Talk:更衬

RFD discussion: June 2014

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

更衬

Not a word in Chinese, despite that it was restored after an objection in RFV. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:19, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Delete. Wyang (talk) 23:28, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

@Wyang Thank you. Could you please comment further what you think "更衬" is and clarify the appearance of the string "更衬" in Google searches. It seems they are something like "... change linen..." or "more ... contrast" or whatever (衬 can be a beginning of another word) but none of the hits suggest it's used as a single word. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:04, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

From the top Google results:

韩国体育女主播新年写真传统服饰更衬娇艳。 — Traditional New Year clothing makes South Korean sports hostess look more delicate and charming in photography.

哪款古装更衬你？ — Which style of ancient costumes suits you better?

紫衣更衬金色腰带的高雅。 — The purple clothes set off a more elegant background for the golden belt.

摩羯女和哪个星座男会更衬阿？ — A guy from which astrological sign matches a Capricornus girl the best?

周迅朋克大片变身叛逆精灵烟熏妆更衬白皙美肌。 — Zhou Xun transforms into a rebellious pretty elf in the new film; the punk mascara on her shows off her fair complexion.

Wyang (talk) 02:28, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Great, thanks! So is the a remote chance that it is a word in a dialect you don't speak (even though the original entry's language was Mandarin)? --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

It's just a non-word sequence entered by a non-speaker. Nothing in the Comprehensive Dictionary of Chinese Dialects, or any of the Chinese-Chinese dictionaries, or Google search. Wyang (talk) 06:35, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Delete. Nonsense. Two characters that come together to say nothing intelligible. bd2412 T 03:57, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Deleted. bd2412 T 18:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

RFV discussion: June 2014

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

更衬

Couldn't find in dictionaries or such usage. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:05, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Delete. Wyang (talk) 05:12, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Cool. Speedied. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:16, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Uh, last I checked that's not how RFV is supposed to work. Why not give the word its fair 30 days, in case it exists and is just difficult to find? —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 05:20, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

I did check before RFV-ing, including Google books. It won't be archived for some time, so there will be a chance to dispute. Besides, we don't have many native speakers active. The entry was created by an anonymous user. I took the liberty to speedy. Do you have any objections to the deletion of this specific term or just objecting to the quick processing? --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:42, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm just objecting to the quick processing. I don't think 11 minutes is enough time to give people a chance to look for citations. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 05:51, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

The word seems simply wrong or mistranslation of two separate words thought to be one (to replace linen?), like 係小 not long ago. You might also want to check with User:Wyang, why he voted Delete. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:00, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

• I object to this quick closure of RFV. I ask restoration of the enty, and that this RFV runs its usual course. I ask that the "delete" votes in this RFV are withdrawn as inappropriate for RFV. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
• I've undeleted the page and unstruck the header of this thread. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:05, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Does it mean that from now on any silliness by IP-users is under protection of Polansky and Co? --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:15, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

No need to make it personal. The term in question is not obviously unattested (google:"更衬", google books:"更衬"), so it deserves our normal RFV process. Compare to #Rectatorium submitted below on this page; that is an item to be speedied as unattested, as per google:"Rectatorium". 更衬 was in Wiktionary since 18 October 2009‎, so it can wait for the conclusion of our regular RFV process; there really is no urgency. Also, by posting to RFV, you imply that you ask for attestation rather than for votes, so you really should not be closing a RFV 11 minutes after you've created it. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:25, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't know your true motives for wanting to restore it. All Google hits show two characters together as belonging to two words, that must be the reason for the original mix-up by the IP who may have used an online translator. We had hundreds of non-words, which were deleted on sight, even if they were unnoticed for a long time. I received confirmation from a native Mandarin speaker at the moment of hesitation that it's not a word, that's all there is to it. Speedy deletions should be allowed for stupidities, besides I was the nominator. I can withdraw the RFV, since I have created RFD for it. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

User:Wyang has given a substantial reasoning, why 更衬 is a non-word at Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion#更衬. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:42, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

I have deleted the entry; however, I will leave this discussion open for the full thirty days (until July 10). If sufficient CFI-worthy citations showing this to mean lining can be found in that time, the entry can be restored. bd2412 T 18:14, 27 June 2014 (UTC)