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.
Two cites have been added. The first doesn't use the term, so I'm not sure of its relevance. The second cite is "A great deal has been written about polygamy as a traditional marriage system in all Africa of which Iboland is a part". I don't think this is an example of definition 3, but of definition 2 (And definition 2 strikes me as the non-idiomatic meaning, as Mglovesfun says). Furius (talk) 01:56, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Besides which, can we be sure that it's traditional marriage system and not traditional marriage system?Chuck Entz (talk) 02:07, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
This term is quite dependent on context: I'm sure there are jurisdictions where a traditional marriage involves exchange of livestock- do we want to even try capturing all of that variation? Chuck Entz (talk) 02:07, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
Separate question: why is "The marriage practises and customs of a particular culture." not rolled into the &lit?
To me the cites look as if they support the SoP &lit.
ergo: Failed. If someone wants to delete one or more other senses, let them go put in an RfV or RfD if they think it is worth it.
In addition, there are specific logical requirements for there to be two definitions for closely related senses. If B is a subset of A and the definition covers A, there is not a good reason to have a separate sense for B. It is only when B is not a subset of A (ie it is either disjoint or overlapping) that we need a separate sense. In this case B (polygamous marriages in societies in which such are traditional) seems to me to be a subset of A (SoP definition). All Bs are As. An "especially" is not appropriate. We don't have "including" lists as they could be endless. If there were a distinct term, that would belong under Hyponyms. DCDuringTALK 19:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
I have removed the unverified sense accordingly, and left the citations in support of the next definition up. bd2412T 19:50, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
Rfd-sense: The marriage practices and customs of a particular culture.
The sense that previously passed RFD is the third one, a marriage between a man and a woman (as opposed to a same-sex marriage). This one was added later and is just plain SoP in every thinkable way. -- Liliana• 20:30, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
I would agree with deleting it, but the third sense needs a context tag. It doesn't generally have that meaning, but only in certain customs/cultures where such marriages are considered traditional. In fact I've only ever seen it used concerning the US, so maybe a (US) tag? —CodeCat 20:35, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Delete the contested sense, as it is clearly covered by the first definition.--Dmol (talk) 20:59, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Delete, SoP (i.e., &lit). bd2412T 21:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Delete, SoP, included in &lit. DCDuringTALK 21:38, 7 August 2013 (UTC)