Talk:swind

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Kiwima in topic RFV discussion: August 2016–May 2017
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RFD discussion[edit]

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion (permalink).

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


Discussion moved to WT:RFV#swind.


RFV discussion: August 2016–May 2017[edit]

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. 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.


Discussion moved from WT:RFD#swind.

I once heard one person use this word a couple of times, N.B., that person was over 80 at the time. Despite this, I am unable to find any Modern English citations for this word and as such I consider it to be quite inappropriate that this present word should be contained in Wiktionary for it degrades Wiktionary if thilk word, which cannot be independently verified, be contained therein. At the very least it should be moved to Middle English with a note indicating that it was still found in its oral form in Northern England up until the late 1970s. Mountebank1 (talk) 15:14, 21 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

(moved by Renard Migrant (talk) 15:52, 21 August 2016 (UTC))Reply

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 03:10, 30 May 2017 (UTC)Reply