Talk:antipericatametanaparbeugedamphicribrationes

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

RFV[edit]

TK archive icon.svg

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, though feel free to discuss its conclusions.


I can see plenty of mentions. Can we have three independent actual uses please. SemperBlotto 08:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't we have some sort of special ruling for published nonce words and hapax legomena? —Angr 14:32, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Usage in a well-known work. Depends what translation this is, which translations of Rabelais into English are well-known, and which aren't? Problem is also it still might not be English; Rabelais stuck some Greek and Latin into his works. One version I read had the Greek in Greek script, surely we wouldn't call that English, so why would we call Latin in Latin script English? Mglovesfun (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
The full passage is here, it's pseudo-Latin (or perhaps real Latin, if you prefer), so if kept as used in a well-known work, should be as Latin, not English. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
It isn't labeled as English, it's labeled as Latin, and always has been. —Angr 15:46, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Oh wait, Latin as a dead language only requires one citation. So if you take that text to be Latin (and I'm not sure about it) then I'd pass with one citation. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

{{look}}

Meh, erring on the side of inclusion, I'll pass it. I've added a context tag to it much like the one I added to goniolatry. Re-open this RFV if you want to argue that the term should fail RFV, instead. - -sche (discuss) 07:28, 8 April 2012 (UTC)