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.
That is not to say that I would defend the entry. DCDuringTALK 20:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
The next breadcrumb, I think is "Lloyd's Encyclopedic Dictionary" 1895, published by the newspaper magnate, probably not a definitive source. I can't find the entry in question. DCDuringTALK 23:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
It is in my Latin dictionary - marked "NeoLatin - vary rare" SemperBlotto 22:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Which Latin dictionary is that? If you mean the electronic one you mentioned before, then I have not been impressed with what I've learned about it. It seems to have indiscriminately included words from numerous unnamed sources which therefore cannot be verified. --EncycloPetey 22:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
With no supporting citations after almost a year, I am removing the Latin section as having failed RfV. --EncycloPetey 18:33, 18 April 2009 (UTC)