Wiktionary:Requests for verification archive/2012/even more

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search


misc 1[edit]


The English would-be term: An angular portion of the stomach between the lesser curvature and the pylorus. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:23, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see [1] for a large number of supporting GB citations. --BB12 (talk) 21:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Dictionary.com has this with a broader definition than we do. Which is right? - -sche (discuss) 19:26, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Broadened and detagged. - -sche (discuss) 02:37, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


Completely unknown to me. -- Liliana 11:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Also never heard of this, and the structure is dubious. There is not typically a dot between the 'v' for version and the number (though there might be within the version, e.g. "v2.0"). Equinox 23:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Difficult to find cites for this, I can't find a search string that filters out most of the false positives. There seems to be some evidence for usage on the internet, but is v.Next being used by Microsoft as a product name? This seem to imply that it is, and possibly also [2] and [3]. On the other hand they may be genuine usages, as might [4]. I only got one durably archived hit [5] but I didn't go through all the results - too difficult, too many false positives from variable names etc. SpinningSpark 14:50, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Capitalization seems to be all over the place, by the way, in typical internet style v.next, v.Next, V.next SpinningSpark 14:56, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 01:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


Re-added after previously failing RFV (see Talk:QQ). Needs to pass WT:BRAND. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:07, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Tooironic compared it to Skype (which we actually don't have any more because it failed RFV!) and to MSN (which isn't the brand name: it was MSN Messenger and then Live Messenger; but is more of a nickname for it). Is QQ the brand, or is it "Tencent QQ", or something else? Usenet might have citations. Equinox 23:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
But Skype is a verb, even! DAVilla 00:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
We have the verb at skype, and Skype could be added as an alternate verb form if attested. QQ is not a verb as far as I know. Equinox 00:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
QQ is used as a verb as well. There is evidence of its usage as a verb on Google search. QQ also appears on Google book searches, seems to be matching WT:BRAND requirements. As an initialism (converted to initialism by Equinox), I don't see why we should be verifying. The abbreviation definitely exists and is attestable. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 08:01, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
OK, I gathered a big pile of verb cites at Citations:QQ and Citations:qq. Now we need somebody to sort them by sense so I can figure out what we need to still get. Looking at QQ, the senses seem to be (intransitive) To use Tencent QQ video chat, (transitive) To chat with someone by means of Tencent QQ video chat, (gaming) To quit a multiplayer game, and (gaming, internet, intransitive) To cry, to be sad about something but I don't think any of those senses are fully cited and I'd like them to be confirmed, as well. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for providing citations. I've gone through and indicated which sense I think each citation supports. The instant messaging program is still completely unattested. - -sche (discuss) 06:21, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed (again). - -sche (discuss) 02:53, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

anabolismen [edit]

Moved from RFD. DAVilla 00:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Word doesn't exist in Dutch. anabolisme is uncountable. --DrJos (talk) 10:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

A procedural note: This would have been better tagged with {{rfv}} and the request posted in WT:RFV. Wiktionary isn't a proscriptive dictionary, so we include incorrect forms if they're actually used- adding context tags like "non-standard" or "proscribed". A quick check of durably-archived sources shows nothing in Google Books or Usenet except in some Scandinavian language(s), so it may be unnecessary to go through that extra step in this case. We only use {{delete}} for cases where it's so obviously wrong or non-controversial that it doesn't need to be discussed. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:34, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
The English noun is labelled 'usually uncountable'. There is no reason to consider the Dutch noun uncountable except that people just haven't had many opportunities to use the plural yet. But here is a perfectly valid sentence using the plural: De anabolismen van verschillende buitenaardse levensvormen kunnen wezenlijk anders zijn dan dat van het leven op Aarde. ("The anabolisms of different extraterrestrial life forms can be radically different from that of life on Earth.") —CodeCat 22:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
It is also the definite singular form of Swedish anabolism. Added. --Hekaheka (talk) 03:45, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. That there are no citations of the plural suggests that DrJos' theory that this is uncountable is descriptively true. - -sche (discuss) 16:42, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Striked. --Hekaheka (talk) 16:26, 10 December 2012 (UTC)


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 (ct) 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 (ct) 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)
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)

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)

Done. - -sche (discuss) 05:51, 15 December 2012 (UTC)


It seems to be just a transcription of Selena and not an actual Yiddish name. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 09:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


Same as above. Seems to be nothing more than a transcription of Paulette. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 09:05, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Do you think that it's not attestable? CFI requires one use in Yiddish. Whether it comes from a transcription or not is irrelevant. --Yair rand (talk) 20:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
Even if it is referring to an American Celebrity? I'm pretty sure transcriptions from other languages don't count as being part of a language. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 21:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
If it refers exclusively to a specific individual, it might fall under the "Names of specific entities" policy of "many should be excluded while some should be included, but there is no agreement on precise, all-encompassing rules for deciding which are which". It doesn't make any difference what the origin is. If it's used in a language and it's attested, it's part of the language. --Yair rand (talk) 21:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
IMO, a citation is a citation. Even a transcription. That said, I doubt I could find one. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
We've discussed whether to include transcriptions of given names and surnames as words in the transcribed-into languages. I don't recall that we had any resolution.​—msh210 (talk) 22:24, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
A number of Japanese and Chinese one-off transcriptions of foreign personal and place names (like one of Selena/Serena) were, IIRC, deleted... I haven't had any luck finding the discussions; Eirikr and/or Haplology might recall them. - -sche (discuss) 22:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Transliterations of given names used in normal text count as words, in my opinion - while phonetic transcriptions used in dictionaries don't count - but I think the citations should be about three different persons. User Diego Grez admitted copying the translations of Selena from the links of the Wikipedia article about Selena Quintanilla-Pérez, without knowing the languages in question... I wish people would never do that. --Makaokalani (talk) 15:17, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 03:56, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: (countable) An act of altruism or beneficence.

Other sense is quality of being charitable. This could use citations, at the very least to help determine whether use in this sense could be limited by date or register. DCDuring TALK 15:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

I've added three citations of "charitablenesses". Most of the hits of "a charitableness" seem to be using the supposedly uncountable sense, merely preceded by "a" to indicate "a particular kind of". Perhaps the {{uncountable}} tag should be re-examined. - -sche (discuss) 07:14, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved. - -sche (discuss) 01:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


Astringent taste of some red wines. I can't find any evidence. Equinox 00:39, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Nothing comes up in gbooks, but a few undurable cites from the blogosphere [6][7][8][9] (none of them wine related). Could the etymology be from the ulcerous taste of chapped lips? SpinningSpark 14:18, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
I think it comes from the idea that too much astringency might chap one's lips. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:35, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 04:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


Is this one of those fun words found only in dictionaries? It isn't in the Compact OED, nor can I find any use citations online, although I find the word listed in many dictionaries and mentioned in lots of books about obscure words. Can we cite either sense, or must this be marked as "dictionary-only"? --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:57, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Move to Appendix:Words found only in dictionaries. -- Liliana 04:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
One hit for gambrinously: "They would stagger gambrinously home at midnight, the sound of the winning side's song ringing in their ears..." Not sure if this is a use or a mention - could well be both. Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 04:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


English noun meaning "conquest"? —RuakhTALK 02:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Fatah is the name for some sort of Arabic descendant rebel group, and the quote doesn't make good sense as that, "...decimated in the fatah." It's a Lybian ethnicity or other sort of grouping, and also a given name [10]. RTG (talk) 12:01, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
All the hits in your Google-search seem to be referring to Fatah, a Palestinian political party (or military-political party). This RFV is about lowercase fatah. —RuakhTALK 12:13, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Apologise, I overlooked the etymology there. I'd probably only echo your own thoughts if I said given the Arabic context, there is nothing to suggest it wasn't used as intended (by Obama) but as an Arabic word purposely in an English language sentence. Sorry about that. RTG (talk) 17:58, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 16:46, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


English sense. If it's real, is it dialectal or something? Because to me, it doesn't even look English-like. :-P   —RuakhTALK 02:17, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

It has a cite, but aapa is italicised in that cite. Recent loanwords are often italicised, but in the same sentence the word bhai isn’t. — Ungoliant (Falai) 03:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
It looks a lot like Hindi आप ‎(āp), but I don't know the language, so I can't explain the difference in the ending. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:29, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
For what it is worth, the OED includes these two citations: WilliamKF (talk) 15:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
  • 1998 Independent 19 Aug. 7/8 To think that all these years I have had an aapa without realising it.
  • 2008 F. Zama Marriage Bureau for Rich People (2009) xi. 141 Don't tell aapa, but my friend says that the police in Royyapalem have been asked to find some evidence..so they can be charged with something more serious.
It also gives the etymology as being: WilliamKF (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Etymology: < Urdu āpa older sister < āp, used respectfully as a 2nd or 3rd person pronoun, lit. ‘self, oneself’, ultimately < Sanskrit ātman self (see atman n.). Compare Hindi āp, āpā oneself. S. Asian.
Here is another citation: WilliamKF (talk) 16:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
  • "Please, Kapugen, my aapa." Julie ran beside him in her bare feet. "I will keep the wolves away from the oxen. Please do not shoot them. They saved my life." She stopped and reached out her arms to him. "It cannot be helped," he repeated, ... [11]

Looks like this passes RFV to me, any objections? WilliamKF (talk) 16:49, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Passed as {{rare}}. - -sche (discuss) 05:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


This is all + comers. It the hyphenated form is used it is when in modifying a noun. DCDuring TALK 03:25, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

There might be some fused-head use, eg, "We went to the all-comers (match)", which I don't think warrants an entry either. DCDuring TALK 03:30, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
I think there is idiomatic usage here. "He fought all-commers" does not mean that he fought everyone who came to the boxing match, but rather he fought everyone who challenged him. "They employed all-comers" does not mean that everyone who visited the factory was employed, but rather that everyone who applied for a job was employed. SpinningSpark 10:14, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
In some contexts all comers might refer to "all guests", "all participants", "all would-be renters", "all who accept a challenge", "all who challenge", "all pilgrims", "all petitioners", "all supplicants", etc. I each case the meaning would seem to be "all who come (as X)", where (as X) depends on context.
In any event, I am asking for citations, with any meaning, of this spelling not used attributively. At best this is an alternative spelling. DCDuring TALK 12:59, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
The hyphen still seems inappropriate in your examples, SpinningSpark. Equinox 13:15, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
I am a bit blind to the correct use of hyphens and would be just as happy with all comers, for which we don't currently have an entry. However, the hyphenated, non-attributive form does seem to be citable [12][13][14][15], although certainly in the minority. SpinningSpark 18:42, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
They are citations of the term. I think the wording must be SoP wording to include all the cites. "Event" certainly doesn't fit three of the four examples. This seems like an error to me, but there are terms that are hyphenated by convention, not by rule. Macmillan and Cambridge Advnced Learners have this spelling. DCDuring TALK 20:54, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Erm, why is this here? Mglovesfun (talk) 21:01, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
So... kept. Move to RFD if it is SOP. - -sche (discuss) 06:22, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "a lout". Tagged but never listed. - -sche (discuss) 06:14, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I've added one two cites, and found a second third one in gbooks, but I am not very inclined to add it to the article myself. SpinningSpark 18:52, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, maybe that one is the "tree" sense. Never mind, I've added lots of other cites now. SpinningSpark 01:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-passed, thank you! - -sche (discuss) 22:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Aboriginal American[edit]

Tagged by the late (hopefully not deceased, but merely absent) Logomaniac but never listed. - -sche (discuss) 06:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

We're talking about the adjective sense, right? Because the noun sense gets over ten thousands hits for the plural alone, and although the vast majority have lower-case for aboriginal, there are more than enough for CFI.
The adjective sense, though, looks pretty shaky. There are plenty of hits, but I have yet to find any that couldn't be interpreted as attributive use of the noun- and that's without taking away any with the wrong capitalization. I checked for comparative and superlative forms, but found none in either Google Books or Usenet.
The version with lower-case "aboriginal" is obviously SOP, But I guess the upper-case one is about as valid as "Native American". I'm not sure our definition for "aboriginal" adequately handles the lower-case examples- it's vague to the point of near-invisibility. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
It's possibly Logomaniac didn't doubt the term at all but merely though it was SOP (I've noticed a few other places she used RFV with a RFD rationale).
Yes, [[Aboriginal]] is badly defined... the noun is defined by referring to the adjective, which is defined by reference to the noun, all without leaving the page. - -sche (discuss) 07:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Strongly agree, Aborigine and Aboriginal are so poorly defined I'm gonna have to look them up in another dictionary to find out what they mean. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:10, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
As for SOP, I didn't deduce the meaning correctly from the meanings of the individual words. Until I looked it up, I assumed this meant "a United States citizen of Australian Aboriginal ancestry". —Angr 15:07, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
The adjectival sense seems to be citable with l/c "a",[16][17][18][19][20][21] but not in the capitalization of this entry. SpinningSpark 16:40, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Three of those cites, however, say "aboriginal American Indian", which is much more clearly [[aboriginal]] + [[American Indian]]. —Angr 17:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Which still leaves a usable three, yes? SpinningSpark 18:55, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
I take the lower-case for "aboriginal" as an indication that the term is acting as an ordinary adjective modifying "American" rather than as the first part of an idiomatic compound term. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:58, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Meh, kept. Re-RFV if you actually doubt the term. - -sche (discuss) 03:59, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


Tagged but AFAICT not listed. - -sche (discuss) 06:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

The third definition of "A service mark owned by Google Inc." Why would we want this? Is it a distinct sense to the company name? Anyway Don't they all pass WT:COMPANY? What exactly do we need to verify? Mglovesfun (talk) 11:14, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
Meh, detagged. The RFV was two years old and went nowhere. - -sche (discuss) 22:21, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


I don't buy either of the two definitions given, though there seems to be a thirdanother that might be citeable- otherwise I would have speedied it. There are a couple of cases where the term seems to be confused with incredible or discredited, but I didn't see enough to support an entry. I also don't think the citation given has anything to do with either of the current definitions. Rather than getting into a revert war with the editor who created it and later reverted my changes, I thought I would bring it here. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

One of the definitions was removed by the original editor just before I added the rfv tag, so there's now only one definition- which I still disagree with. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:51, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
The only other meaningful cite (besides the one already in the article) is part of a play where the dialogue of the episode begins mid-conversation and hence makes it near impossible to divine the sense. It is a hit in gbooks but not visible, but is visible in Amazon's look inside:
  • 1978, Mervyn Peake
    [KITE hides in the room. Enter UNDERTAKERS.]
    PARKINS: Oh, quite discredulous: it wilts me, Laurance,
    To see you subdivide at such an hour -
    WATKINS: Oh such a day, dear fruit, in such a year
    Of such a decade as decays the chord
    [half singing]
    That binds us ... binds us ...
    Nobody loves or ... minds us ....
Besides which the characters are drunk and not making much sense in any case. The word is not in the OED. SpinningSpark 09:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
One usenet example [22], while not a use exactly, does support the untrustworthy meaning. As do some undurable hits don't want to put a discredulous stigma on my company, Unfortunately we live in a world where the police have to protect themselves from discredulous individuals, [23], [24]. SpinningSpark 09:59, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Discredulous can be found in significant numbers using Google Search. I had originally thought it to mean "defamatory", but deleted that definition as I couldn't find a good quote of its use in such a way. --Victar (talk) 14:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
The word is non-standard but it is a word nonetheless in my opinion. --Victar (talk) 14:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Our Criteria For Inclusion (WT:CFI) call for three independent citations in durably-archived sources. Websites, as a rule, aren't durably archived. We mostly depend on Google Books and on Usenet (accessible through Google Groups). The one durably-cited quote you included in the entry looks, from the context, to mean "not inclined to believe". Chuck Entz (talk) 14:28, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Rereading the quoted book, I'm inclined to agree with your understanding of its use in that context. I've added a definition of "(proscribed) Incredulous", and attributed the quote as that. It does indeed seem to also have a meaning of untrustworthy. His transparent party loyalty makes him discredulous and unreliable. --Victar (talk) 14:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
That's three durably archived citations per sense, so two meanings now require a total of six citations. We still only have one. SpinningSpark 16:36, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Right, an impossible task at this point in time. I think it's a word worth watching, even though it may be non-standard/proscribed versions of incredulous and discreditable, respectively. --Victar (talk) 17:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Cited first sense. Astral (talk) 00:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

First sense RFV-passed, second sense RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 04:06, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

infare 2[edit]

See also WT:RFV#infare.

RFV of two noun senses which were added at the same time as it was becoming apparent that the word was quite rare, "entrance" and "an entrance": are they attested? - -sche (discuss) 19:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

They are; the dates for which appear to make them Middle English. Leasnam (talk) 16:31, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Duly removed from the ==English== section. - -sche (discuss) 04:02, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


Tagged RFV by Mike in this edit, never listed. - -sche (discuss) 23:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Mike seems to be conceding that it's valid, but saying the meka spelling is 'preferred'. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:31, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Not all that common, but easily citable: mecka on Google Books is mostly "Mecca", but it looks like at least one "tinker". Meckar turns up several "tinker"s and there's a lot more of the same on Usenet: mecka and meckar. I don't speak Swedish, so some may not be valid, but there would seem to be enough to lose some and still have enough. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:00, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Mecka is also a spelling of Mecca, but to find the verb you should google for some of the conjugated forms (meckar, meckade, har meckat). For example, "Vi meckade med en winsch bra länge" = We tinkered with a winch for a pretty good while, in the description to this lovely Youtube video. The word is in popular use, together with swear words in snow chaos, things that seldom happen to the lexicographers of our learned academies. --LA2 (talk) 02:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
So... struck. - -sche (discuss) 04:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 23:28, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

There is French spectromètre but I had never heard of this spelling in English. A smattering of gbooks hits [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] While some of these could be put down to the preferences of non-English authors, there does seem to be enough there to make it citable. SpinningSpark 10:54, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
It is clearly assessed by other dictionaries as too rare for inclusion. It is probably considered wrong, annoying, or distracting by most readers, certainly in the US. Does that make it {{nonstandard}}? DCDuring TALK 12:21, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
It would be wrong according to even the loosest prescriptivist rules of British English, where "metre" refers to a distance or a poetic rhythm and "meter" refers to a measuring device, but those are certainly plenty of citations. My best guess would be to call it a common misspelling of spectrometer. (It's also possible, incidentally, that some of those books fell foul of some kind of automatic filter designed to convert spellings to British/Commonwealth English - the second citation talks about the "alpha proton X-ray spectrometre", even though this is a NASA proper noun, and NASA spells it "Alpha Proton X-Ray Spectrometer") Smurrayinchester (talk) 13:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Actually, they may even be typos. Citation 2 contains at least 10 "spectrometer"s. Citation 3 contains 9 "spectrometer"s and 1 "spectrometre", citation 4 has 15 "spectrometer"s and 2 "spectrometre"s and so on. Smurrayinchester (talk) 14:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
There is no reasonable basis for calling it "common" as a misspelling. If we are to attempt to be helpful my including it, we need some other presentation. DCDuring TALK 14:33, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Following Smurrayinchester, I withdraw the offered citations. All except cite 5 do not have a consistent spelling and could therefore be taken as typos. SpinningSpark 16:03, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 18:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 23:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Cited. Astral (talk) 18:49, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
I think we should gloss this as "only among fans of Japanese comics and Japanese animation". Nobody would use this term unless they were a Naruto fan or whatever. Equinox 21:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
"Chiefly" would probably be more accurate than "only." Much of this term's more recent popularity can be attributed to Hiro Nakamura on Heroes. Japanese character, American show. Or maybe "chiefly among Japanophiles" or "chiefly among fans of Japanese culture?" Astral (talk) 22:33, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Also popularized in Internet culture by Happatai's faddishly memed song and WTFy music video "Yatta!". ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 22:50, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Kind of the "Gangnam Style" of its day, wasn't it? In that it was intended as a satirical commentary on the culture of living beyond one's means, but that message was lost on most Western viewers, who just saw it as amusingly bizarre. Astral (talk) 23:28, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-passed. - -sche (discuss) 04:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

sine qua non[edit]

RFV-sense "A test used to establish causation in fact." Might be real, I can't tell. - -sche (discuss) 02:18, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 17:10, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


2003 cite is cevichería; 2006 is cebichería; and 2007 is cevichería. — Ungoliant (Falai) 03:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


All the citations currently in the entry italicise the term as a borrowing. - -sche (discuss) 03:27, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: A housecat

I've lived in the north of England most of my life, and I've never, ever heard anyone call their cat a minge, nor can I imagine anyone doing so. I found one book that claims this, but it's just a toilet book (apparently American) so I wouldn't put much stock in its scholarship (he might even have got the idea from us - the book is from 2010 but the edit dates back to 2008). Is this just confusion with the dual meanings of pussy, or do people actually call their cats "minges". Supposedly went through RFV in 2008, but I can't find any archive of this and the citations page is blank. Smurrayinchester (talk) 14:02, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

The discussion (archived on the talk page) suggests the term was passed because Usenet citations existed, but they were not actually added. This time around, they can be added, if they exist... - -sche (discuss) 18:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
I've lived in the North of England my whole life (albeit only in one city) and I've never heard of this. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:22, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
It's the only ever addition by (talk). Mglovesfun (talk) 21:25, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
I've had a look on Google Groups. A lot of hits from people who've called their cats "Minge" (Minge, Ginger Minge and the Monsters of Minge) as a proper noun, but beyond that every use seemed to mean "vagina". Smurrayinchester (talk) 14:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


  • Rfv-sense: A buzzword created to refer to and advertise a new women's bonnet style (AKA "coiffure de gaze" as seen in the early 19th century French painting Portrait De Jeune Femme (En Coiffure De Gaze) by Henri Pierre-Louis Grevedon see here) of 1723 involving a gauzy cloth or net for which the word was invented. Within months, comedies of the time created songs and verses using the new word to make light of political and social leaders. The word gained the meaning sense as a catch-all phrase such that it might refer to any silly trifle or thing of little value or merit as in the English word folderol.[1] From there, it acquired more serious, specific usages.
  • Rfv-sense: (music) The eunuch flute, a kind of membranophone.
  • Rfv-sense: An 18th-century hussar hat resembling a slightly conical shako or tall fez.
  • Rfv-sense: A tube-shaped pastry imitative of the shape of a short toy flute (This shape is now more closely associated with a toy siren whistle).
  • Rfv-sense: A tartlet or biscuit garnished with almond, first produced in Rouen around 1800.[3][4]
  • Rfv-sense: A version of the gold louis d'or coin made during Louis XV's reign.[5][6][7]
  • Rfv-sense: A railroad sign used on the French SNCF network. It is typically a long rectangle with broad diagonal black

I am sending all senses to RFV, except for the chayote one, as that is a sense present in some OneLook dictionaries. Presumably, the senses will fail the request for verification and get deleted, but let us see. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Actually, someone should just delete mirliton, which was incorrectly copied from Transwiki:Mirliton. As a next step, Transwiki:Mirliton should be moved to mirliton, and the senses tagged with rfv-sense. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
It is possible to merge the page histories. I don't want to bother if all the senses fail rfv. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Alright. Here's what I've found.
There are lots of mentions of the gold coin usage in English coin catalogues, but as far as I can tell, no uses in running text (it looks like this is an example, but sadly the snippet view doesn't show all the hits). Nothing for the railway sense. The other pastry sense may just be an extension of the first, although all the hits I found for mirliton described them as tartlets, not tubes. Smurrayinchester (talk) 07:06, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Cited the fruit/vine, the flute, and the cake, which are the only senses in Chambers. Equinox 12:15, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
The cited senses pass RFV; I have removed the uncited ones. - -sche (discuss) 05:25, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


I found Tony Crisp's 2010 Mind And Movement: The Practice of Coex. Are there two other citations out there? I notice a lot of citations of "COEX", is this the same thing? - -sche (discuss) 08:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Crisp claims to have coined coex from a meld of consciosness and expansion so independent cites from others are probably rare given its recentness. The main meaning of COEX (systems) in the gbooks hits is a coinage by w:Stanislav Grof for "systems of condensed experience" [34] which has been picked up by numerous other authors but does not seem to be the same concept as Crisp's. There is also COEX in South Korea and several other usages in gbooks which I couldn't quite make out. SpinningSpark 22:28, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 17:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


Supposedly an initialism of "against all risk". I would have expected it to be capitalised, for one thing. - -sche (discuss) 03:12, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Gbooks has a few mentions of "a.a.r." and a couple of uses of "A.A.R." or "AAR" with that sense. SpinningSpark 18:59, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:27, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


Is this any more attested than c/e, which failed RFV, was? - -sche (discuss) 03:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Just to be clear, we are talking about ce#English, correct? --WikiTiki89 (talk) 07:03, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Yep, I'm seeking verification of the fact that "ce" means "copyedit" in English (mostly because c/e failed RFV not long ago). - -sche (discuss) 08:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 02:05, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


- -sche (discuss) 08:16, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

The only quote so far comes from Ben Croshaw, who writes in quite a visceral, playful way. Almost certainly a nonce word coined by him. Only other result I can find on the whole internet is in a badly written, non-durably-archived fanfic (and technically, in the fanfic it's written without hyphens). Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:17, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

hit both ways[edit]

Can't find anything relevant in Google Books or Groups. Equinox 15:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 02:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 03:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 02:12, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


RFV of the Italian section. Tagged in this edit but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 03:47, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

The citations look great.
Side note: someday, "(all senses)" should be expanded into separate sense lines for each sense: I doubt it really has all the same senses as the English word (e.g. the Canadian First Nations sense). - -sche (discuss) 08:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-passed. - -sche (discuss) 17:31, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense "The collective noun for donkeys." Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 10:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

In the unlikely case that that's true, I'm nominating it for word of the day. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 14:59, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Looks like we do indeed have a word of the day,[35][36][37][38] shall I nominate it or will you?
The Google snippet link to one of those is a deadlink, but this is scraped for the results page
The economist - Volume 381, Issues 8498-8509 - Page 56
2006 - Snippet view - More editions
A pace of donkeys fans out in different directions. For centuries, the asses have served as Mardin's rubbish collectors, penetrating streets so narrow and steep that no car, let alone a dustcart, can squeeze through. Carrying loads of up to 70kg ...
SpinningSpark 15:41, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Nominated. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 16:08, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Cited in under five hours—nice work! - -sche (discuss) 18:03, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
  • "Pace of asses" gets even better results. OED says it's obsolete, but it seems to still have a bit of usage. Ƿidsiþ 18:57, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
I did try "pace of asses" but I only came up with mentions, dictionaries and the like. SpinningSpark 20:30, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


-- Liliana 15:30, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

The only book hits I could find were a large number of Wikipedia-derived books which use it in the index. I'm guessing indices don't meet the CFI, but I'm only guessing at that. SpinningSpark 20:16, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Well, do any of these instances 'convey meaning'? I think that's the test. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
No more than any book index entry usually conveys meaning. Such Wikipedia-derived books have machine-generated indices which are pretty devoid of meaning (or usefulness) anyway - [39] is a typical example. Note that both "Wiktionary" and "Wikt" are used, presumably depending on how the original editor typed it in the interwiki link. SpinningSpark 07:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
They may possibly convey meaning, but they're not independent, being derived from Wikipedia. -- Liliana 20:45, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


Alt form of a deleted (RFV-failed) entry. I have no objection to speedy deletion of this. If kept, it needs to meet the relevant attestation requirements. - -sche (discuss) 19:29, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


Nauruan section. Per Liliana's comment in the RFC discussion. (Liliana, if you wanted to RFV the Japanese section, too, say so.) - -sche (discuss) 22:16, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 18:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


"(slang|British Prisons/happyslapping); The practice of Seagulling is to ejaculate into ones hand and proceed to slap a stranger round the face, with said salty hand." Equinox 20:58, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Found 1 cite that aligns with this sense. Russell Brand also seems to have mentioned "seagulling" in a stand-up routine. There's a poor-quality audience video on YouTube, but perhaps the joke has made it onto an official DVD or broadcast? Might be a place to start for someone more familiar with Brand's work.
The walking-across-a-beam and scavenging senses also need verification, I think. Astral (talk) 20:46, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:58, 29 November 2012 (UTC)


Tagged but never listed, with the comment "acronym of a phrase that failed RFV". - -sche (discuss) 03:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


Tagged but never listed. RFV-sense of the "unit of currency in the Czech Republic, anad [sic] formerly in Slovakia, equalling one-hundredth of a koruna." Tagged with the comment: "I've never seen this word used, can't find good sources online, and doubt that English would adopt such a strange plural form, especially when the Czech nominative plural is "haléře"; Wikipedia uses the term "haller", pl. "hallers", which seems like a better fit." To that, an IP added, below the translations table, "I recently did a crossword and the clue fore this word was hearty." - -sche (discuss) 03:20, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed for now. I could only find 2 BGC hits. - -sche (discuss) 08:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


A space alien's greeting? Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 18:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I guess WT:FICTION applies, needs to be cited outside of Mork and Mindy. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:58, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Mzajac and Robin Lionheart have gathered citations. - -sche (discuss) 22:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Pass. DAVilla 08:53, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks a little early to me to pass this. At the very least, the definition should match the citations, which currently it does not. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for mentioning it. DAVilla 03:44, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense "an insect". Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 18:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 16:54, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


Does anyone know if this place exists? I mean, outside the internet. German and English Wikipedia don't have this word in their texts. This Austrian index doesn't know it: http://www.orte-in-oesterreich.de/orte-suchen.html, nor do the two German telephone catalogs I searched (http://www.klicktel.de/telefonbuch and http://www.dastelefonbuch.de/). According to me, it is a nonsense entry, created by nonsense information in an old version of Woltz: https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Woltz&oldid=1581479 (see "Name" section). --MaEr (talk) 15:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

And how can a place name be "rare".--Dmol (talk) 16:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I found it in one gazetteer:

  • 1823, A geographical dictionary or universal gazetteer, ancient and modern, volume 2, edition 2, page 902:
    Woltin, t. Pomerania; 12 SW. Stargard.
    Woltzdorf, t. Austria; 2 NNW. Weikerstorf.
    Wolvergehen, t. Neth., in South Brabant; 8 N. Brussels. Pop 1,304.

But Ritters Geographisch-statistisches Lexikon is what helped me crack the case: it has what looks like the same name, Woltzdorf, as an Austrian town: but it has the town sorted alphabetically between various Woi- and Woj- placenames, suggesting that what appears to be an l is in fact an i. It looks someone misread Woitzdorf, and the misreading subsequently proliferated into at least that one other gazetteer. - -sche (discuss) 16:45, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

About Woltzdorf in Austria... the frontiers of Austria have changed a bit since 1823. If this place still exists it might be in Czechia, Poland, Italy or Ucraina now, with a completely different name. If it is in modern Austria, its orthography might have changed.
And the original base information was: This name [Woltz, my insertion] is normally or oftenly found with an extra -en at the end or -dorff to make Woltzen, making it plural for young leaders, and -dorff making it mean young leader town. This name is one of the original names of the Germanic peoples. (see Woltz)
It's just complete nonsense.
--MaEr (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Per w:de:Woitzdorf, there were two places by that name, and they're both now in the Czech Republic. —Angr 17:30, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Indeed: two Ortsteile (quarters) of their respective municipality. According to de:WP, one of the two quarters (quarter Vojtíškov) has 130 inhabitants; the second quarter (quarter Vojtovice in Vlčice u Javorníka municipality) isn't listed but its municipality has 425 inhabitants. Do we really need this entry? Insignificant place in Czechia, with a German name, mis-spelled title... --MaEr (talk) 18:30, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Yes, Woitzdorf, with the correct spelling, is a valid entry if attestable (which I presume it is). We have other small villages, like Hitlersee. -- Liliana 19:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I think we can close the case. I moved "young leader town" Woltzdorf to Woitzdorf (which accidentally exists). --MaEr (talk) 09:38, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

bang flag gun[edit]

This is a very plausible entry (what else would this device be called?), but the only durable citation I can find is one in rec.toys.action-figures.marketplace. - -sche (discuss) 08:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I would have hyphenated it as bang-flag gun. But if I were ever to call it something myself, I would call it gun that shoots a flag that says "BANG!". --WikiTiki89 08:54, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Apparently bang flag gun or "bang" flag gun is also what several novelty manufacturers' packaging calls them.[40][41][42] ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 15:10, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Except that two of those put "bang" in quotations marks. --WikiTiki89 15:18, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 02:16, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


(I also wonder about "influenze".) Ƿidsiþ 20:19, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

The only English uses among Google Books' hits are two uses of it in italics as a singular(!) and one usage of it in italics as a plural. I've added the plural citation to Citations:paparazze. Doremítzwr had already placed one citation there, with an edit summary rightly noting that it's nigh-impossible to tell whether the citations are simply misspelling paparazzi, or intentionally using paparazze as the plural of paparazza to specify "female photographers". The only uses on Usenet are likewise split between singular and plural, and one clearly uses the plural to refer to a group of male paparazzi. I would banish it to the citations namespace.
I share your doubt of influenze. I found one citation of it as a plural, from the 1840s. I wonder if it is too rare to merit mention in the headword line—compare nexus. Citations will tell. google books:"the influenze" shows that influenze is more common as a misspelling or alternative spelling of the singular than as a plural, though "the influenze" is still dramatically less common than "the influenza" (154 BGC hits vs upwards of 10 000—supposedly 568 000). - -sche (discuss) 01:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


Æ&Œ (talkcontribs) has posted several citations to the citations page, but in my opinion it's easier to read them as using an {{alternative spelling of|influenza}} than a {{plural of|influenza}}. The first speaks of "a severe epidemic of influenze", and while one could speak of an epidemic of a plural noun ("epidemic of bears"), it seems more usual to speak of an epidemic of a singular and/or non-count noun ("epidemic of the plague", "of the flu", "of flu", "of drug-resistent staph", "of HIV", "of blindness", "of racism"). "[A]n attack of influenze" in the second citation seems even more likely to be singular, and I would also read the third citation's "combined mortality from influenze and pneumonia" as "from flu and pneumonia" rather than "from (flus / kinds of flu) and pneumonia". The 1920 citation also uses "influenza"; it's debatable whether that suggests "influenza" is a misspelling, or a plural. If "influenza" is a plural, it should be possible to find more citations like the one I posted in the entry, where "various influenze" has to be read as "various flus" because "various flu" doesn't make grammatical sense. - -sche (discuss) 18:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 02:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


I see nothing on Google books, neither for this spelling, nor "oenamnesia", nor "enamnesia". - -sche (discuss) 20:58, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

‘cenamnesia’ does not turn up results either. He must have found this term in an Oxford Dictionary, I suppose. --Æ&Œ (talk) 21:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed, sadly. It would have been a nice WOTD. - -sche (discuss) 19:02, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


French. Author speedied it claiming a lack of cites, but I brought it here instead of deleting in case he's wrong.​—msh210 (talk) 06:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Cited, I think. - -sche (discuss) 07:23, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Looks good, follows the spelling rules of the age trying to 're-etymologize' words to look like their Latin etyma, no reason to think it's not legit IMO. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:38, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Passed. - -sche (discuss) 03:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


And baw caw. Chicken sounds. Equinox 22:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Cited bakaw. Could not cite baw caw. Astral (talk) 02:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
I have also seen this sound represented as bagawk and bagurk; no idea if those variants are attested. - -sche (discuss) 06:04, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Btw, we're missing [[bawk]], which Astral's citations also attest. - -sche (discuss) 06:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
bakaw: RFV-passed.
baw caw: RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 19:38, 2 December 2012 (UTC)



4. A pothole
5. A group of airborne hawks riding a thermal.

After verification, they also need context tags. --WikiTiki89 08:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

We already have the geological term meaning kettle hole. I'd be surprised if there was a separate meaning of pothole but perhaps an expert can clarify. Dbfirs 19:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
... (later)... I've combined the two geological senses (the OED has both), and I've provided cites for the ornithological sense (lots more are available). Please put the rfv back if you still have doubts. Dbfirs 19:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm satisfied, thanks! --WikiTiki89 08:59, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense "a protection". - -sche (discuss) 17:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Methinks "protection", in this case, is just another way of saying amulet. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:12, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 19:42, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


This is the plural of a Spanish noun which I think may be uncountable. Of the four Google Books hits for the collocation "los derritos", only one isn't a scanno:

  • Homúnculus: el revisto poética[sic], issue 1, page 88
    corear torno antes derrite los derritos

The only hit for "y derritos" is also a scanno. - -sche (discuss) 18:03, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 19:50, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense: "(Wicca) relating to the threefold law". I'm not sure how this can be attested separate from the usual sense. - -sche (discuss) 22:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 19:54, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


Appears unattested. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I deleted it as a bad redirect, do you wish to create it then rfv it? If not, then what shall we do? Mglovesfun (talk) 21:36, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
The entry had the definition "A lesbian" for an English noun. So if someone gets to attest "scissorchick" in that sense, they can re-create the entry. If no one attests the term within a month (or whatever longer period is customarily used), the page remains deleted, and this nomination gets closed and archived to Talk:scissorchick. Urban dictionary has the term, so having Wiktionary's talk page document the page as having failed an attestation request is kind of useful, right? --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:47, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely. Not supported even by blogs. DAVilla 07:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense "A name for a parson." Is this used by anyone other than Joyce? If not, I'll tag it {{context|nonce|used only by James Joyce}}. - -sche (discuss) 21:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

If the Joyce usage is the one on the Citations page, then it just seems like it is a slightly more figurative usage of definition 3 at bollocks (I really think bollocks and ballocks should be merged). --WikiTiki89 09:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Duly converted to {{alternative form of}}. - -sche (discuss) 03:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

dancing juice [edit]

meaning alcohol or alcoholic beverage --Adding quotes (talk) 18:56, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

  • Added by WF, RfVed by WF. I thought the simplest thing would be to just delete it. SemperBlotto (talk) 08:16, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
I thought Bruno Mars (or whoever writes his songs) just used it as a clever metaphor rather than an idiom. Might be valid, I have no idea. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)


(figuratively) A wrinkle in time that makes time travel possible. (Used by Madeleine L'Engle in her science-fiction novel, A Wrinkle in Time.)

I suspect it might be a universe-only term. — Ungoliant (Falai) 18:06, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone have the The Oxford Dictionary of Science Fiction? (I get credit, but no copy. Boo, hiss.) It has science fictional uses, though the definition will probably have to be broadened. Doctor Who 2: Tessaract uses tessaract, an alternate spelling, in some science-fictional way, if anyone has access to that work. The Avengers had a tesseract. I'll toss a couple more things on citations page, though I'm having trouble finding solid hits; it comes off as technobable most of the time.--Prosfilaes (talk) 13:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
I'll submit that there's enough citations on the citation page, but the definition is going to have to be generalized to fit them.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

RFV passed as reworded, feel free to edit. DAVilla 17:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Prosfilaes and DAVilla. — Ungoliant (Falai) 02:20, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

houseproud [edit]

A coalmine case. Probably citable, but citing it effectively closes the RfD of house-proud. DCDuring TALK 22:29, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Cited. Equinox 23:20, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
Looks good to me. DCDuring TALK 01:28, 3 December 2012 (UTC)


"Of or pertaining to worms" (added in 2006 by an IP). I am almost certain that this only occurs in Roald Dahl's Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator (where they meet stretchy squashy space aliens called Vermicious Knids); can anyone find anything else? Equinox 00:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Cited. Astral (talk) 05:33, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Looks fine. Thanks. Closed. Equinox 12:27, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

August 2012[edit]

easnamh cothromais[edit]

Alleged Irish term. --Dan Polansky (talk) 23:36, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Valid Irish term, now with one attestation, plus a link to a reputable terminological dictionary. embryomystic (talk) 03:06, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Attestation doesn't look durable; even if Irish only required one durably archived attestation, this wouldn't be it. Mglovesfun (talk) 04:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Following Wiktionary:Beer_parlour#the_presence_of_Irish_and_Welsh_online, I have removed Irish and Welsh from the list of languages which are well attested online. This word probably now meets CFI. - -sche (discuss) 22:31, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Possibly cited; have a look. - -sche (discuss) 18:19, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Appendicised. - -sche (discuss) 06:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
The entry has been restored by Angr. The only citations in the entry are not durable, but I'm not going to revert Angr, since I'm willing to assume this has been used in books that are archived in Irish libraries even though we don't have access to them (in contrast to some terms people have alleged to be attested that we've known couldn't possibly meet e.g. the "one-year old" requirement and which I and others have therefore deleted). - -sche (discuss) 21:45, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: Given to laughter; inclined to foolish or incessant merriment.

Webster 1913 etymology: [From Abdera, a town in Thrace, of which place Democritus, the Laughing Philosopher, was a native.]

This definition is given in Webster 1913. Some people seem to want it deleted out of process.

Here are what to me look like promising quotations: [43], [44], [45], [46]. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)


Converted to an {{alternative form of|abderian}}. - -sche (discuss) 22:43, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

September 2012[edit]


I was about to move this to aedoeology, which is a more common spelling, when I noticed that most instances of both spellings were in book titles or were mentions. (Note the one citation in the entry and the second citation on the citations page.) - -sche (discuss) 00:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I added one more citation. Here is another one, but I don’t feel like including it. --Æ&Œ (talk) 02:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Meh, kept. - -sche (discuss) 22:57, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Noun: sole sense: One who indulges in idle, foolish, and irreverent fancies or speculations; one who tries to be cleverly amusing but falls short.

Def is from Century, but Collins has a different definition. Are either attestable? DCDuring TALK 12:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

The cite there appears to be adjectival use; but I have found these solid noun uses:
    • ?, Cody Melcher - Résumé | Facebook, www.facebook.com/EccentricGent/info - Cached:
      Cody Melcher is not only a lexicographic snake oil salesman, but a witwanton and literary homosexual who is not afraid to talk about the important issues of today, such as politics, the English language, and World War I.
    • 1986, David Grambs, Dimboxes, epopts, and other quidams:
      The witwanton is always a little off in trying to be always GETTING MENTAL.
    • 1613, Josuah Sylvester, Lachrymae Lachrymarum:
      All epicures, witwantons, atheists. Leasnam (talk) 16:14, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
  • 1855, Thomas Carlyle, Fraser's magazine, Volume 52[47], Digitized edition, published 2005, page 345:
    Word-warriors and wit-wantons would waste their breath upon one whose book-hunger has won him so rich a meed,
    --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (talk) 20:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
How is the first one solid, not being durably archived? Frankly, it looks like spam in the context of Wiktionary.
Why not just cite witwanton as an adjective if that is unquestionable? Wanton is older and more abundant as an adjective than as a noun.
It would also be nice if the cites illustrated the meaning rather than merely the existence of the word, though we can tease out the meaning from the components, though with risk of error. More surrounding text rather than the bare snippet from Century would help. DCDuring TALK 17:38, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Meh, it looks cited(?), so I've detagged. Retag it if you disagree. - -sche (discuss) 22:58, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

fried gold[edit]

"A perfectly executed plan" and (oddly listed as adjective) "food fried to a golden colour". Appears to be from one or two specific film scripts. Equinox 15:36, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, "food fried to a golden colour" should be at RFD, since it's just fried + gold. I've mostly heard the other sense as "a slice of fried gold" (from the film Shaun of the Dead), and it doesn't really seem to mean "A perfectly executed plan", just anything good. Here are the Google groups results for "fried gold". Make of them what you will. Smurrayinchester (talk) 07:27, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Food sense RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Since the preceding discussion amounts to "the headword is wrong and the definition is wrong", I've deleted the entry. Feel free to create a better entry in its place. - -sche (discuss) 23:04, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

October 2012[edit]


I see a lot of scannos, names and mentions. Any uses? - -sche (discuss) 23:35, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

One book hit: First there is a geyser of blue flame as the tank's puncture wound jets a stream of ignited assoline skyward. Prior reference to "methane-breathers" makes this definitely the right sense. It seems this was a neologism reported to the American Dialect Society in 2002. I had a couple of mentions on usenet also, but no real cites. SpinningSpark 02:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
One from Google groups you guys are missing the point of alcohol. yeah, when you burn it in your engine that was designed to run on assoline, you get poor mileage but I don't think it is usenet and possibly not considered durably archived. SpinningSpark 02:20, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Failed RFV. - -sche (discuss) 23:06, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
Not really relevant to RFV, but I just thought you would all like to know that this was Duden's Most Outrageous Word of the Year in 2001, for which the German translation is the much more satisfactory Arschbenzin.[48] SpinningSpark 14:23, 20 December 2015 (UTC)


Recently added English meaning "a pin badge worn to show fluency in, or a willingness to speak, the Irish language". While we're verifying it, maybe someone can find out what the English plural is: fáinnes? Or is the Irish plural fáinní borrowed as well? —Angr 11:38, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Also, an English pronunciation would be nice. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Now cited.--Dmol (talk) 08:34, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
The citations are for [[fainne]]. Can this spelling be cited, too? Otherwise, the entry can easily be moved to [[fainne]]. - -sche (discuss) 19:37, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Moved. - -sche (discuss) 22:21, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Adjective: (slang) lots, many, a great deal.

usex: There's millions of space in my car if you want a lift.

Also, if millions#Noun is the plural of million, why is there no English million#Noun?DCDuring TALK 18:37, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Added by now-banned user Keene. Also million is a noun, but we seem to use the 'numeral' header a lot for such nouns (one, two, three etc. are all nouns, hences ones, twos, threes). Mglovesfun (talk) 22:28, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
Our number-word entries need agreement and standardization by folks more interested in words than in arithmetic. DCDuring TALK 23:39, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


This can be found in many dictionaries going back at least a century or two, but I can't find it anywhere else. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

It was featured on the British TV show QI just now (an hour ago, or so) and it was in Dr Johnson's dictionary. Of course we don't use the same rules as he used back then. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
I have cited the spelling shape-smith, but I don't know what definition fits the cites. See Citations:shapesmith. Those four pretty much exhausted the valid cites at Google Books. DCDuring TALK 23:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't include the one from the Edda, since it seems like there are several calque-like literalish translations there. The other three seem to fit the definition in question, though. It's odd that the only cites are spelled differently than the dictionary entries.
I should mention that there was one other definition in Google Books referring to a type of craftsman, and the name of a computer application by that name. On Usenet it was all just the computer application and user names apparently associated with it. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:40, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
I also just found this Chuck Entz (talk) 01:10, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
I could not find any spelling of shapesmith at that last link. DCDuring TALK 03:43, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
"This inclination to obesity has always been a heavy source of discomfort and annoyance to Mr Strumcerner and it is known that he has been in training under a multitude of shape-smiths to effect if possible a reduction of that fleshy knobbiness which so materially interferes with the symmetry of his form." Chuck Entz (talk) 04:19, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Excellent. I wonder why I couldn't see it. DCDuring TALK 04:30, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
And I agree with you about the Edda. I strongly suspected calque, but, given the scarcity, I kept it. DCDuring TALK 03:45, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
So, move it to the attested spelling? - -sche (discuss) 05:22, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
  • I understood a shapesmith was someone who made corsets. Ƿidsiþ 05:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
    Per your comment, I've added that sense, to spur people to sort the citations under the relevant sense, so we can see if either or any sense is attested. - -sche (discuss) 22:16, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now, since it is unclear which sense, if any, is attested. - -sche (discuss) 22:26, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Sense: (UK, slang, dated) A man who sanctions sexual relationships between his girlfriend and his male friends.

Someone added a note requesting references. I guess an RFV is what he meant. — Ungoliant (Falai) 01:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

According to this the sense was discovered during Balderdash & Piffle's wordhunt. The citation referred to from All Neat in Black Stockings is not stated, but is now in the OED "If she'd been my daughter in fact I'd never have let her go out with an obvious plonker like myself." Even though the OED agreed with Bald&Piff and changed their entry, I cannot see it myself just from that cite, it just seems the normal use of plonker. This description of the film does confirm that the character Ginger shares his girlfriends. Can someone who has seen the film confirm that Ginger used plonker in that sense? SpinningSpark 23:20, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Never ever heard of it. I suppose since it says 'dated' maybe if some of our older UK editors could comment on this, it would be most welcome. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
I was at school in 1966 (date of film) and learned all sorts of new words in the playground, but I don't recall this sense. SpinningSpark 19:41, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Plonker is like eejit. Search youtube for "rodney plonker" [49] RTG (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 23:07, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense "A tablet, panel, or compartment in ornamented or mosaic work." Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 03:09, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. Had the Catalan translation àbac (ca) m. - -sche (discuss) 06:52, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense #3: "something that is enchanted". I disagree that the given citation I see now that it's all enchantment in this house; is indicative of this usage. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 13:07, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

rfv-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:35, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


"To destroy, ruin, undo, lay waste to." No example offered. --Jerome Potts (talk) 03:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

rfv-failed. - -sche (discuss) 06:23, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


RFV of the adjective POS. Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 03:23, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 02:50, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Spanish RFV-sense "to know perfectly, to master (a language)". Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 03:24, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

rfv-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:36, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense "(by extension) Something heavily guarded." Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 03:37, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:16, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


As far as I can tell this is not an acronym, but the actual name of the company. As such, it needs to meet WT:COMPANY rules. -- Liliana 09:23, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Meh, deleted. - -sche (discuss) 23:33, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


The Maori section was tagged with {{rfv}}, but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 10:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 23:41, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Tagged with the comment "Is this a typo for chwilio?", but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 10:48, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 23:42, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense: "An inscription consisting of the letters of an alphabet, almost always listed in order." Tagged but not listed. (But now that it is listed, I think all the pre-July 2012 ones are listed.) - -sche (discuss) 10:54, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Compare #abecedarian. - -sche (discuss) 18:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Seems to be attested. Kept. - -sche (discuss) 23:43, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Not an abbreviation for "socialized medicine" as I first thought, but "social media". Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 11:00, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 02:53, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


"Year of the Linux Desktop". —RuakhTALK 14:20, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Nothing but scannos on Google Books, and exactly 2 hits on Usenet that might qualify: [50]] and [51]. They seem to be reflective of limited use somewhere, but not enough in the right places for CFI. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:03, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 06:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


Given that ríomhshábháilteacht just failed RFV... - -sche (discuss) 01:52, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:02, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Supposedly means "steroids", so called after the governor of California. Tagged by someone else but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 18:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

One book usage [52] The Steroid Deceit: A Body Worth Dying For? By Jeff Rutstein , Custom Fitness Publishing, LLC, Aug 31, 2005. AFAICT, the publisher is Rutstein himself - and I found no other usages. I suspect that therefore there might not be 3 independent usages. If 2 more are not found shortly, I would consider the verification - failed. Collect (talk) 22:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 23:58, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense of two senses, tagged this this edit but not listed. Both senses are probably attested, if archaic. - -sche (discuss) 19:01, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I've added two citations to the first RFVed sense, and one to the other. I suggest that they be combined. - -sche (discuss) 22:54, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Passed as combined. - -sche (discuss) 23:59, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

balloon knot[edit]

All three cites are mentions, not uses. The first one defines the term as meaning "anal sex", not "anus". None of them supports the "especially" part of the definition. —Angr 20:02, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Cited. Nine cites on the citations page, three of which (the ones that seemed least NSFW) I selected to replace the three mention cites in the main entry. Astral (talk) 14:36, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept. - -sche (discuss) 00:00, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


This needs citations which demonstrate that it is English, singular (as is currently claimed), and not a typo. - -sche (discuss) 07:55, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Sounds pretty likely, but I don't know it for a fact. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:21, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
I cited the verb, but I couldn't find a single hit for the noun. Watch out for scannos of "prefixt". —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:26, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Verb: kept, noun: deleted. - -sche (discuss) 03:17, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: "(Australian slang) The buttocks, the anus." Was removed without comment by an anonymous editor, who presumably didn't believe that this sense exists. —RuakhTALK 18:06, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Cited. Astral (talk) 13:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-passed; thanks! - -sche (discuss) 15:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)


--WikiTiki89 12:05, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Easily citable [53]. Probably the others also. SpinningSpark 15:30, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Um...clearly widespread use? Did you even try a basic Google search? Ƿidsiþ 15:35, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
    If it's so easy then do it so I can close this case. --WikiTiki89 15:59, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
    You are making unnecessary work for people by listing words that are immediately found in quantity with a gbooks search. I think you will find that Ƿidsiþ was quoting the CFI, that is, the word does not need citations for verification. You could add citations yourself if you are so concerned that it does not have any. SpinningSpark 16:16, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Widespread use in 19th cenutry and older poetry. DCDuring TALK 16:38, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
    So can I mark them as archaic then? --WikiTiki89 16:41, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
    Sure. Poetic contractions are from the time when poets adhered strictly to meter. Other contractions are from reported speech or from trying to save 'ink' or 'keystrokes', really time, IMO. DCDuring TALK 17:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
    I would say {{archaic|or|poetic}} or something rather than just {{archaic}}. - -sche (discuss) 18:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
    What about {{archaic|poetic}}? or do you really want that "or"? --WikiTiki89 18:29, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
    I'd prefer "or", because I expect the forms are still used by some poets and songwriters. I've found a modern citation of where'er; I'm trying to find one of whate'er. - -sche (discuss) 22:17, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept. - -sche (discuss) 00:06, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


I can find 1 b.g.c hit for "hemorrheic", 2 for "haemorrhoeic", and none for this, although it already has one citation. There are also a handful for "hemorrhoic", but upon inspection, they are all scannos of "hemorrhoid" or "hemorrhoids". Is any spelling of this term attest? "Hemorrhoidal" is the usual adjective for hemorrhoid-related things. - -sche (discuss) 00:58, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy delete. --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:49, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
I found two hits using "haemorrhoeic", one of which is the one that the contributor added. I think that the contributor must have spent vast amounts of time just doing Google searches of older works for words containing Greek-derived morphemes that offered digraph potential. And he seems to have been perfectly willing to insert something knowing that there were not three cites available. This is why it is very hard to truly believe AGF, whatever public pose one may (and should) maintain. DCDuring TALK 01:14, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
I am sorry that you feel that way about me. I shall freely confess that I didn’t always search thoroughly for extra citations for some of ‘my’ entries, but I take responsibility for any time or space that I wasted with my vain labours and I support the deletion of any rubbish that I include. Does that raise your opinion of me? Probably not, but I am sure that you wouldn’t doubt that my trust could be regained, and I personally like to think that I have improved as an editor. However, you can always block me if you would like, as it would be best if I weren’t a burden on the project. --Æ&Œ (talk) 01:49, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
I didn't think it was you. I was sure it was the other guy. We will challenge any entries that seem bad as we find then. If there are any of yours that are both bad and convenient for you to find, feel free to then it. I've made mistakes on templates that screwed up multiple entries - I had to clean them up and fast. This is different. It's mostly just a bit of a waste of time. We could use all the help we can get on all sorts of other things so I get upset about such waste. Just find some good work to do and do it well. DCDuring TALK 03:00, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 07:37, 19 December 2012 (UTC)


I found one citation of oesophagospasmus, and a lot of citations of Oesophagospasmus (an obsolete spelling of the German word Ösophagospasmus), and I've created esophagospasm, but no spelling ending in -us seems to meet CFI as an English word. - -sche (discuss) 03:58, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy delete; ‘cesophagospasmus’ doesn’t turn up much. --Æ&Œ (talk) 10:02, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
It also doesn't have the letter 'c' in it. --WikiTiki89 10:10, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
I know, but Google’s book scanners were developed by enslaved, stolen Ukrainian orphans, so the scanners ‘think’ that œ = ce. You can do a search for ‘cesophagus,’ for example, and tell me how many results are not actually for ‘œsophagus.’ I learnt this when I noticed that other instances of these words were not highlighted in the same pages, so I had browsed through the poorly transcribed text versions to inspect the problem. --Æ&Œ (talk) 10:17, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Prospects may be bleak, but not so unfathomable as to deprive the entry of a month. DAVilla 11:28, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:02, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense both senses need to pass WT:BRAND. --WikiTiki89 (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 18:06, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


I ask undeletion. Appears attested; have a look at google books:"preorgastic". --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:38, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Not sure it ever failed, it was nominated at RFV, but then moved to preorgasmic which is clearly a separate word. There's nothing to undelete; the only edit is the one that redirects to preorgasmic. So this needs to be created, not restored. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:57, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Resolved. - -sche (discuss) 09:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

November 2012[edit]


Not attestable. --Æ&Œ (talk) 19:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: "Describing a method of murder" (sic). Just looks like the noun used attributively. Maybe it should be speedily deleted, not as if the definition adds anything useful to the entry. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:30, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't see any sense in saying, the most necklacest murder, if that helps. RTG (talk) 16:06, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
Real - as an adjective "necklace execution" appears to be fairly common as a term as is "necklace murder". Many cites around, including in newspapers etc. Collect (talk) 03:04, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
No, that's just an attributive use of the noun. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:57, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Yep. The example I usually give is "tractor parts": tractor is not an adjective. Equinox 11:50, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
The one I got taught is "house keys". You can't say my keys are houser than yours, even though house has only one syllable. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:10, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed (it's a noun). - -sche (discuss) 00:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


Three durably archived uses, please. —Angr 21:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Speedy keep because it's to do with cats. No seriously, I'm aware of the term but I think it's only used in cat memes and has no real 'meaning'. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:02, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Here you go:

LOLcat Bible: In the beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da . . ., Martin Grondin, (c) 2010 Page 49:

5. Caturday,. yu. no. werk. If yu think faek Ceiling Cat iz Ceiling Cat,I maek. Teh Ten Big Roolz

We Are Anonymous: Inside the Hacker World of LulzSec, Anonymous, . . ., Parmy Olson, (c) 2010

In 2005, users on /b/ had started encouraging each other to put funny captions under cute cat photos on Saturdays (or what became known as Caturday).

The Boy Kings: A Journey into the Heart of the Social Network, Katherine Losse, (c) 2012 Page 148: When he and his wife began to have children, they nicknamed them after Internet memes like the lolcat holiday, Caturday. Jeremy Jigglypuff Jones (talk) 22:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Your first citation is hardly English! Equinox 12:13, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Cited. Astral (talk) 16:32, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
delete as encylopedic. Siuenti (talk) 01:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Keep, cited.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:21, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
  • This isn't RFD, and the entry isn't encyclopedic. —Angr 22:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Looks cited to me. I'm not crazy about it, we probably need to be a bit clearer on the meaning, but I suppose everything else is ok. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:00, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
It is a real term, and it is cited. What's the matter? It honestly isn't any worse than ObamaCare. -- Liliana 15:34, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
This kind of thing (something made up for a website) should have an equivalent of WT:BRAND or WT:FICTION Siuenti (talk) 12:03, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
But people "celebrate" Caturday on sites other than 4chan now. Jeremy Jigglypuff Jones (talk) 09:14, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
That would give it a better chance of passing WT:BRAND. Siuenti (talk) 15:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Wouldn't it automatically pass WT:BRAND under any circumstances, since it's not a brand? Mglovesfun (talk) 18:27, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Correct, non-brand terms like this don't have to show they have "entered the lexicon". There just isn't any good reason why not, IMO. Siuenti (talk) 21:15, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
That's what three cites is for, to show they have entered the lexicon.--Prosfilaes (talk) 11:26, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Passed. - -sche (discuss) 07:21, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense - An aspect of technology or collection of products or services; a complex or nebulous collection of concepts. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:35, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

All I can find on Google Books and Usenet is the first sense. Even if usage existed, the second sense is utterly useless as a definition: "a complex or nebulous collection of concepts" seems oddly self-referential. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 00:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

quicumque vult[edit]

RFV-sense "A forward girl, ready to oblige every man that shall ask her." I can only find one book that uses "a quicumque vult" this way. - -sche (discuss) 22:32, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Basically the 1811 Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue wording for a slut. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:16, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:16, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


Appears unattested. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:08, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

As I noted elsewhere, there appears to be no actual usage with anything remotely near the meaning claimed. A "willie-wag-tail" is a kind of bird, and Robert Burns used the term in a poem, but I canna conceive of it having the meaning asserted here at all. And I looked assiduously for such a usage. Fail. Epic fail. Collect (talk) 02:14, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:54, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


Useless manager in a corporation. Equinox 23:09, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:02, 16 December 2012 (UTC)


I can't see the relevant snippet of the book quoted on the citations page to tell if it is valid or a scanno or typo; other Google Books hits are scannos. - -sche (discuss) 22:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


"A biscuit broken up in bowl and hot coffee, sugar and milk added and stirred." Added by User:Soakcrust, suspiciously. Equinox 01:06, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:13, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

casual birder[edit]

"Term used primarily in the homosexual community. Refers to a a heterosexual male who occasionally partakes in homosexual activity of either manual or oral nature. Does not refer to anal sex. Less common usage refers to a man or woman who will experience several male organs in succession via a glory hole wall or anonymous group engagement." I can't find anything about this; all search results appear to be the obvious thing, an amateur birdwatcher. Equinox 02:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

There should be a rule for these: dubious entries posted by occasional anon contributors may be undone by an admin without prejudice. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:06, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 22:14, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


"Discreet and Confidential Color". In what field is this term used? What does it mean? Google Web search only seems to show spammy duplicates of our entry. Equinox 18:48, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 22:15, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


"Obsolete spelling of harbour"

Etymologically implausible. All I seem to find are references to w:Market Harborough. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

That pretty much sums it up. - -sche (discuss) 08:29, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Note that this comes from Webster 1913, which also has the spelling harbrough. I have no idea whether the word is valid. Equinox 01:51, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 22:16, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Said to be a "Common misspelling of neighbour", but there are very few hits, and I suspect most of them are typos or other types of simple mistakes. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 22:19, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


Turkish. Supposedly meaning to cough. -- Curious (talk) 18:20, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 17:50, 23 December 2012 (UTC)