Talk:bicolensis

RFV discussion: May–July 2020

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.

---

bicolensis

0 GB results for "bicolensem", "bicolensi", "bicolensis" "sunt". Thus this probably is just Translingual bicolensis, which doesn't come from Latin but was simply formed with Latin -ēnsis. --Marontyan (talk) 10:44, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Simulium bicolense DCDuring (talk) 13:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

The RFV is for the Latin entry and not for the Translingual one. --Marontyan (talk) 18:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Do you happen to know where the Translingual inflection templates are? DCDuring (talk) 19:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

No, but that's rather a general matter of Translingual, and has nothing to do with the attestation of the Latin entry. See also: Homo sapiens (with its translingual plural, but un-Latin inflection in the accusative "einen Homo sapiens"), ruderalis (with it's translingual Latin-like inflection). --Marontyan (talk) 20:55, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

• RFV-deleted (for the Latin, not the Translingual). —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:40, 20 July 2020 (UTC)