The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification.
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Doesn't seem to be English to me. And what is its significance? SemperBlotto 22:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Already cited; I can cite more books as well if need be. Relates to the Cthulhu mythos of H.P. Lovecraft. Was originally an invented phrase but continues to see use. sewnmouthsecret 23:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Added 3 more cites. sewnmouthsecret 00:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- If we're keeping this, we should explain with Usage notes that the phrase appears in English fiction, and so is technically English, but is intended to represent an ancient (fictitious) language as conceived by H. P. Lovecraft. --EncycloPetey 00:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'd call it interlingual (as it is not translated when the surrounding text is). However, I doubt we should have this entry at all - maybe Cthulhu fhtagn! bd2412 T 00:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'd agree with the interlingual, except I have found a few cites where it bears no translation at all. I didn't expect to place this entry, but when researching it on b.g.c. I found it was easily citable, without direct translations in some cases, and worth having its own entry. Anyone reading a book with this without a translation may want to see what it means; I have also seen this phrase by itself on a commercial t-shirt website. sewnmouthsecret 14:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Added usage notes. sewnmouthsecret 18:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
With the number of cites, well-formatted layout, and meeting every instance of CFI (there are google scholar hits too), I will mark this RFVpassed, unless anyone objects.
- Just wait for the coming burst of Harry Potter scholarship. DCDuring 12:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- There is already a body of serious scholarship literature on Buffy: The Vampire Slayer, so I've no doubt a similar corpus will materialize for HP. --EncycloPetey 23:11, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- DC- I had already agreed to only do a concordance. If terms are in use- they belong here. If not, they don't. I'm not trying to be a boundary pusher- just looking to include terms that are in use. If you object to anything I do, please let me know. sewnmouthsecret 00:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)