Talk:wrength
English[edit]
I am finding cited usages in English, mostly online, as an informal term, particularly used in the Pharmaceutical/Medical industry. The aforementioned scannos for strength make finding true hits on Google difficult, as wrength is by no means as common a word as strength. Are we missing hits interspersed among the hundreds of thousands for strength? probably. Wrength isn't a protologism. It has a history in English and probably represents the ilk of word that flies under the radar for long periods of time without formal mention or recognition only to reappear suddenly (like sibling, leach, etc.) Leasnam 17:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
RFV discussion[edit]
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.
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.
Supposedly, "the state or quality of being wrong; wrongness". The first three hits yielded by google books:"wrength" are scannos for strength. † ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿
- Nonsense. Deleted. Equinox ◑ 00:56, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Wrength was removed from English due to RFD failure; however the word does exist for Middle English (one attestation) and Scots (added one citation). Perhaps still a protologism for English. Leasnam 15:07, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have just added an additional citation from a recent online book which makes a total of 3 for English. Recreated entry for English. Leasnam (talk) 20:27, 9 May 2012 (UTC)