Talk:巫法

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Eirikr in topic RFV discussion: September 2011
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RFC discussion: August 2011

[edit]

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup.

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.


Synonyms / see alsos need serious pruning; readings wrong in many cases (there's no "wu" in Japanese, etc.); formatting is a mess. Another beauty by known-suspect IP users. The term *does* actually show use, entirely in manga as best I can tell. -- Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 15:52, 12 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Did some major surgery; synonyms might still need some pruning, but I've confirmed at least that the terms still listed are all valid. -- Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 16:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)Reply


RFV discussion: September 2011

[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.


Not listed in any dictionaries to hand. Google only shows 10 non-Wikimedia hits for the phrase anywhere on the web (google:"巫法の"+-wiki+-wiktionary), suggesting that this is a rare term indeed. Most (all?) of those hits seem to be the same sites as for 賢術 above. Given the dubious nature of many of the entries added by Special:Contributions/90.209.77.78, I'm adding this to RFV. -- Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 07:08, 19 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'd be happy to speedy-delete this one and the one above. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:14, 19 September 2011 (UTC)Reply
Ta then, please do. If and when folks can show actual use on more than a handful of dubious sites, I'd be happy to have these terms, but as it currently stands, these two really look like so much noise. -- Eiríkr Útlendi | Tala við mig 15:57, 19 September 2011 (UTC)Reply