Talk:politifact
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Ruakh in topic RFV discussion: August–September 2012
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.
I think this is a protologism; there are a lot of Google Book hits, but they refer to the name of a website, not to a noun. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
- Speedy-deleted. I think the purpose of the protologism is precisely to besmirch said website — see e.g. http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1121283/47187247#c48 — and we shouldn't let Wiktionary be hijacked this way. (Not that I disagree with the besmirching. PolitiFact is not very good at its job. But that's not what Wiktionary is for.) —RuakhTALK 01:56, 3 September 2012 (UTC)