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.
Used as a conjunction in running English text. 126.96.36.199 06:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
By geeks? Most people would say "or both" because it is simpler and shorter. Dbfirs 22:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
clocked out, but headword needs a noun sense. Would translations apply to the noun sense? DCDuringTALK 19:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Only occasion in which I might imagine using "inclusive or" (or its Finnish equivalent, rather) as conjunction is when reading out a logical formula in the same way as one reads out a mathematical formula (I think we have entries of the expressions used in reading out mathematical formulae). It may be hard to find a permanently archived quotation of this baby, though. Whether it merits an entry, I leave to others to decide. --Hekaheka 04:57, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
One way to handle this would be to write a usage note similar to that in the entry exclusive or. --Hekaheka 05:38, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
That seems right. I've added the noun. It is really the PoS that bothers me. I can imagine that in some geekspeak dialect this might be understood even in speech, but, in the absence of evidence, the conjunction should be deleted. DCDuringTALK 12:28, 15 October 2009 (UTC)