And it was reverted. Why is that? We have entries for Internet slang terms like pwn, noob or leet. This usage of the word "anonymous" is just about as common as those words are, being used all the time on just about every website I know that allows anonymous posting (notably the many 4chan-style image boards). So why wouldn't it merit being mentioned? Fyrius 17:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
It was removed because you put in it right in the middle of the verb section - destroying the links to the translations. Also you didn't provide any print references, or tell us what the plural was. SemperBlotto 10:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I suppose you mean the adjective section. Well, mea culpa. But that doesn't affect its worthiness of being mentioned, nor does the incompleteness of the entry. (I don't blame you though - I know vandal hunters are often a bit overzealous, especially with anonymous contributions.)
So the only problematic issue is the lack of references. I'm afraid that finding those would be a bit difficult, particularly because the communities wherein the term is used are often too dynamic to refer to. I believe image board posts typically last somewhere between a few days and a few hours. But on the other hand, I see noob has been accepted without any references too, so...
The plural on the other hand is easy to supply. It's usually pluralized with a regular plural, making it anonymouses. I've also seen the quasi-Latin plural anonymii, but that's not so common. So with that added, and with some example phrases thrown in, the entry would become:
I've never seen anonymouses used to refer to more than one anonymous, only anons (and that too is rare). Should we go with the proper English plural form or the real one? 22.214.171.124 04:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
I still don't understand why "anonymous" doesnt have a noun entry--126.96.36.199 17:15, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Failure to be verified may either mean that this information is fabricated, or is merely beyond our resources to confirm. 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. See also Wiktionary:Previously deleted entries.
"Without consideration of prestige, title, rank or background"; synonym "on the merits". This doesn't seem distinct from the usual sense (nameless), i.e. IF you consider something without a name, you MUST consider it on its merits. But that's not a sense of the word itself. Equinox◑ 03:25, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
See Citations:anonymous for a citation (which just happens to be the only citation there is for the word "anonymous"). "On the merits" is a much more precise definition of "anonymous" than the vaster definitions already in the entry. I apologize but something about Wiktionary's templates is making it very slow for me. Kraŭs (talk) 03:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
The citation just uses Anonymous in Alcoholics Anonymous and then uses the word anonymity. It is somewhat useful for the concept, but not the word. DCDuringTALK 09:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Unstriking. We should get three citations. DCDuringTALK 09:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
I'd say that isn't a citation of anonymous at all, Alcoholic Anonymous is the name of an organization, in the same way that a citation for the drinks brand Red Bull wouldn't be a suitable citation for either Red or Bull. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
I would actually want to pass this on widespread use ("anonymous buildings" is common, and they probably do have names and/or addresses), but I suppose the line is blurry. Equinox◑ 22:19, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
RFV-passed per Equinox and the citations Spinningspark links to. - -sche(discuss) 00:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)