Talk:a-kræfternes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification (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.
Created by a native Danish speaker; tagged with {{delete}} by another native Danish speaker. I leave it to RFV to decide whether it's real. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
- There is nothing to be in doubt about. First: "kræft" means "cancer" and "kraft" may be translated to "power". Second the word does not exist in plural. Please look in this dictionary and this dictionary (you need to write the word). As you can see I have deleted it in dawiktionary.
- Sarrus (c • t) 07:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)- Yes there is, as we just don't work like that. You may not be in any doubt, but you are not Wiktionary. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:46, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well, "kræfter" is plural of "kraft", but it does not make a difference in this case. The above dictionaries still don't know a plural of "a-kraft".
- Sarrus (c • t) 17:21, 17 September 2012 (UTC)- That's irrelevant; the English Wiktionary looks at actual usage, not dictionaries.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- In that case this entry should definitely be deleted. It only exists in Wiktionary and in some databases which derive their content from Wiktionary. Speedy, before the disease spreads further! --Hekaheka (talk) 05:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- Precisely! The protests of "but we are descriptivist!" seem to overlook the fact that the word descriptively isn't attested, and could be deleted for that reason without biting our colleague the Danish-speaking da.Wikt admin. - -sche (discuss) 10:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- I don't see informing him of what we're looking for at RFV is biting him. Prior to Hekaheka, nobody made the claim that it wasn't attested. In any case, I see no reason we should speedy it instead of giving it the standard n weeks, in case the creator wants to come up with paper sources or something.--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:41, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- Precisely! The protests of "but we are descriptivist!" seem to overlook the fact that the word descriptively isn't attested, and could be deleted for that reason without biting our colleague the Danish-speaking da.Wikt admin. - -sche (discuss) 10:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- In that case this entry should definitely be deleted. It only exists in Wiktionary and in some databases which derive their content from Wiktionary. Speedy, before the disease spreads further! --Hekaheka (talk) 05:23, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- That's irrelevant; the English Wiktionary looks at actual usage, not dictionaries.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
- Well, "kræfter" is plural of "kraft", but it does not make a difference in this case. The above dictionaries still don't know a plural of "a-kraft".
- Yes there is, as we just don't work like that. You may not be in any doubt, but you are not Wiktionary. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:46, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
- Whoever deletes this should remember to fix [[a-kraft]]. - -sche (discuss) 08:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
- Danish inflection template
{{da-noun-infl}}doesn't seem to have a way to express uncountable nouns. In fact, most entries in Category:Danish uncountable nouns don't use any inflection template at all. I have now indicated that a-kraft is uncountable and set the plural = singular, to avoid having links to the incorrect plural. But someone should help the Danes to improve the template. --LA2 (talk) 02:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)- I've created
{{da-noun-infl-unc}}. - -sche (discuss) 16:43, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
- I've created
- Danish inflection template
As the entry a-kraft has been fixed, and now presents this as uncountable noun, somebody with sufficient powers should proceed to delete this entry. --Hekaheka (talk) 17:22, 10 December 2012 (UTC)