⲓⲥ, ⲧⲟⲩⲏⲣⲉ, ⲑⲟⲩⲏⲣⲓ, ⲅⲉⲃ ==

Coptic. Ⲉⲑⲱⲙ/ⲁⲑⲱⲙ are reconstructions. Ⲟⲛⲟⲩⲣⲓⲥ is a transliteration of a Greek rendering of an Egyptian god’s name. ⲧⲟⲩⲏⲣⲉ/ⲑⲟⲩⲏⲣⲓ are etymologically correct forms, but never used in the sense of the goddess Tawaret in Coptic texts. Ⲅⲉⲃ just looks like the Egyptological pronunciation of gb written in Coptic letters.Rhemmiel (talk) 03:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

 * ⲑⲟⲩⲏⲣⲓ is attested by Coptic Dictionary Online. It is important to remember that Jean-François Champollion spoke Coptic and he was the one that reconstructed the ancient Egyptian language, and it is likely that ⲉⲑⲱⲙ, ⲁⲑⲱⲙ, ⲅⲉⲃ, and ϩⲛⲟⲩⲙ are the translation of Atum, Geb, and Khnum in Coptic. Ⲁⲡⲟⲗⲗⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

= April 2022 =

diegan
is missing from both the Dictionary of Old English and Bosworth-Toller; this appears to be because it is entirely unattested; as, the OED has a note to this effect. Now as was done with that verb, we could relocate it to Reconstruction:Old English/diegan in the very likely event that cites do not end up emerging. However, I question whether the reconstruction of such a verb is necessary; the obvious justification for doing so is the existence of, but that could be easily be from. This is the standard etymology given by the dictionaries, and I see no reason be at variance with them. With taken out of the way, we are thus left without any justification for the reconstructing *dīeġan. It may be worth using at, though, as it appears to be frequently brung up in online discussions of Old English (only some of which note its tenuosity). Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 11:04, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * : In B&T there is a redirect from to, which is found here []. There is some uncertainty whether dēog means "died" or "dyed". It's translated both ways, depending... Leasnam (talk) 20:38, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Neither of those explanations are satisfactory to me; instead, I prefer to take dēog as the past tense of a verb (< ; c.f. ). The DOE supports this hypothesis preliminarily, but remains noncommital, but I believe the poetic context means that it is the only hypothesis that rings true to me: interpreting dēaðfǣge dēog as "doomed to death, he dyed" makes little sense, while "doomed to death, he died" is conceptually repetitive doggerel (it is also not clear that the past tense of a putative  would result in ). Moreover, despite Bammersberg's statement that dēog has "no generally accepted interpretation", the "hid" hypothesis seems to be usual in the recent literature (e.g. in A Guide to Old English, Beowulf and the Hunt, Blogging Beowulf: Fit XIII, Lines 837-924, Eldum Unnyt: Treasure Spaces in Beowulf, and The conceptualisation of emotions in Old English: dream 'joy' as LIFE, PRIVILEGE and HEAVEN in Anglo-Saxon prose and poetry). Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 13:25, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Finanzdienstleistungsaufsichtsgebührenverordnung
German. Seems like a protologism, as fair as i saw no example at the linked DWDS, only one example at google books. --學者三 (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

 * The term occurs in the heading of an official German regulation published in the Bundesgesetzblatt 2021 Vol. I nr. 62, page 4077, as short (!) for Besondere Gebührenverordnung des Bundesministeriums der Finanzen zur Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht. This should be considered a proper noun, the (nick)name of a specific entity. Since the regulation provides for a convenient abbreviation of the short name, FinDAGebV (see used here), I guess we won't be seeing many uses of the term. --Lambiam 11:41, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Confirmed in so far it occurs in neither Beck Online nor Juris. However this is a hot word since the regulation is in effect since 01.10.2021. On the other hand it must have been applied somewhere and thus the FinDAGebV must be on record at some authorities somewhere, as if there are laws someone follows them, in Germany. A written abbreviation is enough since the short name Finanzdienstleistungsaufsichtsgebührenverordnung is how the abbreviation FinDAGebV is pronounced. Chinese pronunciations themselves aren’t supposed to occur in writing either yet pinyin gets entries. Fay Freak (talk) 18:49, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Helen
Tagalog. “Borrowed from. ”. Tagged by 122.2.99.81 (“Not a Tagalog name Should be Elena”), not listed. J3133 (talk) 07:35, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Barbie
Cebuano. “From, the name of a fashion doll. ”. Tagged by 122.2.99.81, not listed. J3133 (talk) 07:35, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-resolved, deleted out of process in . Thadh (talk) 18:08, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

-pela
Bislama. Also RFV'ing yumitripela, yumipela and mipela. These all seem like Tok Pisin to me rather than Bislama, where I couldn't find any evidence of an alternative -pela to the widely used -fala, neither in Crowley's grammar nor in the Bislama spelling dictionary, nor generally online. Pinging as creators of the pronoun entries and the suffix entry respectively. Thadh (talk) 22:38, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

 * Maybe it was just a mistake. The entries were created a very long time ago, and perhaps the sources we had at the time were also wrong. I assume loaning is unlikely, right?  The languages are spoken near each other, but both on islands. — Soap — 18:27, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:08, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

ܥܟܒܝܬܐ
I could not find evidence of this word anywhere in Assyrian Neo-Aramaic, only in other Aramaic languages.

= May 2022 =

Aas
Impossible to web-search.

 * Imagine German, Ety 2 genitive "poo-poo" was automatically created by templates. I sincerely doubt that it can be attested, because the genitive is rare in colloquially speech and even more so in children that have not yet acquired the morphology, and even more so in writing.
 * Surely /ˌaˈʔa(s)/ should not be spelled Aa(s), what's usually /a:/. Who takes the time to create literally children shit entries and then doesn´t source their shit? The Further Reading only concerns Ety 1. 141.20.6.200 12:16, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
 * How else would it be spelled? — Soap — 21:35, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Is that a rhetorical question!? Standard German orthography does not recognize a glottal stop. Nonstandard spelling may be arbitrary, eg. I-Aah for the sound of the donkey and I think IA as well.
 * Pinging User:PseudoSkull who added this and may be able to confirm that it was or wasn't created "automatically". ApisAzuli (talk) 01:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I didn't add anything to this entry according to the page history, nor do I recall doing anything with it. PseudoSkull (talk) 02:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh shoot, right, thanks for the heads up. It was User:SemperBlotto (who has apparently the same voice of reason in my head). ApisAzuli (talk) 06:19, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I've no idea. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * DWDS gives the genitive singular as Aa. Theknightwho (talk) 11:47, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * the Duden says: genitive singular Aa or Aas --Scripturus (talk) 19:36, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

marcosin
Make an account btw if you wanna edit. This word needs to satisfy the criteria of Wiktionary of word inclusion. Try to find published articles that use this word. Thanks. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 10:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

साङ्‍वा
Yamphu. This is given under a Yakkha header but with a Yamphu language code and reference. The given reference has two Yamphu words for "bird":  and, but not. So is this actually Yakkha, or a Yamphu typo, or a dialectal variant, or ...? This, that and the other (talk) 02:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The third possibility is that this was supposed to go at, but the contributor was distracted by the similarity of the spelling (सो vs सा) into adding it to the wrong entry. Looking at their edit history, it was halfway into over an hour of creating nothing but Yamphu entries (the Yakka page creation was 9 days eatlier). By the way, : you seem to have your language codes switched. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I have fixed the codes here. The two codes couldn't be any closer... This, that and the other (talk) 07:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

tandayag
For the word, I can't find the adjective sense you put in any dictionary or source. Could you source it? Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

brigā
Gaulish: Is there any evidence that this existed as a distinct word? It appears to be the same as the element, which is said in sources such as Matasović 2009:77 to be only attested as part of compound toponyms. So, this should be moved to Reconstruction:Gaulish/briga. — 69.120.66.131 22:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Btw, see this discussion for some related info, such as Latin toponyms with this "suffix" that were borrowed from Celtic, some of which should probably be listed in the event that a reconstruction page is created. Note that these are in Latin, with long ī, unlike the short i currently transcribed at brigā (which might just have been a baseless assumption on the part of the entry creator). — 69.120.66.131 22:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

= June 2022 =

سعدان
General term قرد is used instead.
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

فاكهة
South Levantine Arabic. Unattested in the dialect.
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

sinniht
Old English. From RFDN:

Old English. The Bosworth-Toller affirms that the actual word is, a neuter ja-stem. The genitive singular in -es and the fact that its never attested in its endingless form (very common even for oblique cases of ) point to this conclusion. Hundwine (talk) 22:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, send to WT:RFVN. --Astova (talk) 21:46, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

This, that and the other (talk) 07:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not an alternative form. This is the nominative form, and is the oblique singular. Leasnam (talk) 04:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * is feminine; is neuter. These are 2 separate but related terms, which appear to show some conflation or overlap.  though is valid. I've expanded the entry. Leasnam (talk) 04:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

very good, walay lugod-lugod
Cebuano. If anything the expression is probably, but I can't even find this. This, that and the other (talk) 10:05, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Bulan Jatidiri as a translation of Pride Month
RFV-t. 0 hits on Google Books, Google Scholar and Google Groups. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 17:09, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Removed, but I'm not sure if we need RFV discussions for translations. Thadh (talk) 18:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

tunga
Moved here from RfD. --Lambiam 08:09, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

This word doesn't exist in Turkish. Dohqo (talk) 06:16, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * According to Turkish Language Association's Kişi Adları Sözlüğü (Personal Names Dictionary) it means: 1. Görkemli, kuvvetli, muazzam. 2. Yiğit, kahraman. 3. Rütbe, unvan.4. Bir tür kaplan.
 * Not in R:tr:OTK. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

खरोष्ठी
Sanskrit. Rfv-sense: Kharoshthi.

So far as I am aware, it is an assumption rather than a good guess that the Sanskrit word refers to the script known as Kharoshthi in English. Any Sanskrit examples of usage in this sense would be from the last two hundred years. (On the other hand, the cited quotation is the ultimate known source of the English word.)

I think the word may actually have two senses - whatever script it meant in the original sense (if it isn't a word like jabberwocky), and the Kharoshthi script as known today. However, we don't have a quotation for the latter! --RichardW57m (talk) 14:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

gecielfe
Old English.
 * This is attested <<Ðæt ic hæbbe hnesce litlingas, and gecelfe cý mid me - that I have tender children and incalving cows with me >>. Also found here []. Leasnam (talk) 05:04, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * There is also the entry at, which is/is not the same term (?) Leasnam (talk) 05:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Based on the similar terms, , and and the lack of i-umlaut in all of these, this word was actually ġeċealf. Hundwine (talk) 01:12, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Per Clark Hall A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, the form is geċealfe "great with calf" sourced to GenC 33:13, where GenC is explained in the intro as "Crawford's Heptateuch" version of the poem of Genesis. Benwing2 (talk) 07:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, send to WT:RFVN. --Astova (talk) 21:46, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

This, that and the other (talk) 08:12, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

achichiltik
The two Nahuatl languages mark this terms as noun and adjective respectively, is that correct? --TongcyDai (talk) 11:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed, better safe than sorry. Thadh (talk) 18:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

חנות משכונות
Hebrew. Apparently incorrect. --Huckerby980 (talk) 12:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's used in the press occasionally, although בית עבוט is more common. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 10:51, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Should we have an entry for by itself? I can't quite figure it out; could it be cognate to  (compare )? From the uses it seems to have three meanings: (1) pawn (security for loan); (2) pawn shop (perhaps by shortening of ); (3) neighbourhood. Cases of the last one are probably misspellings of .  --Lambiam 09:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

tropatuts
Could you provide attestation for this based on Wiktionary entry guidelines? I can't find this in any published source. It kinda needs to be to be tracked in Wiktionary. Thanks! --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 14:36, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, we've got tropa listed as meaning a group of friends in Tagalog, so there's probably something to this, but there's clearly a mistake somewhere. If it were a typo for something like tropatita i could see this being a diminutive coined in Spanish and then loaned, or even coined natively using familiar patterns .... but although the letters are close I get the impression that no such word exists, and that anywhere it appears on Google search results is an example of the two separate words tropa + tito spelled bunched together as in hashtags. Alternatively, there may be a connection with patutsada, created by the same author, and with the same six letters in a row.  — Soap — 21:03, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It's obvious that it's related to "tropa". The issue is attestation. So many variations of Tagalog slang come and go but they don't stick. Probably this is one of them. Without attestation, it can't be an entry in Wiktionary. By the way, the IPA template you put is wrong, when "ts" is at the end of a Tagalog sentence, it doesn't produce a /tʃ/ sound but a /ts/ sound. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:11, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

llayang
This is a word. - Patnugot123 (talk) 18:01, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Why should it be deleted? Can't it just be turned into a Pattani Malay entry? ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * can you respond to Patnugot123's request by demonstrating that this is in use as a Malay word, or whether it belongs to the distinct Pattani Malay language? This, that and the other (talk) 12:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

= July 2022 =

ielfþone
Old English. All I'm seeing is (Bosworth-Toller). 98.170.164.88 00:39, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

 * I created an entry for ælfþone. "ielfþone", along with "ielfiġ" originally appeared on this page: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ielf#Derived_terms

"ælfþone" is in the Mercian orthography.

2602:306:CEC2:A3A0:A07C:91F6:D2CC:EC3A 00:46, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

♂
Translingual. Rfv-sense: biennial (the orbital period of Mars is 2 years)

As an aside, I assume the part about the orbital period of Mars is the etymology of the sense, but I'm not certain. Theknightwho (talk) 23:30, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

 * You can find “♂ Biennial” and “♃ Perennial” here, as well as “☉ Annual”, thus extending the correspondence between the plant’s longevity and the astronomical object’s orbital period, undoubtedly the origin of the association of these symbols with plants. “♄” is also listed, but as simply meaning “Shrub or Tree” – all of which, however, are perennial anyway. Likewise here and here, although the latter has a toppled Jupiter in the table; later uses in the book are upright). --Lambiam 14:52, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Taking the three sources together, I'd suggest that we amend ♂ to read biennial plant for the sake of consistency. All three sources seem to give a mix of noun and adjective glosses for these symbols, and they're not consistent with each other when it comes to the same symbol. Given that they're not used within running text, it doesn't really matter which style we choose, but biennial plant is more elegant than Of a plant, binennial. Theknightwho (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

♃
Translingual. Rfv-sense: herbaceous perennial plant (the orbital period of Jupiter is 12 years)

Not sure how the two halves of the sense relate to each other, to be quite honest. I guess herbaceous plants live longer than 2 years (see ♂) but less than woody plants (see ♄)? Theknightwho (talk) 23:35, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * One reference has been added to the article. As far as I can tell it only mentions the term, defining it as "A perennial." —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

♄
Translingual. Rfv-sense: woody perennial plant (the orbital period of Saturn is 30 years)

Also unsure how the two halves of the sense relate to each other, but I assume it's to do with woody plants living longer than herbaceous ones (see ♃). Theknightwho (talk) 23:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

 * One reference has been added to the entry, but I'm having trouble finding this symbol on the specified pages. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It can be a bit hard to recognize, as described by Simpson 2010 Botanical symbols: a new symbol set for new images. kwami (talk) 18:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that helps. Based on that I suppose it is the symbol defined as "A true tree; as the Oak" and "An under shrub; as Laurustinus." I still don't think we have any uses of the symbol with this meaning, only two mentions. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:01, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It's not too difficult to find uses, but they're all old. kwami (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Could you provide three of them, to show that the symbol meets WT:CFI? —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I wrote to niki simpson, who knows the lit. i don't remember the sources i've seen (none of which i have on me), and a gbooks search doesn't work because they get hits for 'jupiter' and 'saturn'.
 * BTW, this (p. 1604) mentions the orbital periods in conjunction w the botanical meaning (though there are some obvious copy errors).
 * They were required knowledge for school exams in the 19th cent, but again those are mentions rather than uses. kwami (talk) 04:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, Simpson responded that she's mostly seen these "handwritten on very old herbarium sheets." One old printed example is Linnaeus Species Plantarum. ♃ (perennes) is very common, ♄ (fruticantes) less so, but appears for e.g. Salicornia #2, #4 on p5 of vol I.
 * Perennis and fruticans BTW would be the authoritative definitions.
 * Vol I is free on GBooks; you can find online links to all vols on Latin Wikisource. kwami (talk) 16:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

ᠨᡇᡇᠷ
Written Oirat. Using proper formatting this is:

Moved from RFDN. wrote: "As far as I may be concerned about transliterating the Clear script, these orthographies are all false and, due to this, the entries shouldn't be kept." , the entry's creator, responded: "The first variant was attested in Pozdneyev’s printed dictionary (although it’s not enough unless we find it in a manuscript). Should we keep the spelling for a while?"

tl;dr can it be attested in a manuscript? This, that and the other (talk) 04:54, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

 * What's the objection here? That the word doesn't exist? Or that it should be spelt differently? If the latter, how does think it should be spelt? 0DF (talk) 09:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @0DF I know nothing of Written Oirat. I only got involved because this word was wrongly listed at RFD when it was the word's existence that was in question. We indeed need to hear from @HeliosX. This, that and the other (talk) 09:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

 * Or perhaps, rather, from, since was the one who originally tagged the entry for deletion (despite being its creator), five years, five months, and one day ago. 0DF (talk) 09:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi! I was told that manual FVS had become unnecessary, as fonts (e.g. Mongolian Baiti) should automatically display the alternative shape of the second u. So sorry. LibCae (talk) 10:14, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

 * So, what do you now think should be done with this entry? 0DF (talk) 10:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Let’s delete it. I will creat both ᠨᡇᡇᠷ and ᠨᡆᡇᠷ, attested in Pozdneyev’s dictionary and 西域同文志 respectively. Thank you. LibCae (talk) 11:22, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

 * I have no objection. Do you? 0DF (talk) 12:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * : Why not move it to one of the correct spellings, and create the other? That way we preserve the edit history. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Fine by me. Chuck makes a good point about moving the entry rather than deleting and recreating. This, that and the other (talk) 02:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

I've made the discussed changes. Please add an adequate gloss to. 0DF (talk) 18:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

unz
Old Norse. This edit by added some extra information, but did not really follow the Wiktionary format, and I cannot verify the content because I cannot read the language of the book in the link. --kc_kennylau (talk) 00:48, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

 * It looks like the info is right based on the reference, but they should have made a new L3 header for the noun instead of sticking it in the etymology. The quotation from the c. 1500 manuscript ("AM 625 4") is shown in the panel on the right of the reference, but someone more knowledgeable should confirm it I guess. 98.170.164.88 00:55, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

باح
Arabic. Rfv-senses: "to be revealed or divulged, to become known", "(of a secret) to leak out". There was an edit war over whether to include these intransitive senses, in addition to the transitive sense of "to reveal, to divulge, to disclose", which is currently the only one that remains. To be clear, I was not involved in the edit war.

FWIW, Wehr lists all these intransitive senses as well as the transitive ones, almost verbatim:. 98.170.164.88 03:08, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * See my response above. — Fenakhay ( حيطي · مساهماتي ) 03:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Abu Al-Haytham Ibn al-Tayyihan said   --2001:16A2:E950:3402:28B9:7B80:EB65:4073 09:49, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

яліты
Belarusian. Tagged but not listed. Original tag said: "made-up word. I looked several dictionaries, the closest is ялито in Гістарычны слоўнік беларускай мовы, Vol. 9 with the meaning 'Intestine'. The reference also cites a couple of examples with obscure meaning, including Bible. Anyway the word is still spelled differently." added on 12:54, 16 July 2022 by. —Mahāgaja · talk 12:43, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

 * The word ялі́ты-таў appears in this dictionary: . I added three citations from other sources, but two of them are non-ideal: a LiveJournal post and a Yiddish–Belarusian dictionary (where it appears as one of the glosses for ). You can find more on bnkorpus.info and archive.org by searching for the lemma form, but the hits are mostly mentions. I find that it's not that easy to search for attestations in Belarusian since Google Books is lacking. The same applies to some other Eastern European languages. Maybe some leniency is justified. 98.170.164.88 01:07, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

= August 2022 =

ポケットモンスター
Rfv-sense Pokémon". Dennis Dartman (talk) 20:48, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

 * @Dennis Dartman: The sense "Pokémon" is easily verifiable in any official translation of the games of the Pokémon series. Sartma (talk) 21:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

 * See the deletion discussion, however. Dennis Dartman (talk) 23:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

 * , the confusion is that this is not about RFV of a specific sense for this term. (FWIW, Pokémon is the only sense currently in the  entry.)  This is specifically seeking evidence that this passes WT:BRAND.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

University of Recto
Tagalog. Needs to fit the inclusion criteria. --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 00:01, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Feuerarm
An apparent calque of, and synonymous with and. But attestation of this word is scant (89 hits on Google, including those generated by the Wiktionary entry itself). It is not to be found in the usual dictionary/corpus database sources (Duden, Pons, DWDS, etc.), and the audio on the page is for (presumably copied across from that page). Can we find attestation to support this entry's existence? Voltaigne (talk) 14:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Here is a use of the term with a different meaning, possibly the same as for the implied use in Strodtmann’s feuerarm’gen Moloch. Some uses in the sense of a :, , , . If (as is IMO plausible) this is a partial calque of , the German noun is innocent and the etymology we give needs to be corrected.  --Lambiam 15:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I’ve changed the etymology to “”. --Lambiam 19:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

‛

 * A leading ; a form of the apostrophe when it occurs at the beginning of a word.

Translingual. I have seen leading apostrophes in both old and new books but always as ’, never ‛. J3133 (talk) 18:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

ฮ̂า
Saek.

No evidence is presented that this spelling has ever been used, nor any explanation of why any recorded pronunciation with the alleged meaning 'five' should be written in this extraordinary manner. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

 * This is correct written word and there are a lot of evidences. Since Seak has six tones (or seven but one is for fixing the right tone) so they need two more tone marks. I have all Saek orthography rules, dictionaries, and lores. They are defined many years ago.  See Fulltext.pdf page 62 for description. If you stick only with western authors, you won't see these. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Prematurely-created Mariupol Greek Greek spellings
φυκρύμ and γιαλό.

Mariupol Greek. (As will probably be obvious from the section header.)

I created those by transliterating the Cyrillic entries for фукрум and яло, respectively, using the table in WT:GRK-MAR TR to convert Cyrillic into Greek script, assuming, rather naively, that this was a mechanical one-to-one conversion following the rules in the table.🤦♀

I was quickly disabused of that notion.

Hence, listing the two ones I did create until advised otherwise here, to determine whether I managed to accidentally create the attested correct Greek spelling for these ones. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty ⚧ Averted crashes 15:28, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I have found and added a quote for both. Mariupol Greek seems to have a surprisingly large corpus of books published in the '30s - makes me rethink the fact that we lemmatise at Cyrillic. Thadh (talk) 16:54, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It has been brought to my attention by on Discord that this isn't Mariupol Greek, but rather Demotic. So we're back to square one. Thadh (talk) 06:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

นกเขา
Thai. Rfv-sense: Accipiter spp.

Word might mean "dove", according to Hippietrail. I looked up all five Accipiter species found in Thailand, according to Avibase, which has vernacular names in many languages, and didn't find any Thai terms. Some English vernacular names for predatory birds contain the name of their prey in their name, like goshawk and sparrowhawk. DCDuring (talk) 13:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 * Non-domestic fowl normally prefix the classificatory word to their names, as obscurely mentioned in the entry for .  So Hippietrail is right about the word meaning 'dove', and googling finds plenty of confirmation for the meaning 'columbid'.  However, if one looks up นกเขา น in the Thai Royal Institute Dictionary, one will find it defined roughly as Accipiter, with the species A. trivirgatus, A. badius and A. gularis getting specific mention.  The connection seems to be a similarity in plumage.
 * Fixed typo - spurious trailing no nu (น). --RichardW57 (talk) 20:22, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

 * The hawk seems to be normally called เหยี่ยวนกเขา, as can be seen in the Thai Wikipedia at https://th.wiktionary.org/wiki/เหยี่ยวนกเขา. Quiet Quentin's found one book with that longer word; and I've found a newspaper website page at https://www.matichon.co.th/prachachuen/prachachuen-scoop/news_1716240 - I'm not sure how good that it is; and an example in the Bible at https://www.bible.com/th/bible/174/JOB.39.26.THSV11.  I couldn't find any examples of just นกเขา for 'hawk'. --RichardW57 (talk) 00:26, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Some Old Uyghur lemmas
21 Old Uyghur lemmas. These were all added by back in 2017/18, though all but one are unsourced. is sourced, but the one that's available online uses a completely different orthography. Nothing shows up on Google, from what I've been able to tell.

It would also be good to bring any of these that can be verified in line with the rest of the language by converting them to the Old Uyghur script. It's understandable why these weren't, though, given it was only added to Unicode in 2021. Theknightwho (talk) 21:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

 * @Theknightwho: I did a few of these but I got bored. I think they all exist. One way to find citations is to go to the VATEC "corpus location query form" and enter the term (replacing each ʾ|right half ring with a question mark, because otherwise it won't work). You then get a list of uses in texts and can click on the bolded chocolate-colored link to see the context, translation, etc. Let me know if you find one you cannot easily find attestations for using this method.
 * It's also possible to search for them on Google or Google Books, replacing the right half rings with apostrophes. Unfortunately, a lot of the Google Books hits only show partial context, and there's no translation available to confirm the meaning, etc. 98.170.164.88 03:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

₮
Translingual. Rfv-sense: The Tether cryptocurrency, USDT.

Not seeing any uses of this as a currency symbol. Seems to be more of a branding thing. Theknightwho (talk) 12:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't know but it is in Wikipedia --Hekaheka (talk) 12:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It is, but just because we can source them saying it's their currency sign doesn't mean it's actually used as one. Theknightwho (talk) 14:13, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
 * https://tether.to/en/transparency/#usdt 198.84.224.219 17:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

-изм
Mongolian. Not convinced this is a suffix in Mongolian. There are borrowed terms like and, but they come from Russian. Theknightwho (talk) 14:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

 * Are there any native terms, namely (/possibly) neologisms, that use the suffix? How aware are speakers that this is a suffix? Vininn126 (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

 * Between Монгол хэлний зөв бичих дүрмийн журамласан толь and Большой академический монгольско-русский словарь I've found 50 - all of them are Russian borrowings. However, I've found evidence of, which I suspect was coined in Mongolian. Theknightwho (talk) 23:18, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Tagging @Bathrobe, who may be able to comment on this. Theknightwho (talk) 14:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

= September 2022 =

kakaq
Kapampangan. Created by and tagged for speedy deletion by, who wrote: "Whoever wrote this didn't know that q is a glottal stop and not meant to be written". WT:APAM says that word-final glottal stops do not exist in the language, but this seems to be contradicted by the reference given in the entry, a dictionary containing many words ending in "q", which is employed to represent a "glottal catch". None of our other Kapampangan entries have a "q" in the orthography as far as I can tell, but I feel like this should at least wait out its 30 days. This, that and the other (talk) 10:25, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

 * @This, that and the other You see Kapampangan doesn't have a standard orthography as of date, more so on the date that the dictionary was written (1971). That dictionary made q to be explicit so that readers will know where the glottal stop is and properly speak the word. I moved to, as it is the prescribed orthography by Wiktionary at About Kapampangan (Batiauan Orthography, only made 1997) or more correctly, kákâ to show pronunciation. The 'q' from that dictionary is equivalent to marking the previous vowel with a circumflex accent.
 * About Kapampangan is also wrong with the following:
 * Kapampangan not using glottal stops at the end of words (though it is correct that it does not use glottal stops mid-word, glottal stops disappears at the end of a word if it is used in between a sentence)
 * Circumflex accent is not used (only grave accent is not used in Batiauan orthography but circumflex is used to show glottal stop after the syllable)
 * Thanks! Ysrael214 (talk) 14:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Ysrael214 thanks for the extensive response. I'm pinging who wrote WT:APAM - it sounds like that page needs updating. This, that and the other (talk) 00:11, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Category:Inupiaq numerals
The Inupiaq numeral system presented here is consistent with the vigesimal system of this language for small numbers, but seems rather strange for very large numbers in the millions, billions or trillions. It seems that none (except for the smallest ones) is attested outside https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iñupiaq_numerals. 193.54.167.164 13:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

 * (@Kwamikagami since you added them) Honestly a very interesting number system, reminds me a lot of the Yorùbá number system. I looked for the source that's listed, "MacLean (2014) Iñupiatun Uqaluit Taniktun Sivuninit / Iñupiaq to English Dictionary, p. 840 ff", but I've been unable to without buying it or going to a physical library. I did find, though, "", which seems to be a precursor to the prior source, and does have all the numbers cited. However, I don't have the energy right now to add them to every entry, so I'll leave it to y'all to decide if it's officially cited or not. AG202 (talk) 14:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * These are the numbers taught in schools. Though the language is moribund. kwami (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The large numbers certainly aren't traditional. I imagine the language was extended to cover large numbers so that it would be adequate for science and mathematics. Something all languages with large numerals have done. kwami (talk) 04:40, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

daeuh
Zhuang. Etymology 2: "seaweed; algae" and "green (as seaweed or algae)". Added by. I could not find this in 壮汉词汇 or 壮汉英词典. It might be a misinterpretation of 古壮字字典, where is given as a syllable that can be used with  in the word ; it does not show any independent use of. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 14:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

 * I believe it is from your source gave me in 2019, where I saw sawndips, that is now unavailable. My sources do not state it either. daeuhraez might be the right word. (and how is it formed?) --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:10, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

 * I found daeuh=blue (historical blue includes green) in Nong Zhuang that should not be included in Zhuang; they are kind of different languages. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:12, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

 * I wonder if all the Zhuang varieties should be put under "Zhuang" (like "Chinese") or if we should actually separate them. I've been assuming that Zhuang functions the same way as Chinese in that it is a macrolanguage with all Zhuang varieties under it (with the appropriate labels for the regions). For example seems to include most Zhuang varieties. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 23:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

 * Nong Zhuang, Dai Zhuang, Zuojiang Zhuang have more consonants and vowels than Standard Zhuang. Northern Zhuang (in Northern Tai) and Southern Zhuang (in Central Tai) are not the same group; it is obviously not able to unify. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

umpe
Narragansett, "string". I don't see this in , which is the definitive source for this language. The only gloss involving the word "string" is "enomphómmin" ("to thread or string"). Where did this come from? Is it reconstructed? Is there a verifiable cognate in 🇨🇬 or any other 🇨🇬 language? (Was not able to find in the 🇨🇬-language Natick Dictionary, searching for 'string', 'rope', 'cord', 'thread'.) 98.170.164.88 02:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * According to the edit history, the entry was created because it was mentioned in the etymology of [[wampumpeag]] and [[wampum]]. Various English texts about etymology do give umpe or ompe as a word for string [of beads] in "Algonquian", usually specifically Narragansett or Massachusett, but obviously we need to see if it actually exists (on its own) in those languages. Wikipedia points to Dictionary.com for the statement that the PA form of wampumpeag was *wa·p-a·py-aki, so we're looking for a reflex of Reconstruction:Proto-Algonquian/-a·py, but while I can obviously find reflexes of the longer term *wa·p-a·py-aki / cognates of wampumpeag, like Abenaki wôbôbi, I haven't had time to check if there are any likely reflexes of *apy. It wouldn't surprise me if umpe only exists in the compound wampumpe- and not as a separate word (both *apy and its reflexes seem to often exist only in compounds). - -sche (discuss) 09:34, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * If it's not directly attested in Roger Williams (or other colonial writings that document the language, if any exist), I think treating it in the reconstruction namespace is the way to go. 98.170.164.88 22:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

gihgiokdienh
Zhuang. From http://www.jiu60.com/hoiz/, but not found in 壮汉词汇 (Sawloih Cuengh Gun). Also not found in 广西民族报. --沈澄心✉ 11:56, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 17:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

pyaeuh
Zuojiang Zhuang. Copied from Wikipedia. --沈澄心✉ 12:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

koenz
Zuojiang Zhuang. Mentioned in vunz. --沈澄心✉ 13:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

= October 2022 =

cyningrice
Old English. "" is only attested as in a ostensible charter of King. The OED states that the charter is "probably a forgery of the late 11th or early 12th cent.". After a admittedly brief and superficial examination of the text, I concur with the OED and would lean towards a later dating; the text appears to be nothing more than Early Middle English sprinkled in with a few archaisms, which leaves us with with no basis for a entry at. Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 03:16, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hrrm Okay. Move to then ? There are cognates in 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬. Leasnam (talk) 20:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think the existence of is certain enough to create such a form. Note that  is barely attested in Early ME (which would be unexpected if it was a old formation, as words for "kingdom" and "authority" occur profusely in early ME texts) and the earliest attestations vary between forms in nominative, genitive , and dative , suggesting a new and unsettled compound.
 * Let me digress for a bit now. I don't think the OS and OHG forms are relevant here, given that they could be modifications of earlier and  (attested as ) with replacement of the mysterious unproductive  with reflexes of semantically transparent . Contrastingly, OE speakers wouldn't've felt the need to replace  with  because the reflex of   was still productive in that language. Further proof for this theory is that  only starts to appear with any real frequency after  (the ME reflex of ) ceased to be productive, suggesting that it it is a modification  along similar lines. Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 13:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hrm, alright. Well, I'll probably still create a reconstruction for the OFS, OSX, GOH as a late remodelling of the original  . I think we should still leave the OE entry as an unrelated reconstruction though, since it's mentioned in so many places and folk will be looking for it, and no-doubt keep re-creating it if they do not find it. We can add a detailed Usage note explaining that it's most likely not real (?) Leasnam (talk) 17:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, you've already made it. What do you make of ? Calque, or independent formation ? Leasnam (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * We can use to dissuade people from creating ; no reconstruction page is needed for that purpose. As for ; I'm not sure about its status; I'd need more research into its attestation pattern to make a decision. Finally, I'll note that my theory about  originally being, while compelling (to me at least) is not something that I'm entirely dead-set on. It could be that  is old (or at the very least a old remodelling) and was just lost in OE. It's even possible that there could've been a ; the important thing is its existence isn't likely enough to justify sticking a stake in the ground by creating a reconstruction. Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 19:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I just took a look at the MED for king-riche. I think this is a borrowing/calque/partial-calque from Old Norse. Many of the forms are clearly Norse-like. Timeframe matches up as well. What do you think ? Leasnam (talk) 19:39, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

ایرشاوان
Urdu. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:06, 9 October 2022 (UTC) Unattested lemma. Transliteration of. نعم البدل (talk) 02:46, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

اتینت
Urdu. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Unattested lemma, Transliteration of. نعم البدل (talk) 02:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

อคฺคล
Pali.

What evidence do we have for this form? The etymological form is, with a retroflex lateral. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:28, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

 * (1) ETipitaka Pali-Thai Dict & Pramaha Prasert Mantasevi's Thai-Pali Dict (2) Wisdom Library "Aggaḷa, & Aggaḷā (f.) (also occasionally with l.)" (3) Concise Pali-English Dictionary > shorturl.at/hnT27 sub dict // Single ฬ sometimes used as ล in many words, including the word 'Pali' itself. That's why I described there . --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The only one of those sources of mentions that looks durably archived is Buddhadatta's Concise Pali-English Dictionary, which I think screams out for the use of . At least the PTS directs one to actual usages.  Unfortunately, I suspect Buddhadatta's entry is itself a misspelling, or rather a typo.  The preface says, "In compiling this work I have constantly referred to the Pali-English Dictionary,...", so why does Buddhadatta's work omit aggaḷa? --RichardW57m (talk) 11:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Now, it is possible that Buddhadatta's work is sufficiently important that his errors will be repeated in modern compositions. If such compositions are to be included in our coverage, then it is helpful to users to include them.  Additionally, there are very probably Sinhalese Pali manuscripts that use the dental instead of the retroflex.  Accordingly, I propose categorising the spelling with a dental as a misspelling.  We therefore should not record it as an alternative form in the correctly spelt lemmas. --RichardW57m (talk) 11:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I've created aggala and alternative citation forms aggalo and aggalaṃ, which all have the same evidentiary requirements as the challenged word. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * The heading "Aggaḷa, & Aggaḷā (f.) (also occasionally with l.)" comes from the PTS, but the remark with 'l' (which looks like an obscure abbreviation because of the full stop!) might only apply to the feminine form. Childers gives the masculine and neuter forms with the retroflex, but the feminine with the dental. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:50, 17 October 2022 (UTC) RichardW57m (talk) 12:50, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

tiewe
Skalvian. RFV-term, appears on Reconstruction:Proto-Balto-Slavic/tewas. Is this language even attested at all? For some reason, extinct Baltic languages are a magnet for questionable additions. The person who originally added this also included Sudovian, Old Curonian, and Kursenieki.

70.172.194.25 00:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Sudovian is barely attested, only in one word list (that scholars aren't even sure is Sudovian) and a few short sentences from (that are likely actually Old Prussian, and academic Old Prussian dictionaries treat them as such, e.g. ). The form they added for Sudovian, "tove", was apparently an unattested invention of Suduva.com; I have replaced it with an attested spelling from the word list.
 * Old Curonian is in a similar situation, only having one representative text (which isn't even securely identified as Curonian), but possibly a great deal of words could be legitimately academically reconstructed from onomastics and the significant regional influence it had on Lithuanian/Samogitian and Latvian. Luckily, the one purportedly Old Curonian text is the Pater Noster, so the word for father is attested ("thewes"), but it doesn't even match the spelling added by the user ("thæwæs", which has no other hits on Google) unless I'm missing something.
 * Kursenieki is definitely attested, and even has two living speakers, but it's still rare so it nonetheless sets off a bit of an alarm. The particular Kursenieki form "teve" may be attested, as searching for "teve mūses" on Google brings up some hits, mostly various Wikipedias and one 2017 self-published ebook (funnily enough cited on Kursenieku_valoda, but surely an instance of citogenesis since the text has been on de.wikipedia since 2012), but I have no idea the original source/authenticity of this Pater Noster translation. ALEW, which I trust more but still isn't an ideal source, gives "têvs" as the Kursenieki cognate of Lithuanian "tėvas". Dictionaries and texts in the language exist but I don't think I can access any of them. The form is superficially plausible, although I have to wonder whether "teve" is supposed to be the vocative instead of the nominative (lemma form), which I would have expected to end in -s. For example, the Lithuanian Pater Noster starts with "tėve mūsų", instead of the lemma form "tėvas". But in Latvian, of which Kursenieki is a dialect, the nominative and vocative are both "tēvs", so IDK.

စပ
Burmese. Created by a vandal. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

 * This Twitter post makes me think the term might be real. Dunno about the etymology. Whether it's citable to our standards, IDK either. The current citation is terrible (the title of a random YouTube video consisting of various clips of dancing women; the word isn't even spoken in the video, nor is any word other than "one, two, three, four"(?) at the start). 70.172.194.25 21:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

= February 2023 =

квайт
Komi-Permyak. One of the defining features of Permyak is that Proto-Permic *ť is reflected as <ть> instead of the Zyrian <йт>. квать is supported by the dictionaries I have. Seems to again be a case of someone not knowing what Permyak is. Thadh (talk) 14:58, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

чӧскыд
Another one. Should be чӧскыт.

шоныд
Another one. Should be шоныт.

небыд
Another one. Should be небыт.

вунӧдны
Another one. Should be вунӧтны.

югыд
Another one. Should be югыт.

 * Югыд seems to be Komi Zyrian or Komi Izhma, so we can just change the name of the language, no need to delete the whole entry. Tollef Salemann (talk) 07:02, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

сьӧкыд
Another one. Should be сьӧкыт.

кӧдзыд
Another one. Should be кӧдзыт.

пемыд
Another one. Should be пемыт.

Honestly, I'm getting tired of this shit by Rajkiandris. Can we just nuke all his entries without sources? Thadh (talk) 19:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

 * Yes. Vininn126 (talk) 19:13, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

вой
Another one. Should be ой. Thadh (talk) 11:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

 * All RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Ιεηωουα
Ancient Greek.

I can't find any evidence of this, but I don't have access to good resources on Ancient Greek proper nouns. Given the religious proscriptions on use of the Divine Name, I'm skeptical, but I don't know enough about Koine usage to be sure. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Hellenistic Jewish writers still needed a form to write, as יהוה is, and those proscriptions don't exist for non-Jewish sources, cf. the citations at Ἰαω, so there's nothing inherently implausible about it on purely religious grounds. This particular form is quite difficult to track down, though. The claim at Iehova that it's attested in the Gnostic  (which survives only in Coptic in any case) appears to stem from an earlier Wikipedia misinterpretation of Charles William King's 19th-century study The Gnostics and Their Remains, which, while discussing the Pistis Sophia, mysteriously states that "The author of the 'Treatise on Interpretations' says, 'The Egyptians express the name of the Supreme Being by the seven Greek vowels ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ'". (Wikipedia now correctly states "Charles William King attributes [it] to a work that he calls On Interpretations", but previously ascribed it to the Pistis Sophia.) Unfortunately King gives no indication at all as to what the 'Treatise on Interpretations' is, and it's never mentioned again. So I'm inclined to delete this, in the absence of any better evidence. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 18:21, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I think the place to look for this would be the Greek Magical Papyri, which are absolutely littered with all sorts of theonyms, including many variations on the Tetragrammaton, as well as all sorts of ‘magical’ sequences of the seven Greek vowels. I haven’t found this exact form myself with a cursory glance, but if it would be anywhere, that would be the most likely set of texts to search. (Also note that King refers to ‘the Egyptians’; the Magical Papyri themselves originate in Greco-Roman Egypt.) Another source that may have some information about where this comes from, if anyone can dig it up, is Gesner’s 1746 De laude dei per septem vocales; various more modern books refer to this when discussing this particular form. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 02:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Edit: I’ve dug up the above-mentioned treatise by Gesner; it can be found on p.245 of this work (Commentarii Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 1). Unfortunately I don’t think my Latin and Greek are quite up to the task of wading through it, but if someone else wants to give it a try, perhaps there might be some useful references there. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 03:07, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I found ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ (in all caps) on page 254 of Gesner's thesis, but the thesis is written in Latin, and the term is only mentioned, not used. I don't know whether this is sufficient for inclusion. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:08, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Not per WT:CFI: "one use in a contemporaneous source". Io. Matthias Gesnerus lived in the 17th/18th century; Greek ended in the 15th century (developed/degenerated into New Greek). If Gesnerus would quote some old text (maybe now lost/destroyed), it could pass; but not if it's just Gesnerus.--08:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

amarantka
Polish. Wikipedia articles don't count. Vininn126 (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

 * The Wikipedia articles don't count as cites, but it's worth noting that both that article as well as ziarnojadek's refer to the Jagiellonian University's Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World, so it might be worth looking somewhere there. Hythonia (talk) 11:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

ziarnojadek
Polish. Wikipedia articles don't count. Vininn126 (talk) 18:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It's been some time, but I found this, for whatever it's worth. Hythonia (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

বীরভূমী and বর্ধমানী
As an inhabitant of West Bengal and a native speaker of Bengali, I don't think I have ever heard of these terms. I found nothing like these in Bengali-language publications in West Bengal, including, etc. So far, I have found words like বীরভূমবাসী and বর্ধমানবাসী, which are demonyms of বীরভূম and বর্ধমান respectively. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 06:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

santi
Pali. Rfv-sense: Does the feminine of the present participle have this form? --RichardW57m (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

d
Translingual. Isn't this an alternative form of or ? Theknightwho (talk) 06:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Uh, this is difficult, how would you distinguish in quotes? Both are asumed faces. It is sure though that in some cases it is the former due to typing so lazily as to omit pressing the shift key. Fay Freak (talk) 11:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Tbh I usually see it used with a bit more irony cheekiness, :d is more like :v. :D is usually just expressing joy. Vininn126 (talk) 12:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Then let's forgo defining it as “synonym of” aught and relegate the uncertainties, concerning which actual symbols it is related to, to the etymology. Fay Freak (talk) 13:12, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Did we all see the comment on Talk:Unsupported_titles/:d? Because  I was skeptical too.  I dont play that game but the explanation makes sense.  And, as for other online games ...   I can see how an originally capitalized emoticon could evolve to  lowercase   for  ease of typing in a fast-paced video game, especially these days when we rely so much on more colorful emojis.   — Soap — 10:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

tarati
Pali. Rfv-sense: swim

Pali. Rfv-sense: float

I can't find this meaning in any dictionaries, and I've looked in PTS, Childers, Maung Tin and Buddhadatta. Wiktionary does have this meaning for the cognate. The meaning was added for Pali by. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Befehl ist Befehl
Dutch. I think it's still German. PUC – 12:13, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of uses in Dutch texts and they have already been added to Wiktionary at Citations:Befehl ist Befehl long before this RFV was started, so I am not sure what more ought be done in terms of attestation/verification. Is there a clear litmus test for when a borrowed phrase is genuinely borrowed, and when it is just quotation/code switching/whatever? For the record, my opinion is that this phrase Dutch in the same way c'est la vie is English. The phrase is very well known and regularly used. I think the existence of spellings such as Befehl is Befehl also indicate nativization. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:35, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Several cites there are only mentionings (cp. Use–mention distinction). But apart from that, it can be a Dutch phrase, just like the mentioned . --08:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Nonetheless at least 3 of those, from a quick glance, are uses and not mentionings. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 08:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

= March 2023 =

sechsundzwanzigköpfig
German. Zero Google hits. The user has created many such entries which may need attention. Equinox ◑ 19:42, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Search for inflected forms like, . That gives enough results of the term. One could only argue regarding the meaning:
 * a being/creature with 26 heads [possible not existing and not given in the entry]
 * a group of 26 people [easily attested like sechsundzwanzigköpfige Besatzung, Gruppe, Mannschaft, Delegation/Gremium/Komitee/Kommission]

boojum
An unadapted English loanword in the extinct language Cochimi of western Mexico. The cactus was given this name in English at just about the time when Cochimi was going extinct, so I wonder if it's even meaningful to say whether the word is or not part of the language. It's also a bit strange that a language native to the cactus' habitat would need to borrow from English to describe it, so it's possible this is an error of some kind and that the scientist never intended boojum to be part of the Cochimi language. The Spanish and Nahuatl wiktionaries also list this word as belonging to two other languages of the area, so for those who edit other wikis, this RFV could be applied to those languages as well. — Soap — 12:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

berda
Kashubian. Vininn126 (talk) 23:46, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

cajtung
Kashubian. Vininn126 (talk) 11:15, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

europ
Kashubian. I believe this could be real, and I think some chemistry textbooks have been printed in Kashubian, I would like at least one quote from them... Vininn126 (talk) 10:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

haka
Kashubian. Gołąbk lists as hôk, I propose the entry be moved. Vininn126 (talk) 22:30, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

jantôr
Kashubian. I think it should be jantar according to my sources. Vininn126 (talk) 19:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

samar
Kashubian. Like with europ, I think this is real, probably in some Kashubian textbook, I just would like a quote. Vininn126 (talk) 14:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * RFV-failed. Thadh (talk) 18:47, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

stëczeń
Kashubian. Vininn126 (talk) 14:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

ทิฟฟานี
Thai. Rfv-sense: a transgender woman.

As a (native) Thai speaker, I have never found anyone using the term to refer to any transgender woman. Also, a Google search did not return any use of the term in such a sense. --Asembleo (talk) 15:45, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

I tried myself to verify the existence of this name but I was unable to find anything reliable on it, I've also never seen it in any charters or the Domesday Book and to my knowledge the element isn't used  in any other Old English names. Pirsicola T. (talk) 22:46, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

ꓚꓳ-ꓗꓴꓷꓼ
Lisu. This doesn't make sense within the Fraser script orthography, and I can't find any evidence of it online. The "transliteration" is very clearly taken from A Dictionary of the Northern Dialect of Lisu, but in actual fact that uses a separate Latin orthography altogether that follows quite different rules.

I suspect this was simply copied from the Chinese Wiktionary. Theknightwho (talk) 04:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

= April 2023 =

апелсин
Mongolian (orange ). Not in any dictionary I can access. The spelling (exactly as in Russian) gets hits in Mongolian Google searches. The regular term for orange (fruit) is.

Passive inflections of
appears to be intransitive. See for example the Reta Vortaro, where they list active but not passive participles, and the example:
 * se edzo opiniis, ke lia edzino amoris kun alia, sed ne havis pruvon, tiam li                                iris kun sia edzino al la templo

with intransitive "amoris kun alia" rather than transitive "amori alian".

If this is the case, then the 27 passive inflections in the following table should be deleted. (I thought it would be disruptive to tag them individually for verification.)

kwami (talk) 22:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Reagan
Cebuano. Another @Carl Francis entry without any supporting citations. Kwékwlos (talk) 12:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Vladimir
Cebuano. Imagine an alternate history in which Russia invaded the Philippines instead of Spain. Sounds like @Carl Francis lives there. Kwékwlos (talk) 12:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

 * There are citations at Citations:Vladimir. I don't know whether they are durably archived. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:53, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Darius
Cebuano. He only went as far as India, not the Philippines. Another @Carl Francis creation with no citations. Kwékwlos (talk) 12:59, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

White
Cebuano. @Carl Francis, did you mistake English for Spanish? Kwékwlos (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Lancelot
Cebuano. @Carl Francis Should be Lanzarote. Kwékwlos (talk) 22:15, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Reichelt
Cebuano. @Carl Francis, are you living in German Philippines? Kwékwlos (talk) 22:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Siegfried
Cebuano. Again, I didn't think the Germans ever maintained a colony in the Philippines, @Carl Francis. Kwékwlos (talk) 22:24, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Aramis
Cebuano. @Carl Francis Did you think the French creators suddenly found themselves in Cebu? Kwékwlos (talk) 22:26, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

foreigner
Cebuano. @Carl Francis. I don't know how an English term would be borrowed directly into Cebuano in the absence of any other Philippine language. Kwékwlos (talk) 22:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

target
Cebuano. @Carl Francis. I don't know how an English term would be borrowed directly into Cebuano in the absence of any other Philippine language. Kwékwlos (talk) 22:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Of all the recent RFD's, this one stands out as the most believable since this word has also been borrowed into other languages. It is in the linked dictionary with senses much as our entry claims it has, although the dictionary spells it as targit. Is this a matter of two different spelling standards, or should we change the spelling of our entry? In any case, I cant be of any help in finding citations, let alone citations for all five senses, but it seems wholly reasonable to me.   Best regards, — Soap — 18:20, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

barbie
Cebuano. Are Barbies even made in Cebu?

Also Chuterix (talk) 03:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Sutcliffe
Cebuano. @Carl Francis Kwékwlos (talk) 14:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

kaci
Polish. Partial verification request for the definition. Kaci is the relational adjective of the noun kat, which has two distinct meanings: literal, "executioner," and figurative, "tormentor." It's pretty easy to find usage of the noun in the figurative sense, but I can't seem to find occurences of kaci as relating to it, only to the literal meaning (especially in collocations like kaci topór — executioner's axe, kaci kaptur — executioner's hood, etc.). Hythonia (talk) 13:44, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

 * Notably, WSJP clearly states it only relates to "executioner". Vininn126 (talk) 13:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Quote from (1840): "Kiedy miano czarownice i czarowników próbować torturami, kaci zabobonnicy i guslarze wielcy, golili im na sam przód włosy" (English: "When witches and sorcerers were to be tried by torture, tormenting superstitious [people] and great guslars shaved their hair first."). Here "kaci" is definitely used as an adjective from "kat" in the sense of "tormentor", and not "executioner", but still the meaning is literal.
 * In another example, we can see contemporary usage in the figurative sense, but it's just a random quote from the internet, and a kind of poetry, so it may not adhere to the strict language rules:.
 * Still, I believe "kaci" is just a standard creation of an adjective from a noun "kat", so there is no reason why we shouldn't use it in all possible senses. It's just rare, so it's hard to find examples. Olaf (talk) 10:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Olaf Per our WT:CFI, each definition needs three examples, just just the entry as a whole. If the only definition is "of or relating to a executioner", we need three examples of that. Vininn126 (talk) 10:33, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I thought this discussion is about meaning of "kaci" as "of or relating to a tormentor", because "of or relating to an executioner" is already well confirmed with dictionaries. So here is the third quotation in which "kaci" is definitely used in a figurative sense: https://www.google.pl/books/edition/Wi%C4%99%C5%BA/m25IAQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=kaciego&dq=kaciego&printsec=frontcover Olaf (talk) 10:42, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Hythonia As the lister. Vininn126 (talk) 10:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Two examples more:
 * , look for "kacia": "Lecz czy dzielić się musiał wymiotem? Skąd ta wiedza, ta pewność kacia, ze stojąc pod płotem sam nie grzęźnie po uszki otulon swych projekcji błotem?" - refers to an unpleasant situation, but not an execution.
 * , look for "kaciej", second item: "w pewnym momencie poczujesz bunt, potem nienawiść do swego krzywdziciela, a nawet chęć zemsty. Dążąc do ich realizacji "przyobleczesz szaty" kata, by w kolejnym żywocie odpłacić się temu człowiekowi za wszelkie krzywdy, jakie ci uczynił. Po pewnym okresie swej kaciej działalności może pojawić się poczucie winy."
 * Olaf (talk) 11:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * (Sorry, this took a bit to type up, the reply interface lags a lot on this page.) : Addressing the latter part, I was a bit unsure about this request, yeah. It is a rather standard derivative, so maybe the definition was fine like that? Still, I was slightly alarmed by the fact WSJP lists two definitions for kat ("executioner" and "tormentor"), whereas for kaci it specifies that it refers to the sense "executioner", so I felt that it's better to be safe than sorry.
 * The latter two examples seem fine; the first, hm. It seems ambiguous? It might be employing the adjective, but given it speaks of what's happening during an execution, it seems more likely that it's a noun concord (i.e. two nouns -- kat zabobonnik in the singular -- because, like, there would assumedly be torturers present, and they'd be superstitious as well). I don't know if the Criteria for Inclusion would allow the second quote, but at the very least it's proof the word's used that way. Hythonia (talk) 11:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, oops -- never mind. Hadn't seen your last comment prior to typing this up. Yeah, this looks like a closed case. Thank you. Hythonia (talk) 11:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

হায়রে লন্ডন শান্তি নাই
Bengali. — S URJECTION / T / C / L / 06:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

یوگیہ
Urdu. This word must be kept on! This word is found on Hindustani Dictionary.
 * : The original RFD nomination, which I have changed to RFV, says "Not Urdu. Transliteration of ." Urdu is only half of Hindustani, and it is not just Hindi spelled with a different script. We need to see evidence that this is used in Urdu, not just Hindi. Chuck Entz (talk) 10:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

өкүлкеңеш
Kyrgyz. Two supposed calques from Finnish, both added by User:Almanbet Janışev and have no ghits outside of Wiktionary. Most entries in Category:Kyrgyz neologisms appear suspect in general. — S URJECTION / T / C / L / 19:41, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

 * I need to add that this user has been adding entries from other Wiktionaries not checking if they match our WT:CFI or not. Vininn126 (talk) 12:45, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

= May 2023 =

ne manuti
Albanian. Recently added by an anon. I don't know Albanian, so I don't know if this is a real term or something somebody made up one day. —Mahāgaja · talk 22:21, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * RFV-deleted — S URJECTION / T / C / L / 15:43, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

มือฝรั่ง
Thai. Unattested at all. No usage of the term is found anywhere. Google search returned no usage of this term. --YURi (talk) 20:19, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

ยาเม็ดสีทอง
Thai. The attestation of the term is in doubt.

 * 1) Regarding Definition 1 - Not sure what the OP really wanted to refer to. But the def provided seems to refer to any medicine that is gold in colour, which, if so, would constitute an SOP.
 * 2) Regarding definition 2 - Never once have I seen this term used in this sense. Google search returned no usage of the term in this sense.

--YURi (talk) 20:25, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

kuvantum
Turkish. Tagged by User:Xenos melophilos. Defined as a misspelling. As a standalone term it has more than three apparently citable uses. It's harder to tell if it is a rare misspelling (RFD material), common misspelling, or alternative form. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Verificated in kuantum. TDK is a government foundation and whatever it says is the official language. If the words taken from foreign languages are taken in a late period, TDK generally prefers to take their spelling close to the original. Quantum is already an academic word, we don't use it in our daily life. So, kuvantum can not be a dialect. It's a misspelling. We spell it kuantum and read this word as it is written. BurakD53 (talk) 22:30, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you're right about RFD. BurakD53 (talk) 22:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

пызь
Komi-Permyak. The word is missing in the "Komi-Permyak-Russian Dictionary (1985)" and "Russian-Komi-Permyak Dictionary (1946)". Burmort (talk) 19:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

überfreut
German. Tagged by an IP editor but not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:57, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

beennen
Low German. An IP editor requested verification of the past participles ebeennt and gebeennt in the inflection table. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

bedüden
Low German. An IP editor requested verification of the past participles ebedüüdt and gebedüüdt in the inflection table. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:01, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

graag
Low German. Tagged by an IP editor, not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:03, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Gröyter
Low German or Low Saxon. The L2 says Low Saxon, the head template says Low German. Tagged by an IP editor but not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:05, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * nds = Low German (strict sense) = Low Saxon -- it all means the same. (nds-nl = Dutch Low German/Saxon has an addition.)
 * gröyter (small g) is more likely, but still questionable.

Rüen
Low German. Rfv-sense: "dog". Tagged by an IP editor who added a sense as an oblique form of. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

starfsemi
Icelandic. Rfv-sense: industriousness. Tagged by but not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

nashke
Albanian. Can we source that? Sławobóg (talk) 21:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Горішні Плавні
Ukrainian. Rfv-sense: nowheresville. Tagged by User:Underfell Flowey, not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 02:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * At some stage the renaming caused a storm of memes in Ukrainian and Russian at some period but the sense is wrong, IMO. Google "Горішні Плавні мем" to see meme examples. Since the name sounded funny, someone may have assigned that meaning but I don't think it was anywhere widespread.
 * Added three sources, I think it should be good now — NickK (talk) 01:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

anapilin
Lithuanian. — Fenakhay ( حيطي · مساهماتي ) 18:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

abad
Indonesian. Rfv-sense: eternal era. Tagged by User:Rex Aurorum years ago, not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

ଷ଼
Oriya. Tagged by an IP editor years ago with the comment "ṣô + nukta becoming /ɻ/ does not make sense". This may be meant as a request for verification of pronunciation /ɻɔ/. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

snoppstoppare
Swedish. Tagged by User:Christoffre, not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:15, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

evrenk
Turkish. Tagged by User:Afb2011. If it exists it might be spelled evreng, the Ottoman pronunciation given in R:tr:NewRedhouse. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:33, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

RFV label added by Kwekwlos, but not listed here. DonnanZ (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Republiik van Albaanje
Limburgish. Tagged by an IP editor with the comment
 * As:
 * nothing at Google and Google Books.
 * officialese names are uncommon in vernacular and minority languages.
 * per Eupen dialect, the dialect is Ripuarian (part of Central Franconian) and not Limburgish.

Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

köferik
Salar. Tagged by User:BurakD53 with the comment "I think it is misunderstanding of köprik “breast”, page 393". Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:14, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

بريمة
South Levantine Arabic. Rfv-sense: corkscrew. Tagged by User:AdrianAbdulBaha, not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:24, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

جمبري
South Levantine Arabic. Tagged by User:Fenakhay. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Deffo present in Jordan. Carrefour Jordan sells it. Something about fishing in Jordan, and a cooking show, although this is some nice Modern Standard Arabic the girl is talking; it is generally correct to assume terms for flora and fauna to belong to either literary language or dialect if found in one unless there is contrary evidence. My search is, as Jordan is between Egyptian and Hijazi Arabic where it is used because of influence from Egyptian Arabic; apparently here borrowed from Egyptian into Jordanian phonology, hence unexpected . Fay Freak (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Artognou
Proto-Brythonic. It's a given name attested in the inscription PATERN[--] COLI AVI FICIT ARTOGNOU COL[I] FICIT, which is Latin, which strongly suggests this is a Latin transcription of a Proto-Brythonic name, and not a Proto-Brythonic term in its own right. By comparison, the reconstructed form would be.

I should note that this has been RFV'd before ( - discussion here), but the notice was removed after 2 days with the baffling reasoning that it is attested, without actually addressing the fact that the dispute is over which language it's actually attested in. Can we please clear this up once and for all? Theknightwho (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Ἀργεντοκόξος
Proto-Brythonic. According to the etymology, it's attested in a Koine Greek text as a transcription of a Proto-Brythonic given name. Same issue as ' and ', in that the attestation makes it a Koine Greek term (which we group under Ancient Greek), and not a Proto-Brythonic term. Theknightwho (talk) 17:50, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

سلطعون
South Levantine Arabic. More seafood skepticism from User:Fenakhay. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:37, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

جنسية
South Levantine Arabic. Rfv-sense: sexuality. Tagged by an IP editor. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:41, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

rikìta
Vlax Romani. Tagged by the creator of the definition. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:44, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

застреха
Russian. Rfv-sense: eavestrough. Tagged in 2017 by D1gggg whose account is now globally locked. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:54, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

 * @Vox Sciurorum: The term can be referenced in Ushakov, Ozhegov, Zaliznyak, orthographic, etc. dictionaries: The links are all here: Ushakov gives a usage example: "Воробьи́ под застре́хой вьют гнёзда." Kindly retract the rfv. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:37, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

злоумыслить
Russian. Rfv-sense: To lie in wait. Tagged by User:Allahverdi Verdizade. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

sattha
Pali. Rfv-sense: seventh

looks like a typo to me. --RichardW57 (talk) 00:17, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

 * Delete --RichardW57 (talk) 14:04, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I've traced the spelling with the aspiration back to Duroiselle's A Practical Grammar of the Pāli Language, Third edition, 1921. Paragraph 251 gives the form as 'sattha', while Paragraph 275 gives it as unaspirated .  I suspect interference from adjacent  and ; their underdotting in the text has to be taken on faith - it is not visible in the scan of the original. --RichardW57m (talk) 09:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

гач
Komi-Permyak. The word is not in Kuznetsov's Dictionary (1946) or the Krivoschekova-Gantman Dictionary (1985). Burmort (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

hode
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "testicle".

WNT gives one mention, but that's about it for now. Thadh (talk) 12:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

ఞాయిఱు
Telugu. — Fenakhay ( حيطي · مساهماتي ) 16:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

അച്ചുതൻ
Malayalam. — Fenakhay ( حيطي · مساهماتي ) 16:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

 * I have added gloss for given name . Vis M (talk) 19:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

എപ്പൊൾ
Malayalam. — Fenakhay ( حيطي · مساهماتي ) 16:51, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

 * It was the spelling for in older works.s:ml:Page:CiXIV40.pdf/125, s:ml:Page:CiXIV133.pdf/546, and several others.
 * I think I created this entry by mistake while sourcing missing lemmas from older works, and then realized the mistake and immediately added the archaic label. Vis M (talk) 19:03, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

 * , The dictionary seems to transcribe all ō and ē as o/e as in വെഗം, എന്നെക്കും, ഇനിമെൽ, തൊറും, തലെന്നാൾ, ദ്രൊഹം, could be a Grantha feature though im not sure whether the early Malayalam script really lacked distinction between ō/o, ē/e? also transcribing the kuttiyalukaram as unmarked though that was common before AleksiB 1945 (talk) 09:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

anupādāaparitassanā
Pali. Hiatus is odd, especially given its absence in the claimed antonym. : Where's this word been seen? --RichardW57 (talk) 21:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe this is obvious, but the hiatus is because both parts of the compound are negated, not just the first. I dont know this language ... would an ā normally swallow a following a, even if that /a/ is  a very important morpheme? — Soap — 14:53, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Some of the X-not-X compounds have looked very unclear, but I forgot the first rule - try Google. I've now found seemingly good quotations and will put at least one of them up tonight. --RichardW57m (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It's an SoP (as in the looming German/Swedish/Sanskrit problem) and coal mine mess! First durable source hyphenates, and also hyphenates the feminine form of the positive, but not the neuter form of the positive. --RichardW57m (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * This is RFV, not RFD. Theknightwho (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I misread the accusative of the feminine form as a neuter form. The Sinhala script version has the phrase or whatever as a single word, so we now have quotes for one word in the Sinhala script, and for hyphenated and two words in the Roman script.  They're not independent. --RichardW57 (talk) 00:12, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Is this word associated with a specific religious or philosophical tradition? If so, it should probably be labeled.__Gamren (talk) 12:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * If you're up to identifying the tradition, go ahead and label it. I'd be tempted to say it's a Buddhist term, but for all I know it might just be a Theravadin concept.  It might not Sanskritise well. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know anything about this topic.__Gamren (talk) 14:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

caturaṅga
Pali.

Even an LDL needs some evidence of existence for its words. Can find no evidence of this noun in Pali. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, it's got two descendants listed at the bottom of the चतुरङ्ग page. Would these two be better explained as direct loans from Sanskrit? — Soap — 09:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It works - dating of the loans would help. The compilers of Thailand's Royal Institute Dictionary gave up on trying to decide whether words were borrowed from Sanskrit or Pali.  In this instance, I think borrowing via Thai would also be possible.  The word exists in Thai, though not on Wiktionary.  The homonymous adjective in Pali has a ghostly existence - it can be seen as an intermediate element of compounds, but is also borderline SoP. --RichardW57 (talk) 10:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

patodaka
Pali. Rfv-sense: 'spur'

Dictionaries record. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

= June 2023 =

āraññaka
Pali. Rfv-sense: an ascetic forest-dwelling

Put simply, what evidence do we have that this was (or is) used as a noun in Pali?--RichardW57m (talk) 13:00, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

vacati
Pali. Rfv-sense: to say

Both vacati and vatti appear to be grammarians' fancies, and Childers writes, "Saddiníti gives the present forms vatti and vacati, neither of which I have yet met with in texts, vadati in Pali being generally substituted for the present of वच्." .

Geiger makes no reference to vatti in his discussion of athematic verbs. In his grammar, Thomas Oberlies uses the expression '(*)vatti' to refer to the forms from the stem. Neither grammar makes any mention of vacati.

As the Saddiníti refers to them, there may be some merit in fashioning an explanation of the terms on Wiktionary. (Note that Oberlies' usage is in English.) --RichardW57 (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

 * Please note that I've sent to RfV. RichardW57 (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

creamh
Scottish Gaelic: ''6. beer''

I cannot find this on Am Faclair Beag, and neither can I verify it with native or fluent speakers. This will probably need removal unless the sense can be proven satisfactorily. –Konanen (talk) 13:01, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Pinging, who added this sense. I wonder if there wasn't some confusion going on with , which means 'beer' in Old Irish and used to mean that in ScG as well (but no longer does). —Mahāgaja · talk 13:13, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That may indeed be where Dwelly got it from. I don't generally add definitions solely based on Dwelly anymore; there seem to be a lot of errors like this. Potentially thanks to half-literate native speakers conflating separate words based on similar pronunciation, or maybe the error lies with Dwelly himself. Anyway, this definition may as well be removed. embryomystic (talk) 22:32, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. –Konanen (talk) 12:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

бобув
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Thadh (talk) 13:30, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

ἀπέταλος
Ancient Greek

RFV for the 🇨🇬 spelling ἀπέταλος; the 🇨🇬 spelling,, is attested in the feminine accusative singular absolute and the feminine nominative singular comparative  in 🇨🇬 sources. 🇨🇬 is acknowledged to exist, but is that Attic form attested earlier, perhaps during the 🇨🇬 period? Beware Google Books' OCR errors when searching old Greek texts; e.g., this purported instance of ἀπέταλος is in fact ? and this one supposedly of ἀπετάλου is in fact. 0DF (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

ဆီ့
Eastern Pwo. Somehow misspellings of ဆင့်, ဆီ ? Thadh (talk) 14:51, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Sense "ten" is cited, but sense "chicken" remains. Thadh (talk) 18:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

ဆ်ုဂုၮ်ႋဆ်ုတာ
Eastern Pwo. Pwo doesn't even have creaky voice... Thadh (talk) 15:06, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

ထေဝ်
Eastern Pwo. Etymology 1 is seemingly a misspelling of, but the second one I couldn't find in any paper. Thadh (talk) 22:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

STEDT and Proto-Karen papers   may help you with pronunciations on both Eastern/Western Pwo (they read and write different). Look for more papers/journals by Luangthongkum around 2013. I don't know how to write Eastern Pwo (I think I lost) but we can spell back by Kato pp. 31-40 (Buddhist system is prefered, not older Christian) responding to reading. (But I do have Western Pwo lexicon.)--Octahedron80 (talk) 04:47, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Those are useful papers for Proto-Karen, but do they actually include Eastern Pwo terms? The second paper describes "N-Pwo" and "S-Pwo" as the Pwo lects spoken in Lamphun and Uthai Thani, respectively. Both are in Thailand, whereas Eastern Pwo is spoken mostly in Myanmar, and seem to be Northern Pwo lects, instead. Thadh (talk) 07:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

 * There are 4 Pwo Karen languages. Southern Pwo in Thailand is the subset ~5% of Eastern Pwo (kjp) in both countries. Western Pwo (pwo) is purely spoken in Myanmar near Irrawaddy delta. There are also Northern Pwo (pww) around Mae Hong Son, Tak, south of Chiang Mai, and surely Lamphun; and Phrae (Northeastern) Pwo (kjt) around Phrae, Lampang, and Chiang Rai. pww and kjt are purely spoken in Thailand.

 * Proto-Karen papers only mention Southern Pwo that can assume Eastern Pwo having same reading. Additionally, I just found the Pwo of Om Koi (very south district of Chiang Mai; it's Northern Pwo) paper that writes in Thai system.

 * Uthai Thani that speaks Southern Pwo is Eastern Pwo either; they are separated group. So, you can imply N-Pwo means pww and S-Pwo means kjp. This is widely dividing. It may have different details between provinces, or even villages.--Octahedron80 (talk) 18:02, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * if you compare the pronunciations of S-Pwo as given in the Proto-Karen papers, and the Hpa-an Pwo forms given by Kato, you'll see they are widely different, both in tone and vowel quality. How certain are you that S-Pwo is indeed an Eastern Pwo lect rather than, for instance, a Northern one? Thadh (talk) 19:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Because Phetchaburi, Kanchanaburi, Ratchaburi, and Uthai Thani provinces that speak Southern Pwo are located near Mon state. (They migrated with Mons since the ancient time.) (See at - Also spoken in:). Also noted in from the beginning. Have you check Glottolog yet?   About Om Koi people and nearby, it is surely Northern Pwo. Large community there. Om Koi is also the word in the language. (I guess, because it's not Thai word.)--Octahedron80 (talk) 20:35, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

 * However, I cannot sure how different between the regional Southern Pwo and the greater Eastern Pwo. Same word can be vary in many places (similar to Chinese e.g.) I didn't know exactly where the authors go to interview. I still want to have some lexicon, if we could read them from that Incubator. I am sure one thing: people in Thailand will write it with Thai.--Octahedron80 (talk) 20:47, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * As I've said in the first message, the second paper you've sent (A view on Proto-Karen phonology and lexicon) provides a location for the Southern Pwo fieldwork, on page vii: It's a village in the easternmost district of Uthai Thani. That's quite a long way from the border region that Eastern Pwo occupies. In fact, this paper suggests that the Thai varieties of Pwo are not Eastern at all, and rather a "West-Central Pwo" language, which is mutually unintelligible with the Eastern varieties of Myanmar. I guess we're about to have yet another Pwo code? Thadh (talk) 21:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

PS You may want to contact 咽頭べさ because he is a Mon person that collecting ancient literacies that may have Eastern Pwo Karen source because EPK system derived from Mon (ask him at Mon Wiktionary).
 * Considering what this person claimed about themselves and their history of communication I am hesitant to do so, I doubt they will have anything useful to add. Thadh (talk) 07:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't mind if Eastern Pwo words will be deleted. Because I have no more papers to show. Better ask 咽頭べさ for tangible lexicon or news etc. About Northern Pwo (Om Koi) and Western Pwo, I already have resources. --Octahedron80 (talk) 21:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

ဓဝ်ႉ
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 22:59, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:04, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

ဓဝ်ႉသစ္စာ
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 23:00, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

နန်ႉ
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

နန်ႉထဝ့်ပြာသတ်
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 23:01, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:06, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

ogrodzenioza
Polish. Protologism/neologism that is barely attested and only limited to internet usage. The exact definition of the term is nowhere to be found. JimiY ☽ ru 07:20, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

 * I've added two cites from journal-sites for now. There are plenty of other Internet hits, which we sometimes accept according to WT:CFI. It's definitely not a protologisms, it's been around since at least 2019 based on the sources. The current definition is fine based on the quotations. Vininn126 (talk) 07:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I've also added a mention from Poradnik językowy. Vininn126 (talk) 08:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

ပ်ုဖၠုံယှင်
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 14:17, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

ပ်ုဖၠုံယှိုဝ်ႉ
Eastern Pwo. Usual word seems to just be ဖၠုံ. Thadh (talk) 14:20, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

ပၞာင့်
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 14:25, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Cited. Thadh (talk) 22:38, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

ဘာႉ
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 14:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

လီႋ
Eastern Pwo. Rfv-sense: "bile". as the one who added the sense, maybe you remember where you got it from? I can't find it in the usual papers by Kato. Thadh (talk) 15:22, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't remember how I got that. See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

သြုံ့
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 18:41, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

သၟိင့်
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 18:44, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

ဟုံ့
Eastern Pwo. Thadh (talk) 18:45, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:11, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

အှ်ဆံင်းလာႋဆါ်
Eastern Pwo. Again some phonemes that simply don't exist in Pwo. Thadh (talk) 21:00, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

See --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:10, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

porozjebywać
Polish.

Can-bơ-rơ
Vietnamese, meaning "Canberra" (i.e. the capital of Australia). Are these real? The actual term seems to be just. Theknightwho (talk) 01:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * : The first one was created by someone who has done terrible things to Japanese, but is a native speaker of Vietnamese. The second one, as with all the others below, is probably from a southeastern Australia kid who likes to pretend they know a lot of very difficult languages, but really should stick to Minecraft. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:38, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Maybe the entire Vietnamese language should stick to mai-cờ-ráp, but is cited. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:44, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * is also cited, and I’m quite sure is also citable. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 09:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Ma-ni-la
Vietnamese. Meaning "Manila" (capital of the Philippines). Theknightwho (talk) 01:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Po Mo-re-xbi
Vietnamese. Port Moresby (capital of Papua New Guinea).

Am Tước Đàm
Vietnamese. Amsterdam (capital of the Netherlands). Theknightwho (talk) 01:30, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

nôrodowò
Kashubian. Originally from Robert Goh (2018 March 29) English Kashubian Lexicon, no longer a trusted source. Vininn126 (talk) 13:05, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

nôrodowòsc
Kashubian. Originally from Robert Goh (2018 March 29) English Kashubian Lexicon, no longer a trusted source. Vininn126 (talk) 13:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

bun
Albanian. Deleted out of process. Thadh (talk) 15:42, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

नम
Hindi. Rfv-sense: noun. Never heard it, also unable to find quotations in books or articles. Mentioned only in R:hi:McGregor as doubtful (with (?)). —Svārtava · 07:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

 * @Svartava It's also in Platts: "s.f.(?) Moisture; moistness, humidity; — dew"
 * Not sure whether the question mark only concerns the gender here. Exarchus (talk) 10:42, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Odia (Oriya) characters with nuqta
There are several entries in the Odia (Oriya) writing system such as କ଼, ଖ଼, ଗ଼, ଜ଼, ଝ଼, ଫ଼ and ଷ଼ and there is potential for more. It should be noted that a similar argument was submitted for the ICANN's Root Zone LGR for the Odia script in 2018. I was involved in this public consultation and interviewed several linguists, Odia-language experts including university professors, and Unicode and other technology experts. The outcome of these conversations affirming that the existing କ, ଖ, ଗ, ଚ, ଜ, ଫ suffice for all loanwords and other languages sharing the Odia script are documented in two white papers (1 and 2). At the end, the proposed nuqta combination to କ, ଖ,ଗ, ଚ and ଜ were discarded on the basis of non-availability of citable resource nor widespread use, and only ଡ and ଢ nuqta combinations were allowed. Interestingly, all the nuqta combined non-widely used Odia characters in question (କ଼, ଖ଼, ଗ଼, ଜ଼, ଝ଼, ଫ଼ and ଷ଼), except ଗ଼ which was created by a non-native speaker, were created by IP users. These characters do not comply with any of the attestation criteria. They should be deleted or redirected to existing equivalents. Psubhashish (talk) 22:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

mhła
Upper Sorbian. I didn't find it in any of the dictionaries we have in the reference templates. Stríðsdrengur · 21:54, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

sĩ
In this discusssion, User:PhanAnh123 and I, who are both native Vietnamese speakers, agreed that we never saw sĩ being used as an adjective glossed as "(archaic) intelligent; wise; well educated". Two Vietnamese dictionaries (Hồ Ngọc Đức, Nguyễn & Phan ) which I can access, both classify sĩ as a noun. I personally vote yes for deleting just the "Adjective" subsection,, , , what do you think? Erminwin (talk) 02:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * , must go through RfV before it can be deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Erminwin: Yeah, sounds fair enough. Most dictionaries (Từ điển - Lê Văn Đức, Từ điển mở - Hồ Ngọc Đức, Đại Từ điển Tiếng Việt, Từ điển - Nguyễn Lân, etc.) classify "sĩ" as noun. Seriously though, I don't know why you feel the need to go through the whole RfD and RfV process, seems a bit overkill. Billcipher123 (talk) 08:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree. It's not a matter of the entire page being deleted by an admin, just removal of some content on the page. If the editors who have already discussed it agree and published dictionaries agree, just remove the content. You don't have to wait for the formal RFV to be complete. If someone later does turn up a noun usage, it's easy enough to re-add the info. —Mahāgaja · talk 08:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This is not a question of “feeling the need”: this is the rules of Wiktionary; and it is not overkill, as being a native speaker does not in any way guarantee knowledge of all words (let alone archaic ones) and other dictionaries often have lacunae (especially when it comes to archaic words). At least Fumiko Take should have a chance to tell us where she found this sense, and maybe other editors (currently active or otherwise) may have knowledge of manuscripts none of us has read. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Native speakers are not aware of tons of words. It's about what has quotes and uses, not about what our given editor base is familiar with. Vininn126 (talk) 08:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

cặc
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: "no". – Nguyên Hưng Trần (talk) 13:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

lokesyen
Malay. — Fenakhay ( حيطي · مساهماتي ) 15:44, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Ὡρομάζης
Ancient Greek. (logeion only finds and, both in "Bailly 2024".) --19:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * PLATO, Alcibiades 1 122a: --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:47, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Also occurs in (some) printed editions, like: . --14:28, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

galwo
Old Prussian. I couldn't find a RfV section on the entry, so I'm creating my own. I've added two resources with meaning and etymology explained. However, finding actual usage was tricky; the specific sense of “head of the shoe” has been provided once in the Elbing dictionary, and it could as well be some sort of semantic narrowing of, or even a misspelling thereof. Should the verification be failed, I'll consider adding it to as an alternative form. JimiY ☽ ru 09:13, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

benna
Gaulish. Is it actually attested, or should it be moved to Reconstruction: space? —Mahāgaja · talk 16:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

 * quotes Festus: “Benna lingua Gallica genus vehiculi appellatur, unde vocantur combennones eadem benna sedentes.” lingua Gallica = in/from the Gallic/Gaulish language. Let's discuss if this qualifies as Latin or Gaulish. Similar cases:
 * nepa (L&S: "acc. to Paul. ex Fest. .., an African word: Afrorum linguā est .."), though this is also attested in proper Latin.
 * sipoax (Pseudo-Apuleius: "A Graecis dicitur arnoglossa, [...], Daci sipoax, [...]"), sinupyla, 𐤒𐤔𐤀
 * --2003:DE:3717:71DD:A495:E64D:4F92:290C 21:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * So it's not attested in a Gaulish-language text; it's attested in a Latin text that says "The Gauls call this benna". I don't know whether Wiktionary has a settled custom on how to treat attestations like that; it's a gray area. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

keana
Hawaiian. Unsourced and not in any dictionary on Wehewehe. - saph 🍏 20:50, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * An obvious error for kaena, so I moved it there. The quote in the entry had that spelling until an IP "corrected" it, and that spelling is in the Combined Hawaiian Dictionary, while "keana" is only in a few apparently unrelated place names. Let's leave this open for now, and if anyone has any evidence to the contrary, we can always move it back. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. - saph 🍏 21:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

not the yellow from the egg
German. Neither German not English, afaict, but an instance of interlanguage that we don't need to document. PUC – 13:56, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Not interlanguage (by WT's definitions), and edit summary already contained enough examples, and it's in "widespread use":, , , , . --14:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

hōʻaʻā
Hawaiian. Pukui & Elbert gives and the entry is unsourced. - saph 🍏 21:16, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Uy Nhĩ Sĩ
Vietnamese. I also question that means Wales, as given in the translation table there. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 09:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Bagong Silandiya
Tagalog. moved -i- to -e- with reason "Don't follow Wikipedia". I couldn't find any hits for -e- on Google, and -i- has results but not many. --kc_kennylau (talk) 00:28, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

 * @Kc kennylau Google Books should give you legitimate results. Tagalog Wikipedia lacks quality control as of the moment due to lack of volunteers. They shifted to Silandiya because of the English pronunciation of Zealand but you cant find that in Google Books. The reason you can find more Silandiya in Google right now because of Tagalog Wikipedia itself being the first ones to appear in search results but the Si- isn't actually used. I'm fine with both Bagong Selandiya and Silandiya removed, as Nuweba Selanda/Selandiya has more results. 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 02:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the information. Google Books give 2 results for Se-, and more results for Si-, but the top 10 results for Si- are mentions and not uses (they are vocabulary books for different languages). --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:58, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Kc kennylau I talked with Tagalog Wikipedia editors and apparently "Bagong Silandiya" has been an error in Wikipedia since 2019. They now corrected it to "Nuweba Selandiya." 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

knirbeln
German. 1. Grimm have it with: "fränk. Schm. 2, 375, henneb. Fromm. 3, 132", where the abbreviations mean: So in Grimm it's not a "German" (de) term, but from some dialect (vmf, bar, whatever). 2. Duden, DWDS, zeno don't have this term. --14:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
 * fränk. = fränkisch
 * Schm. = Schmeller, Joh. Andr.: bayerisches Wörterbuch
 * henneb. = hennebergisch
 * Fromm. = Frommann, Karl (ed.): die deutschen Mundarten, 1854ff. - here referring to G. Brückner, Die hennebergische Mundart
 * BTW: In the meanwhile, was created with references. --22:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

នំបុ័ងអឌ្ឍចន្ទ
Khmer. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:49, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

ᬘᭂᬫᬦᬶ
Balinese. --kc_kennylau (talk) 14:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

gijlui
Dutch, only RFV concerning the label 'regional'. Regional (Belgian) variants that no doubt exist are: gelle, golle, gulle, gijlie, gellie. But 'gijlui zijt' in Google Search only gives 3 results: 2 books from 19th century (so archaic) and Wiktionary. Exarchus (talk) 20:33, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

 * By the way, the translation of 'Gijlieden zijt' as 'You lot are' at is inappropriate as the most common context where you would find that phrase is in archaic bible translations. Exarchus (talk) 21:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

 * I think this is indeed not regional: ( born in Amsterdam, putting the word in the mouth of, addressing Rembrandt in plain Dutch);   ( in , putting the word in the mouth of an inhabitant of the Veluwe who speaks plain Dutch);  (article in an  by a doctor, putting the word in the mouth of a woman speaking plain Dutch).  --Lambiam 22:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Lambiam My first idea when asking this question was actually whether this was used in any region today (like 'gelle' etc. no doubt is). But maybe the intention of that label was simply to say that 'gijlui' is/was archaic, but only in certain regions. That might still be true, because your first two examples are from people from the province of Gelderland. It was definitely more colloquial than 'gijlieden'. Exarchus (talk) 06:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * From Gelderland, but in one case a speaker born in 1626 and fictionally speaking in 1642, and for the other case a fictional character born around 1743 and speaking in 1808, so this is not helpful for deciding regional use today. --Lambiam 07:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * True, I think note 6) in the Dutch personal pronouns template needs rewriting, because it suggests that 'gijlui' or 'gijlieden' are commonly used in that form. Exarchus (talk) 07:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Maus
German. Rfv-sense: "(colloquial, vulgar) cunt, mickey (vulva, vagina)". This had been HTML commented out with the comment "not sure". - -sche (discuss) 15:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

дась
Komi-Permyak. The word is not found in the following dictionaries that I have consulted: В. Н. Коколева 1993: Коми-Пермяцко-Русский Русско-Коми-Пермяцкий Словарь, Р. М. Баталова 1985: Коми-Пермяцко-Русскӧй Словарь and П. С. Кузнецов 1940: Русско-Коми-Пермяцкӧй Словарь. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 08:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Krvatkondre
Sranan Tongo. I cannot attest this outside the Wikiverse. I suppose it's a neologism created by a Sranan Tongo Wikipedia editor.--Appolodorus1 (talk) 11:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The anonymous IP editor, blocked for block evasion, created entries for the supposed names of Croatia in Abkhaz, Acehnese, Chechen, Cherokee, Dhivehi, Doteli, Dutch, English, Faroese, Gottscheerish, Guarani, Haitian Creole, Hawaiian, Japanese, Kabyle, Kannada, Kazakh, Khmer, Korean, Lao, Latgalian, Lithuanian, Lower Sorbian, Mandarin, Mongolian, Northern Luri, Oromok, Polish, Punjabi, Samogitian, Sinhalese, Slovak, Somali, Sranan Tongo, Swazi, Turkish, Urdu, Uyghur, Veneto, Volapük, Wallon, Waray, Wolof, Zazaki, Zealandic, and Zulu. There seems no reason to assume they are, specifically, a Sranantongo editor. Apparently, they got hold of a source listing names of countries in many languages, possibly the "Also Known As" section at mapcarta. Croatia is not the only country that got this treatment. The article on Croatia on the Sranantongo Wikipedia is also named, but the editors on this Wikipedia do not know Sranantongo and just make up words, so this carries no weight. The letter ⟨v⟩ does not occur in Sranantongo orthography, and an ⟨r⟩ that is not syllable-final is always followed by a vowel, so this made-up term is not even believably Sranantongo. --Lambiam 21:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Рѡсро
Old East Slavic.

Looks to be completely bogus with a bogus etymology. Inclined to speedy. Vininn126 (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

 * Speedied by Surjection. --Svartava (talk) 14:57, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

шеренге
Eastern Mari. I didn't find it in any of the dictionaries I have as a reference. Stríðsdrengur (talk)
 * Found one mention here. Thadh (talk) 13:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, I misread, it's actually шереҥге with a ҥ. Pretty sure old orthographies used н instead of ҥ though, so I'm sure this form is also findable. Thadh (talk) 13:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

दर्ज
Hindi. Rfv-sense: Noun. Occurs in dictionaries R:Platts and R:hi:McGregor, I suspect it may be because the Arabic etymon is a noun. --Svartava (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

tech othrais
Old Irish. As intuitive as "house of illness" as a term for "hospital" is, I can't find this anywhere, not even in Middle Irish (the language that most dubious terms labeled Old Irish turn out to be in). —Mahāgaja · talk 21:09, 19 July 2024 (UTC)