This means that, while adequate citation may not have been recorded, discussion has concluded that usage is widespread and content is accurate. Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so. See Wiktionary’s criteria for inclusion.
The phrasebook I stole from my mother this holiday has baisikeli as opposed to our baiskeli. Google gives more results for our listing, but the number one link is to us, so some of that may be our fault. Anyone know if they are both accepted or if we have a typo? - TheDaveRoss 21:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Ahh, the issue of foreign loanwords. I'd treat them both as acceptable, and have one be an alternative form of the other. -- Prince Kassad 21:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
[[sw:baiskeli]] was created by actual Swahili speakers, not a bot or whatnot, and the same is true of [[w:sw:baisikeli]] . . . so probably both are accepted? (And while it's true that we're the first Google hit for baiskeli, the other hits seem mostly to be genuine uses, not mentions, in which case, that's probably not our fault. A lot of sites automatedly follow our lead, but that shouldn't really affect usage.) —RuakhTALK 23:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Does anyone object to my keeping this? (Not marking it "RFV passed", per se, since no one added valid citations, but not deleting it, either, since decent evidence was presented, and the main problem seems to be a shortage of Swahili-speaking citers.) —RuakhTALK 19:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I am satisfied with a keep, this was mostly out of curiosity and to have other folks put eyes on the entry. - TheDaveRoss 20:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Closing as RFV kept via an exception to the typical RFV process, given the nominator is okay with the entry. The entry under discussion is this: Swahili Noun "baiskeli": "1. bicycle". --Dan Polansky 09:44, 17 March 2011 (UTC)