Talk:rixig

RFV discussion: January 2022–February 2024

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.

---

rixig

German; tagged by LinguisticMystic today, not listed. J3133 (talk) 13:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

@Hamaryns as the creator.

(Notifying Matthias Buchmeier, -sche, Atitarev, Jberkel, Mahagaja, Fay Freak): I'm not finding anything at all. Anyone want to have a go at it before I close it as failed? Pretty funny that they have both been FWotD; Category:Words of the day that were later deleted. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 10:26, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

There is a Österreichisches Wörterbuch, but it is behind a paywall. – Jberkel 10:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

That is a Duden-measure dictionary, apart from it not containing quotations, why would one expect anything interesting there? They are marketing scams from which there is nothing good to expect, all the regard they have they get for regulatory capture. Very naïve to expect that all words that exist one can also find at least mentioned somewhere. Fay Freak (talk) 11:15, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

I'd expect Austrian-specific terms to be in there, for a start. But maybe I'm hopelessly naïve. – Jberkel 11:30, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Not everything labelled “Austria” is “General Austrian”. There is a lot that has only been fashionable for a certain time and only in the capital, Vienna being the capital of one of the greatest Empires, or even in territories lost to Austria. And of course they slight the recent monarchic past to focus on more progressive vocabulary. Fay Freak (talk) 11:48, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

There is a Czech-Slovak corpus including Austro-Hungarian parliamentary debates, which is so deep in the deep web that search engines fail to show words from its texts, such as honigeln = Honig ums Maul schmieren 1902-07-21 also employed by Robert Musil, as a reader found. Search engines are fibbing, but I don’t know how. Do you find where the full text search for the database is, @Fytcha, finding results even for normal German words? Fay Freak (talk) 11:00, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Fay Freak: That page can potentially be crawled and then indexed offline, but I'm not finding anything online to search it. FYI the reason why you can't search it isn't because search engines are fibbing but rather because the site admin explicitly disallowed it: robots.txt (last line: Disallow: /eknih). — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Is the reason to do so not that they have an own full-text search which I just failed to fathom behind all the tools on the site? I mean why does one exclude if the purpose of the website is to make texts accessible? Too bad I am not a search engine spammer using “bad bots” infamous to ignore robots.txt (Majestic-12?) to best find language material. Fay Freak (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Rixe and rixig each have one citation, but German is a WDL so they need 3. If they get deleted, don't forget to move the cites to Citation: namespace first, please! —Mahāgaja · talk 11:03, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Probably was not only used by Steiner though, but the internet is slanted, as in the example above, so it has the three uses in permanently recorded three independent instances, which we don’t find. Fay Freak (talk) 11:15, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

@Mahagaja: Perhaps it can be converted to Bavarian if we are reasonably sure that the German term is a borrowing from Bavarian. The quote is of course undoubtedly German but the term has to have come from somewhere; to give a comparable case, Bünzli is obviously borrowed from Alemannic for morphological reasons but even if the Alemannic one cannot be cited, it should be created and retained as long as we can cite it in German. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:46, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Term is unattested for over 2(!) years. Hence: RfV failed. --2003:DE:3730:F428:A061:1BF8:AC91:9DAB 00:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)