Talk:ducentesimal
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.
- Discussion moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/English.
Only one verifiable citation. "Category:en:Two hundred" does not exist here or on Wikipedia. The pages two hundred here and w:Two hundred on Wikipedia do exist, but do not mention "ducentesimal". The MLA listserv has the comment, 'Google finds what seems to be one occurrence in the Atlantic Monthly of 1858'. There need to be three verifiable RS citations in this page's "Citations" tab. – .Raven (talk) 09:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- @.Raven Verifiability issues are handled at Wiktionary:Requests for verification. Do you mind if I move it there? J3133 (talk) 10:54, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- No problem! - .Raven (talk) 19:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
RFV-failed, converted to {{no entry}} (although perhaps should be deleted outright, as the most recent use - the only one, indeed - is not recent). This, that and the other (talk) 12:43, 4 June 2023 (UTC)