Talk:Unkonventionelle Spreng- und Brandvorrichtung

RFV discussion: April 2017–January 2018

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.

---

Unkonventionelle Spreng- und Brandvorrichtung

The German Wiktionarians decided to delete this vocablon. Perhaps we should too. --G23r0f0i (talk) 20:32, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

If attested and not SOP, it should be moved to unkonventionelle Spreng- und Brandvorrichtung. There's no reason for the u to be capitalized. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

There could be a reason to have it as Unkonventionelle Spreng- und Brandvorrichtung, namely attestation (WT:ATTEST). One can indeed find it with a capital u (that is inside of sentences, not just at the beginning), but I don't know if it is attestable for en.wt which requires three durably archived German sources.
Maybe also compare German Schwarzes Brett (which is not necessarily schwarz in the sense of black or illegal) → 1996 reformed (§ 63 & § 64) schwarzes Brett → 2004 rereformed still only schwarzes Brett or already schwarzes or Schwarzes Brett (?) → 2006 rerereformed schwarzes or Schwarzes Brett. -84.161.56.85 20:14, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

dict.cc has the same entry, but with a small "u", and the abbreviation USBV. DonnanZ (talk) 16:17, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

The entry has been moved, and there is an entry for improvised explosive device, so providing it's correct this can be kept. DonnanZ (talk) 16:30, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Cited both. -84.161.58.63 15:13, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

RFV failed.__Gamren (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)