Talk:Uessian

RFV discussion: March–July 2014

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.

---

Uessian

Meaning a citizen of the United States. User:Pass a Method added three quotations to this entry shortly after creating it, but of those quotations, two were scannos for Hessian and the other was a mention, not a use. All I can see on Google Books is more scannos. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 16:15, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• Delete. I must have misread, sorry. Pass a Method (talk) 17:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
  • User:Pass a Method: RFV is not a vote, and it is not even a "!vote". The outcome depends on the existence of cited usage, not on what people write in bold letters. What is it that you have "misread"? Keφr 17:20, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
    • The citations Pass a Method (talk) 17:33, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• FWIW, I'm used to encountering USian (or more rarely Usian as an alternate spelling) as synonym of American, but restricted to the United States senses. That said, our entry at USian was apparently deleted back in 2006 for failing RFV. google books:"USian" shows a lot of noise, but there are some valid hits, like this one:

Before developing this idea of "counter-worlding" any further, I would also note that as a postcolonial-oriented comparativist of Canadian and Québécois literatures, I am inevitably drawn to considering such an approach vis-à-vis the United States – especially within the immediate context of greater pressures on Canada and Quebec to integrate within the USian imperial nexus in terms of national, continental, and international policies and values, as well as the current academic debates over whether the US should be a subject of postcolonial studies or whether analyses of its cultures, writings, and politics would be well served by the new field of North American studies.

... or like this one:

I am a member of the Liberal Democrats, a British political party that are liberal in the British, rather than the American, sense – while for the most part the beliefs of the party as a whole (though not of every member) tend to overlap with the USian definition, for us liberalism is based around the idea of allowing the individual the maximum freedom to run their life as they wish – the role of the state being to remove, rather than to add, restrictions on individual liberty.

I'm sure a third cite could be found. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 18:49, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Add these to Citations:USian, then. This is the RFV for Uessian. Two different things. Keφr 19:18, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

• I explicitly stated that these would be for USian rather than Uessian, in recognition that these are separate terms. I am curious as to whether Pass a Method (talk • contribs) has encountered USian, and whether that might be a better term to work on. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 20:11, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I was unable to cite Uessian. There were two cites of use as adjective to be found on Usenet, both from 1997, and only one use as a noun from a Texas newspaper. -Cloudcuckoolander (talk) 23:55, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Failed. Note that one of the citations is a mention. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 18:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)