Wiktionary:Requests for verification/English

Wiktionary Request pages (edit) see also: discussions
Requests for cleanup
add new | history | archives

Cleanup requests, questions and discussions.

Requests for deletion/English
add new English request | history | archives

Requests for deletion of pages in the main namespace due to policy violations; also for undeletion requests.

Requests for deletion/Others
add new | history

Requests for deletion of pages in other (not the main) namespaces, such as categories, appendices and templates.

Requests for verification/English
add new English request | history | archives

Requests for verification in the form of durably-archived attestations conveying the meaning of the term in question.

Requests for moves, mergers and splits
add new | history | archives

Moves, mergers and splits; requests listings, questions and discussions.

Requests for deletion/Non-English
add new non-English request | history | archives

Requests for deletion and undeletion of foreign entries.

Requests for verification/Non-English
add new non-English request | history | archives

Requests for verification of foreign entries.

{{rfap}} • {{rfdate}} • {{rfdef}} • {{rfd-redundant}} • {{rfe}} • {{rfex}} • {{rfi}} • {{rfp}}

All Wiktionary: namespace discussions 1 2 3 4 5 - All discussion pages 1 2 3 4 5

This page is for entries in English. For entries in other languages, see Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English.

Scope of this request page:

  • In-scope: terms to be attested by providing quotations of their use
  • Out-of-scope: terms suspected to be multi-word sums of their parts such as “green leaf”



See also:

Overview: This page is for disputing the existence of terms or senses. It is for requests for attestation of a term or a sense, leading to deletion of the term or a sense unless an editor proves that the disputed term or sense meets the attestation criterion as specified in Criteria for inclusion, usually by providing citations from three durably archived sources. Requests for deletion based on the claim that the term or sense is nonidiomatic or "sum of parts" should be posted to Wiktionary:Requests for deletion. Requests to confirm that a certain etymology is correct should go in the Etymology scriptorium, and requests to confirm pronunciation is correct should go in the Tea Room.

Adding a request: To add a request for verification (attestation), add the template {{rfv}} or {{rfv-sense}} to the questioned entry, and then make a new section here. Those who would seek attestation after the term or sense is nominated will appreciate your doing at least a cursory check for such attestation before nominating it: Google Books is a good place to check, others are listed here (WT:SEA).

Answering a request by providing an attestation: To attest a disputed term, i.e. prove that the term is actually used and satisfies the requirement of attestation as specified in inclusion criteria, do one of the following:

  • Assert that the term is in clearly widespread use. (If this assertion is not obviously correct, or is challenged by multiple editors, it will likely be ignored, necessitating the following step.)
  • Cite, on the article page, usage of the word in permanently recorded media, conveying meaning, in at least three independent instances spanning at least a year. (Many languages are subject to other requirements; see WT:CFI.)

In any case, advise on this page that you have placed the citations on the entry page.

Closing a request: After a discussion has sat for more than a month without being "cited", or after a discussion has been "cited" for more than a week without challenge, the discussion may be closed. Closing a discussion normally consists of the following actions:

  • Deleting or removing the entry or sense (if it failed), or de-tagging it (if it passed). In either case, the edit summary or deletion summary should indicate what is happening.
  • Adding a comment to the discussion here with either RFV failed or RFV passed (emboldened), indicating what action was taken. This makes automatic archiving possible. Some editors strike out the discussion header at this time.

In some cases, the disposition is more complicated than simply "RFV failed" or "RFV passed" (for example, two senses may have been nominated, of which only one was cited).

Archiving a request: At least a week after a request has been closed, if no one has objected to its disposition, the request may be archived to the entry's talk-page. This consists of removing the discussion from this page, and copying it to the entry's talk-page (using {{archive-top|rfv}} + {{archive-bottom}}). Historically, it could also include simply commenting on the talk page with a link to the diff of the edit that removed the discussion from this page. Examples of discussions archived at talk pages: Talk:non-lemma, Talk:accident-blackspot.

Oldest tagged RFVs

May 2019Edit


DTLHS (talk) 16:04, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

I added two cites to the citations page, but we still need a third. Adverbs are so hard to cite! Kiwima (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

June 2019Edit


DTLHS (talk) 18:31, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I only managed to find one. Kiwima (talk) 23:31, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

July 2019Edit


DTLHS (talk) 23:22, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

cited Kiwima (talk) 00:09, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Those are citations of "inter-censually". DTLHS (talk) 00:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes, but not "intercensually", because they treat "censually" as a word. Kiwima (talk) 00:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Obviously not in the opinion of one censor of citations. DCDuring (talk) 02:16, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
I think there are great advantages for Wiktionary from considering hyphens to be word separators in English. The proliferation of entries for hyphenated terms could be systematically brought to an end with no reduction of meaningful semantic content.
In the case of inter-sensually it is interesting to note that there are no Google Books hits for intercensually (There are two at Scholar.) DCDuring (talk) 02:29, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
I don't see inter-censually as evidence for censually. The construction might be inter-censual + -ly for one thing. Equinox 20:23, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Good point. Then we only have one cite. Kiwima (talk) 22:36, 13 July 2019 (UTC)


Tagged by Special:Contributions/2600:1000:b100:697a:65a3:cbbb:f084:1882 but not listed. — surjection?〉 20:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)


Given citation is the only one on GB2600:1000:B119:704C:AB:BBA5:283D:7AA9 15:02, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

August 2019Edit


DTLHS (talk) 00:13, 9 August 2019 (UTC)


Noun, sense 1. Tharthan (talk) 16:50, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Most of what I find are mentions. this looks like a use to me, this is a bit iffy. Kiwima (talk) 22:18, 28 August 2019 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 16:45, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I have added two cites to the citations page - one very solid, the other a bit mention-y. Everything else I found was clearly just mentions. Kiwima (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

September 2019Edit


Looking on Google Books, I see a few mentions, and two possible uses in the plural. Old Man Consequences (talk) 00:33, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Most of what I find looks like mentions to me. I added what I could find. Kiwima (talk) 00:46, 12 September 2019 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 21:44, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

I can find LOTS of mentions, but so far, only one use, which is on the citations page. Kiwima (talk) 23:10, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
The dictionaries generally specify "old English law" or something to that effect which would make this Middle French rather than English. A French journal article I found mentions that it was specifically in use in the 14th–15th centuries. However the definition, although given in a few English references, does not seem to be right; from what I can see "brennage" was the feudal tenure based on paying bran as a substitute for other duties, rather than other duties as a substitute for bran. This is how it's given at TLFi and some English sources also agree ([1]). I created a Middle French entry at brenage. —Nizolan (talk) 12:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

October 2019Edit


Rfv-sense "Alternative form of antisocial". Originally added by Special:Contributions/ as two distinct meanings: "Not interested in meeting other people, a person averse to sociality", "Unfriendly toward others". — surjection?〉 06:53, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

I found one cite, but that is all. Kiwima (talk) 00:07, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

/* moved from below */ verified on collins dictionary —This comment was unsigned.

There is already an RfV above. We need attestation of use, not mentions in a dictionary, though the dictionary mention would suggest that we can expect to find such attestation. DCDuring (talk) 02:36, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Name entries by IP editorEdit

(Note to admins: Please archive this discussion to Category talk:English surnames from Japanese after the issue is resolved)

I cannot find a better place to put this, but I doubt the existence of basically all names (mostly surnames) added by Special:Contributions/ and Special:Contributions/, both for English and Non-English (Portuguese, French, German, Italian, etc.), since it seems that many of the names are those of fictional characters (or of Japanese emperors, etc.) and their use in the languages they are claimed to be used in is doubtful. There are simply too many to list on here. — surjection?〉 09:04, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

If a large proportion of the names turns out to be unverifiable, I'm not wholly opposed to the idea of just deleting all of those entries, even if that may seem like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. It is also worth noting that this is possibly the same editor that was adding nonsense Egyptian entries earlier. — surjection?〉 09:07, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
@Eirikr What is your opinion on entries such as Fubuki, Masahito,Yoshihito, etc? These seem to be romanizations, rather than actual borrowings into English, Spanish, Portuguese, etc. On the other hand, there are entries such as Shinzo, Nijo, Ichijo, Shinjo that have lost the "ō". Are these considered actual borrowings? KevinUp (talk) 09:41, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Meh. Unless we've got verifiable examples of English speakers are using these names for their own children, I'm more of the opinion that these are romanizations -- and the dropping of the macron is not evidence of borrowing, in my view, so much as evidence of English writers and readers not understanding diacritics, or simply not bothering with them. We see the same thing with other languages, like Hawaiian humuhumunukunukuāpuaʻa appearing in English contexts as humuhumunukunukuapuaa, losing both the macron and the ʻokina.
Otherwise, we may as well just romanize every name everywhere that isn't already spelled in Latin letters and dump all of that into Wiktionary as "English". Which seems to be what this anon is doing for Japanese names. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:55, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
I've cleaned up and removed English, Cebuano, Spanish, Tagalog, Portuguese, etc from the following entries:
@Eirikr These entries also need to be deleted:
I found similar entries created by Special:Contributions/ and Special:Contributions/ in 2016 so I will clean those up later. KevinUp (talk) 00:50, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
@Surjection: you're right that the names in the boxes are lists of personal names of emperors, but also first names of Madoka characters (I don't remember a real person named Kyūbei as in the familiar in Madoka), the dropped-macron names as mentioned before, and possibly IJN battleship names (edited 吹雪 long time ago).
Isn't the romanization of 久兵衛 written as Kyūbee or Kyūbē? I would like an analysis regarding the sound shift from べいゑ → べえ... ~ POKéTalker) 10:05, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
Kyūbee appears to be legit. I'm glad you've restored the romanization entry. KevinUp (talk) 06:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Update: After analyzing entries created by various IPs, I've identified the following 540 entries with Japanese romanizations assigned as English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and Tagalog lemmas. If any of these lemmas are indeed used for names of native speakers, then citations or statistical evidence will be needed. KevinUp (talk) 06:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Extended content

Also, these entries need to be deleted due to incorrect romanization (using "o" instead of "ō", etc):

Cleanup is in progress. Please archive this discussion to Category talk:English surnames from Japanese once the issue is resolved. KevinUp (talk) 06:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I've added RFV tags to all entries on the "small list". Note to anyone adding cites that we specifically need examples of these being used in English texts and not as romanizations (or botched romanizations) of names. — surjection?〉 07:26, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I think a very small number of these ought to have English entries as generally known historical figures, though not as "given names": in particular Hirohito and perhaps Akihito since they're in wide and unambiguous use in English to refer to specific people on the same principle as e.g. Cicero or Napoleon sense 1. —Nizolan (talk) 13:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 18:04, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

In addition to the one paper, there is this. Kiwima (talk) 21:31, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

November 2019Edit

tredecillionth, quindecillionth, quattuordecillionthEdit

DTLHS (talk) 05:20, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

I came here to say "don't bring obvious rubbish like quattuordecillionth to the RFV, just delete it" but then I found that it is in some (Google-scanned) books. Wow! But yes these do seem like "list words" like the phobias. Equinox 07:23, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
I have added what I could find to the respective citations pages, omitting all instances that are just in lists of large or small powers. The result is one cite each for tredecillionth and quindecillionth, and two for quattuordecillionth. Kiwima (talk) 00:23, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
I didn't find any other uses of them on Usenet, Issuu, or Scholar, nor in a Google search of Newspapers.com, nor in poking around Google News (in case that had pointers to any papers using the term). - -sche (discuss) 03:59, 21 March 2020 (UTC)


Created by the same editor as the other "large numerals" entries above, who still creates them without any citations. — surjection?〉 09:41, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps we should move these to the dictionary-only terms appendix, or even give them an appendix of their own. Kiwima (talk) 20:54, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
And shouldn't this be unotrigintillion, which has one citation? Kiwima (talk) 21:06, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
untrigintillion is the form you’d expect, in analogy with undecillion. However, whereas undecillion is from existing Latin ūndecim + -illion, there is no Latin numeral *ūntriginta; the Latin term for XXXI is triginta (et) unus/-a/-um, literally “thirty (and) one”. Pages tretrigintillion, quattuortrigintillion, quintrigintillion, ..., were all deleted in 2006; the latter even again in 2015.  --Lambiam 22:57, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
I've found two citations: Citations:untrigintillion. I like the idea of an appendix for the unattestable ones. (The citations at Citations:sexvigintillion can be used to attest many others.) - -sche (discuss) 08:50, 23 February 2020 (UTC)


"Acronym of Louis XIV, James II, Queen Mary of Modena and the Prince of Wales. (a code-word among Jacobites)". I can see a couple of mentions in GBooks but no real usage. How would it be used anyway? One source seems to say that a person actually limped (walked lamely) to subtly show Jacobite support. That of course doesn't attest the word sense. Equinox 01:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

cited Kiwima (talk) 23:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Not cited. You have shown that throwing the word "limp" into conversation was a code-word, along the lines of Freemasons using certain words; but it still appears to mean "limp", like "walk awkwardly". It doesn't have a separate meaning; it is just that speaking of limping (walking awkwardly) is something Jacobites did to secretly identify themselves. Usage note at best. Equinox 22:11, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
Drinking “the health of Limp” can hardly refer to an awkward gait. Here the term explicitly refers to the acronym, but then it becomes of course a mention. But can one really expect persecuted people using a code-word to avoid prosecution to record it durably in a way in which it is recognizable as such?  --Lambiam 19:44, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
In an anti-Jacobite engraving, entitled “The Triumphs of Providence over Hell, France & Rome, In the Defeating & Discovering of the late Hellish and Barbarous Plott, for Aſſaſſinating his Royall Majesty King William   III”, seen here, the word LIMP appears, as well as in the accompanying text.  --Lambiam 20:20, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
It looks like that gives us two, but we still need a third.
Macaulay refers to a letter of L’Hermitage (to the States General?) of September 5/15 1695, and Narcissus Luttrell‘s Parliamentary Diary, of which I can’t find an accessible online copy.  --Lambiam 13:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 16:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I have added one cite to the citations page. Kiwima (talk) 23:33, 19 November 2019 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 16:48, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I added one cite to the citations page. Kiwima (talk) 23:36, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

January 2020Edit


2 BGC results. — surjection?〉 18:49, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 02:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

February 2020Edit


A lesbian. Term proposed on a Web site that never caught on; I see no uses in Google Books. Equinox 14:07, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

I found a couple of mentions (here and here), but no actual uses, except ones that are not durably archived, such as this and this. Kiwima (talk) 21:04, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 09:33, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

IMO the 2008 citation is not acceptable. It uses the word as a word: "choosing gayelle", like "saying strawberry aloud". Equinox 20:12, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Ok, I have added another one. It seems to be emerging as a word, but is still too new to have made most writing that is not targetted at the gay community. Kiwima (talk) 21:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Not cited. Two of the three non-mention cites are from autostraddle.com, which is not durably archived. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

lusûs naturæEdit

A horrid creation of the author of many such, with one cite that I can't confirm. DCDuring (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I found and added one other citation (which I was able to see has this on the page; I was not able to confirm that Dickens does). But the inclusion of so much etymological information seems excessive/unusual for an inflected form, especially when the singular entry already covers the plural's etymology. And the singular lemma should itself be moved from lusus naturæ to lusus naturae (Ngrams). - -sche (discuss) 16:55, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
I've moved the lemma (of the singular) to the ligatureless form, at least. - -sche (discuss) 17:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Surely this is an alternative, archaic spelling of (the plural) lusus naturae, rather than a plural of lusus naturæ. Madame Blavatsky died in 1891, so her quotation of 2018 must have been channelled through occult forces.  --Lambiam 17:47, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Good point. (Please revise the presentation as to "form of" as you see fit.) And older editions of her work don't have the û, though that doesn't prevent this edition from being used as a citation of a work that does have û (it exists in the world as a work someone might "run across", in the words of CFI). - -sche (discuss) 17:55, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
  Done. Another point: I doubt that the specific form “lusûs naturae”, which is given as an alternative plural at lusus naturae, was ever used in actuality.  --Lambiam 17:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
If you find this entry in its challenged form objectionable, you might wish to review other contributions by the same person, distinguished by extreme pedantry. DCDuring (talk) 03:12, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
I made a list of English entries using âêîôûāēīōūæœ (characters I've seen used in archaic Latinate entry titles) which aren't marked as archaic or obsolete. Many are valid, e.g. placenames, some are things that need to be marked as archaic (with content moved to another spelling), but many are other plurals, like Aramæans. Probably we should come up with a general policy on whether to present these as plurals of the ligature-using singulars or as archaic forms of the non-ligature plurals (or singulars). - -sche (discuss) 04:51, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
@Lambiam other entries in this vein: conatûs, nexûs, nexūs, ictūs, lapsūs linguae, statūs (with an anti-pronunciation section). - -sche (discuss) 16:55, 20 April 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 19:21, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

  • 1989, M.D. Gabovich, N.N. Semashko, N.V. Pleshivtsev, "Ion and atomic beams for controlled fusion and technology"
The possibility of obtaining solid pseudosolutions of inert gases such as titanium argonide, scandium heliumide, etc., has been demonstrated
  • 2020, Quizlet, Compounds Quiz [2]
ionic: NSiHe - nitrogen silicon heliumide
-- 19:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

I added one more. This is now cited Kiwima (talk) 21:31, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Not cited. The 2020 cite is not durably archived. Old Man Consequences (talk) 02:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

March 2020Edit


DTLHS (talk) 23:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)


All mentions, no uses- even on regular Google search. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I managed to find one use (on citations page). There is also this, but it doesn't count. Kiwima (talk) 22:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)


1 use in BGC. — surjection?〉 17:39, 23 March 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 02:23, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

I added a few lines to the citations page, although they seem to support other senses. I only found uses of Citations:theriatric and Citations:theriatrician in relation to veterinary medicine. – Einstein2 (talk) 10:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

April 2020Edit

Algerian Saharan ArabicEdit

Ghost language. A few uses are SOP. Fay Freak (talk) 14:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

I added two cites to the citations page, but from what I can see, the language is more comomonly called Algerian Saharan (which is citable). Perhaps we should move the entry. As it is a form of Arabic, it is, as Fay Freak points out, SOP, but only if we have "Algerian Saharan" Kiwima (talk) 20:11, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, these seem two uses for an alleged distinct language, and at the same time they look like somebody didn’t even know what he talks about but went through some lists and said a sentence or two about every one. Encyclopedism, third-hand uses. This is probably a candidate for the template {{no entry}}. Fay Freak (talk) 22:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Saidi ArabicEdit

A database monster. Even if considered a language, not spelled so but with a ʿ or an other apostrophe after the a and often a macron or two thereafter, and preferrably with . Fay Freak (talk) 14:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

It could be a spelling variant, but I can find multiple uses of Saidi referring to the people. However the would probably only be used by scholars in specialized publications; common English wouldn't (or I would argue shouldn't) use it. Almost looks like it could be SOP as Arabic of the Saidi, but I don't really know anything about it. From the Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (2nd ed., vol. 1)[3] "Varieties of Egyptian Arabic include ..., and in Middle and Upper Egypt (known as Saidi Arabic)." -Mike (talk) 21:10, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
It looks like “common English” wouldn’t conceptualize such a language at all. “Commoners” wouldn’t know how to pronounce it and call it Egyptian Arabic, as do also most language scientists without exerting themselves much in splitting. Fay Freak (talk) 22:13, 5 April 2020 (UTC)


Since this has been created 3 times now I guess it should be RFVed. DTLHS (talk) 02:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Worth noting that I already asked the creator before to stop adding these number entries, but it seems they decided to ignore my request. — surjection??〉 10:45, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
I added one citation to the citations page, but that is all I could find. I find it interesting that the creator copied my Usage note about the long form being unattested that I added to the big numbers that passed RFV. Kiwima (talk) 21:31, 7 April 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 02:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Here's two: in a table of calculations in an ancient Buddhist text and in a discussion of names for huge numbers. They are somewhat mention-y, but they both use it to refer to specific numbers in actual use elsewhere. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:29, 7 April 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 22:14, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I can find several mentions, but no uses. Kiwima (talk) 02:22, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
Here's one use from 1659, can't find any others: [4]Nizolan (talk) 22:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)


Collection of Slavophone countries. Equinox 13:07, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

I found a single use on Wired with a slightly different meaning. – Einstein2 (talk) 18:30, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
It is a word, but I don't see it in the usual places that I look for words. I have to go to the wider Internet. Besides the podcast, I see instances at Twitter (just a single tweet), fandom.com, scottishreviewofbooks.org (appearing in quotes), vice.com, rbth.com, a nationstates.net poll, and prospectmagazine.co.uk (lower case variant). -Mike (talk) 18:50, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
It's more like an instance of -sphere as a productive suffix, I think—though I take the expected definition to be more on the lines of Sinosphere's looser "countries and regions influenced by". You can also find scattered usages of terms like "Japanosphere", "Hungarosphere" etc. Might still be enough for verification (you can find a dozen or two more tweets incidentally with a general rather than hashtag-specific search, cut off before the podcast started—use the keywords "Slavosphere" until:2019-10-01). Nizolan (talk) 20:04, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


As a generic term for the two species. DTLHS (talk) 04:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

The definition is not for both of the two species, but for either of the two species. It is definitely possible to find cites for each individual species (see citations page). Kiwima (talk) 00:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Hmm, I suppose the question is whether "crocias" occurs by itself, e.g. as "I saw a crocias", outside the full (common) names of the two species. (If so, I think it's unimportant whether it's presented the way it currently is or by listing "a grey-crowned crocias" and "a spotted crocias" as separate senses of "crocias".) On the raw web, I can find examples of "a crocias", but not in books. It's possible this should be converted to an {{only used in}} entry pointing to the two full names. - -sche (discuss) 18:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC)


Newly added: US slang: "a male person". Equinox 00:51, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Not an adequate definition of the slang and not sure it's been used generally for over a year. e.g. the relevant ghits for "don't worry king" are all from 2020, and the Urban Dictionary entry was only added this February. —Nizolan (talk) 12:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
The definition at queen ("A powerful or forceful female person.") may also need some refinement, but ultimately may help us define this (if it is attested...), since the usage I've seen does seem intended to parallel women building each other up by calling each other "queen". - -sche (discuss) 18:16, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

May 2020Edit


Rfv-sense: That cannot be turned into a prime number by changing just one of its digits to any other digit. DTLHS (talk) 16:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

For base 10, these form sequence A192545[5] in the OEIS. They do not use the term, but Wikipedia does – which does not count for attestation purposes. I found one usable cite: [6].
There is another Google Books hit at [7]. These and the number of reasonable-seeming hits in general web search seem persuasive that this probably is a genuine term. Mihia (talk) 01:03, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
Noting also that there are one or two hits with the spelling unprimable, as well as one or two instances of unprimable in the sense "unable to be prepared for work", as in e.g. "unprimable pump". Mihia (talk) 09:59, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

your mother, yo momma etc.Edit

Our definition:

your mother!
A general purpose insult.

I have never heard of this in the sense that our definition seems to indicate. Does it exist? Of course, I have heard of it as part of an insult, e.g. "Your mother's so fat, ... etc.", or as a punchline or rejoinder "What's fat, stupid and ... etc.?" -- "Your mother!", but does someone say "Your mother!" without such a context, as other insults might be used? Mihia (talk) 09:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I certainly heard it growing up in Texas in the '80s. If someone insulted you and you couldn't think of a snappy comeback, you could say "yo mama", even if you didn't predicate anything of her. Wikipedia's article Maternal insult agrees: "the phrase 'yo mama' by itself, without any qualifiers, has become commonly used as an all-purpose insult or an expression of defiance". I'm not sure whether it works with "your mother" instead of "yo mama", but it might. —Mahāgaja · talk 11:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


(It's short for "market urbanist".) I've found tweets ([8], [9], [10], [11]), but nothing in more permanent places. Note that it's apparently not that intuitive, as you can frequently see people asking "what's a murbie?" in the replies. grendel|khan 22:55, 18 May 2020 (UTC)


Noun: alt form of tizz, i.e. a state of excitement or distress. This can also be a tizzy or tissy, but I've never seen tis. The extremely bad and inaccurate state of the tissy entry until recently makes me suspicious of this one too. Equinox 21:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

So far, I've only managed to find one cite. There may be more, but it is hard to search for. Kiwima (talk) 05:20, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: "To block discussion on an internet board to restrict dissent". If attestable, I'd be interested in knowing what the etymology is. —Mahāgaja · talk 08:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Ety presumably a social justice thing: [12]. In such circles those who disagree are encouraged to "sit down and shut up", "educate themselves" etc. Equinox 13:20, 26 May 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 19:55, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I found a single relevant cite. Another use seems to be a misconstruction of mitral stenosis. – 21:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Although it appears in a dictionary, I would consider this to be a use, which gives us two cites. Kiwima (talk) 20:56, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

meraklon Edit

DTLHS (talk) 19:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Unless I'm mistaken, this will hinge on WT:BRAND, since there seem to be enough raw hits to pass otherwise. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 21:45, 25 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 20:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I added what I could find to Citations:meneito. Only one cite for this spelling. – Einstein2 (talk) 21:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: Someone who frequently courts women for sex. Different senses would probably includable. DTLHS (talk) 21:41, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I could find no evidence for this meaning, although I added and cited a definition as a type of gynecological surgeon. I also added a single cite for yet another meaning to the citations page. Kiwima (talk) 21:20, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 02:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense, as short for strap-on. I can find uses on Twitter ([13], [14], [15], [16]), but it's difficult to search for, and I haven't found it anywhere durable. grendel|khan 23:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 21:16, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 03:04, 26 May 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "the city of Chaozhou". —Suzukaze-c 09:20, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Comment on the quotes added by @17jiangz1: These refer to the Teochew cultural group, which is a missing sense. None of these refer to "the city of Teochew". —Suzukaze-c 03:15, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
I believe that the new quotes added after the above comment still refer to the Teochew cultural group, save for departments in Teochew City (2015, Eric Low) and perhaps 8 Chen Chaozhou (Teochew city). (2014, Sihua Liang. But what does this mean, "8 Chen Chaozhou"?). —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:03, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Chaozhou, ChaozhousEdit

"A native or inhabitant of the Chaozhou region of eastern Guangdong province, China.". —Suzukaze-c (talk) 04:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

neko Edit

Rfv-sense: cat DTLHS (talk) 20:14, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Does either sense meet CFI? There's an occasional "Neko girl" (often capitalized): "Suddenly, the Neko girl changed to a cat"[17]. Neko is typically used in the context of animé where people would be likely to write romanized Japanese words. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:26, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 21:19, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 20:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 21:54, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

I created lithiatic, which this might have been an error for. Old Man Consequences (talk) 13:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
I have added two cites. Kiwima (talk) 21:55, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

lipomatosous Edit

DTLHS (talk) 21:55, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

cited Kiwima (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I have expanded your first quotation, since it can barely be considered English (machine translated?) DTLHS (talk) 22:22, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
And I added yet another citation. Kiwima (talk) 23:02, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Here that journal article uses the spelling "Lipomatous". I think we should just call this a misspelling. DTLHS (talk) 23:05, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed. I am convinced that the citations are misspellings. Kiwima (talk) 21:17, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 21:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

A legitimate French word, now so defined, but apparently not English. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 23:15, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 21:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 22:03, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

I found two cites with different senses. --Einstein2 (talk) 07:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 22:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

  • It's starting to look like someone's got it in for me. SemperBlotto (talk) 05:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it infamy! Mihia (talk) 23:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
This partially visible article researches a different meaning: "marriageable, fit for a husband", based on a lapis ("stone"). The joke is the secondary meaning of stone. DCDuring (talk) 00:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
  • No it's starting to look like you have a long-term habit of adding non-words from improperly edited papers from sources like PLOS-ONE and someone other than me has finally noticed. Equinox 10:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

katoforit Edit

= the mineral katophorite (and stated at that entry to be the "original" form). Is it English? Judging from Google Books it may be German (with capital K), though katoforite with the final e can be found easily in English. Equinox 18:44, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Without the final "e", it looks like it's German to me. The only English quote I can find:
  • 1927, Bulletin - Issues 46-50, page 37:
    The latter speaks of it as a zoning, giving a gradual transition from a "katoforit kern" to an outside rim of the character of arfvedsonite.
is referring to a German text. Kiwima (talk) 23:09, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Defined original German form Katoforite. I see occasional uses in various languages (Norwegian, German, Slovakian) as katoforit, probably not enough to cite. Google Scholar offers a snippet "The spelling of catophorite varies; we have adopted LJ Spencer's anglicized version of Brogger's Katoforit (Min. Mag., 1900, vol. 12, pp. 380, 385)". Vox Sciurorum (talk) 13:38, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Shouldn't it be Katoforit (plural Katoforite) in modern standard German? Other words in Category:de:Minerals seem to be using the -it suffix. – Einstein2 (talk) 13:53, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
I'll pass on that question. I used the original 1894 paper on the mineral which defined a word Katoforite with plural Katoforiten. In the 20th Century much scientific literature changed from German to English and spelling changes are harder for me to find. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:19, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:47, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 23:01, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:44, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

notogamia Edit

DTLHS (talk) 23:02, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

myriadaire Edit

DTLHS (talk) 23:13, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:54, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

hanjaeo Edit

A term derived from Korean, sense "transliterated Korean hanja" - this seems inaccurate is the only sense listed so I was not sure whether to add the whole entry or just that one sense. I do not speak Korean but given the meaning of the equivalent Chinese characters in Chinese, and the Korean word linked in the Etymology section (which says: (linguistics) Sino-Korean words; Korean words etymologically from or influenced by Chinese), it seems irrelevant and inaccurate. I think it is possibly confusion between the etymology and the definition. Hkbusfan (talk) 02:29, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:56, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

shoot the daylights Edit

Chat casually. I see only "shoot the daylights out of", i.e. totally blast with guns etc. Equinox 15:47, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

I believe this is a notorious mass creator of wrong/invented entries who has come back. User name Shamar (with some digits I can't remember). Please keep an eye on them. Equinox 16:00, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:57, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Rar Edit

"Roshal Archive, a proprietary data compression format" —Suzukaze-c 17:56, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Note it actually says "alternative form of RAR" (at least it does now) and that is well known. So I assume Suzukaze is challenging this capitalisation form and not the term in general. Equinox 07:26, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Yes; I should have been more specific. —Suzukaze-c 03:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:58, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

neuroenergetics Edit


  • The act of dynamically changing the magnetic field of the body through force field or touch and reinforcing with neuroplasticity

Pretty much everything in Google Books is about the technical side of neurobiology. Nothing even remotely like this sci-fi or pseudoscience definition. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:47, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

overranging Edit

Blotto created this with the etymologically sound but actually nonsensical definition "excessive ranging". If you look up this word it's actually a specific thing in neuroimaging/radiography, I think some kind of problem where the measurement is not taken properly, along with overscanning and overbeaming. I wish I could fix it but I don't know enough about this topic. However I think this current definition is a lazy lie. Equinox 10:57, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

There actually is some evidence for Blotto's definition, but it is clearly just the present participle of the verb overrange. I did add the radiography meaning as a separate meaning. Kiwima (talk) 02:18, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 23:00, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

univy Edit

Possible results on BGC, which might be false positives. — surjection??〉 20:35, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 23:01, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020Edit


Tagged but not listed. Old Man Consequences (talk) 16:41, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Google Scholar with restriction to English results finds enough hits to show use as an English word if obscure humanities journals are durable. Needs more thought. (I'm more accustomed to citing single word name scientific journals about which I have no doubts.) I'll see what I can find through a university library account. Seems not to be capitalized consistently and it might not be a proper noun. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 22:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
For now, added one citation that may count as a mention rather than a use but gives a different (broader) definition. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 23:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
So far it's looking like this is a typical use/mention: "We do not see in either collection any indications of how terrible things were for soldiers or civilians, nor do we see the grave social effects of the forced Ottoman conscription in the region that was known as seferberlik." And this: "scores of men who had been recruited in the Ottoman military’s seferberlik campaign had been killed." The word is always in italics or quotation marks. If those count as English language uses, I think we're set. But it feels more like Kristallnacht, which is in Wiktionary only as a German word. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 00:10, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Most of the uses make clear this is (a transliteration of) an Ottoman Turkish word. It is quite common in scholarly historical articles to use a non-English term to refer to a historically defined topic, like here dotis dictio for a Roman legal term, or here pankarpia (πανκαρπία) for an Ancient Greek concept. This too looks more like an instance of code-switching.  --Lambiam 10:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

the French have arrivedEdit

surjection??〉 21:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

riot boosting, riot boosterEdit

Both terms were hot words in 2019. I can find a fair number of news articles that use riot boosting, and a smaller (but >3) number using riot booster. The problem is, they are all directly related to either a 2019 South Dakota law, which was struck down, and/or a 2020 law to replace it. Is this sufficiently independent for attestation? Cnilep (talk) 05:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

If it's only used talking about South Dakota 2019-2020, I would drop it as a sum of parts of riot + booster (Someone who is a fan or supporter of something). Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:43, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
If it is used in durably archived independent cites about those who are accused of being or are found to be riot-boosters and the term appears in the law(s), then its meaning in law would almost certainly not be SoP. DCDuring (talk) 21:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
It is used in the S.D. law. New York Magazine* claimed in Dec. 19, 2019 that the term was 'invented last year by South Dakota lawmakers'. The Billings Gazette*(AP 3/4/20) (MT) and the Sioux Falls Argus Leader and Rapid City Journal*, have articles using riot-booster as do Mother Jones*, Seattle Times*, Washington Times*, The Atlantic*, and Rolling Stone*. The publications marked by "*" have print editions (some only on weekends), though I can't determine whether the relevant text appeared in a print edition for most of them. Most of the publications run the story over the name of their own staff reporter, not one from a syndicator like AP. The first cite I found that might be durably archived cite was in the Washington Times on March 7, 2019. June 4, 2020 is the date of a recent Rolling Stones story. DCDuring (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


One BGC use, it seems. — surjection??〉 10:14, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

And even that is actually red-flaggy (with a hyphen) when you view the page. —Mahāgaja · talk 14:19, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
I have added red-flaggy but could not find citations for the unhyphenated form. – Einstein2 (talk) 19:03, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Two more added to the citations page. 2012 is spread across two lines, so it's unclear whether it's a true hyphenated use, or an unhyphenated use broken up by formatting. WordyAndNerdy (talk) 00:49, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

coelum empireum Edit

--Bakunla (talk) 09:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Added quotes (and a proper definition). --Lvovmauro (talk) 11:45, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 20:33, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 17:58, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Interesting. It's a meaningful word with sound etymology and appearing in dictionaries back at least to the 19th Century, but nobody has ever used it. The antonym cavicorn has a few uses. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:40, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 17:59, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 18:04, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


Is this used in English? — justin(r)leung (t...) | c=› } 06:35, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I doubt there are many Hong Kong English Internet slangs, since people don't usually use English on the Hong Kong part of the Internet. Anyway, even if it's used in an English sentence, it sounds like code-switching to me. RcAlex36 (talk) 06:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "The name of the Latin-script letter Z" — surjection??〉 15:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

The entry izzard1 in The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia of 1903, presents an etymological theory of this name for the letter Z (see our izzard), saying that it is “said to stand for s hard”, adding, “but evidence of s hard as a current name for z is lacking“. Could it be that shard is a misreading of s hard – which, however, is apparently not attested in this sense?  --Lambiam 19:16, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
It would be surprising for z to be called "s hard"; given sense 7, subsense 2 of hard#Adjective, /s/ would be the "hard" one and /z/ the "soft" one. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:51, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
For that very reason Walker‘s Critical Pronouncing Dictionary of 1797 already called “s hard” “a groſs miſnomer”.  --Lambiam 10:48, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


RFV-sense of "Having both animal and human-like characteristics; of or related to the furry subculture." Seems like another case of people reading an adjective into a compounded/attributive noun. Is there evidence of comparable or predicative usage? The fandom-related nominal sense could have easily arisen from the regular meaning of the adjective. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 16:40, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, remember that this noun came from an adjective in the first place. I can find e.g. "A very Furry St. Patrick's Day" (title of a piece of furry artwork with that day as the theme). Equinox 17:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
In most cases the uses can be satisfactorily be explained as the attributive use of a noun, but what about “somebody may identify as furry, “I’ve been furry my whole life”, and “someone who without a doubt was born furry?  --Lambiam 18:45, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
  • I feel like "A very Furry St. Patrick's Day" follows the construction of A Very Brady Christmas, which IMO does not confirm that Brady is really an adjective. —Mahāgaja · talk 05:38, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Then from forums.furaffinity.net: "How furry am I? How furry are you?", "Seriously how furry can you get?", "The community is not so furry anymore". Equinox 23:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
I am inclined to agree it's an adjective, but I would shorten the definition to just its (current) second half: "of or related to the furry subculture". - -sche (discuss) 08:38, 25 June 2020 (UTC)


surjection??〉 09:52, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

All I can find is non-durably archived, such as this blog. Kiwima (talk) 23:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


This hot word doesn't appear to have made it beyond 2018, perhaps not much beyond March. I find a few uses of snoil in news articles, but few mean “soil on snow” (and those that do are from March 2018). One is a “snow coil” from 2017; others are Lions spelled backwards by sports fans. Snoil also appears to be the name of a character in the Star Wars universe. Cnilep (talk) 06:51, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it will only reappear in use during a period when the phenomenon will occur in Britain. At this stage, it was a one-off event in March 2018, so has not been citable outside then. -Stelio (talk) 16:28, 15 June 2020 (UTC)


Any takers? SemperBlotto (talk) 10:09, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: weight gained during the COVID-19 pandemic DTLHS (talk) 16:36, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I dont know about 19, but I think we can find cites for the phrase COVID-15, which belongs to a pattern of phrases such as sober 15, freshman fifteen, and so on which are in common enough use that they can be used in connected speech without explanation. In our case, we found a variant where the number is 19 instead of 15 because it's a pun, but again, finding cites for this is going to be quite a chore, because it's spelled in exactly the same way as the name of the disease. Soap 14:29, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
I found one newspaper cite (published in two papers). The trick is to imagine some words that would likely collocate with the term in the sense challenged. I used "gain|lose|gains|loses|losing|gaining|lost|gained my|your|our|their|his|her|any|some|much COVID-19" at Google News and Google Groups. It will take some imagination to get some other collocations. DCDuring (talk) 23:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)


Having a hard time thinking of examples where this is used. DTLHS (talk) 21:15, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

And we have no inhabitants of Category:English words suffixed with -e.
As a test, I googled "bike-e" (with a hyphen) - it assumed that I meant e-bike. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
All I can figure is maybe the creator had model numbers in mind, like if someone makes a model 14 vs a model 14e? - -sche (discuss) 21:56, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Yes, that is what I had in mind. A marketing tool to indicate electronic or electrified models. -- 06:06, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Such as electrified versions Opel Corsa-e, Fiat 500e, etc. (similarly for electronic versions of products) -- 11:19, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
I hate to split hairs but electric and electronic are not really the same ... i think we all agree the car sense is cited but I wouldnt count those as being examples of the electronic sense. Soap 17:40, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
I'm not saying that they are. The examples listed are for electric. I'll have to look through some parts catalogues for electronic versions of analogue/mechanical fixtures, for the electronic or internet connected things, and they'd usually be model numbers -- 01:05, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
I would not really consider this a suffix. Marketing names are formed in all kinds of ways; there is a vague idea that e means electronic or e-mail etc., and it may be wedged in any-old-where (compare the use of the Internet @ in the Amstrad E-m@iler). If it's not particularly common then we probably shouldn't include it. Possible talking-points: -ex, pak. Equinox 17:45, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

semenology Edit

Created by @SemperBlotto. I don't see any evidence at all on BGC. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:24, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Cited. DTLHS (talk) 03:29, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
The main entry should probably be seminology, with semenology an alternative form. (See [18].)  --Lambiam 18:01, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 20:43, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: "A convenience store open 24 hours a day." Any cites to corroborate this? --Robbie SWE (talk) 10:19, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

A Google Books search suggests it does not usually occur in English. However, the adjective nonstop was borrowed into Hungarian, Romanian, Czech and possibly other languages (see nonstop#Hungarian which I've just added), where it has become a noun by ellipsis, meaning "a 24-hour convenience store". As a result of this, I could find the term in a lot of English guidebooks about Hungary (three of which I added to the entry), although some of them are a bit mention-y. – Einstein2 (talk) 07:44, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Einstein2, thank you for your help and for adding the Romanian section. --Robbie SWE (talk) 20:16, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
The Romanian entry was created by @Soap. I've now added a noun section that corresponds to the challenged English sense. – Einstein2 (talk) 20:45, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

cited. I moved the most mention-y cites to the citations page, and replaced them with cites that are more clearly uses. Kiwima (talk) 20:58, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

speedbooster Edit

Not the photographic sense 1, but the generic sense 2, "something that boosts speed". Wouldn't this be two words? Equinox 22:36, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I added some citations, which should suffice. It seems that the word is used as an alternative form for the more standard speed booster which would be SOP on its own. It is not common (I dug for a while and these are literally the only four citations I could find, at all), so I added the rare label. The 2005 citation is being generous, assuming that the writer didn't know that Speedbooster was, at the time at least, apparently a product sold for wireless routers, and was as such a proper noun and not a common noun as the writer seems to have assumed. PseudoSkull (talk) 00:15, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 21:00, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Internet huntEdit

DTLHS (talk) 20:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I've added one use with a lower case 'i', and a second definition which is what I thought it meant until I read the definition. RFV was posted when it was defined only as hunting animals over the internet. I added the scavenger hunt sense but I'm not sure if it has enough durable uses. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:52, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
cited. Also added a third sense. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 21:02, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


I also tweaked the definition which seemed more like it was trying to make fun of some people. — surjection??〉 14:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

run (moved to RFD)Edit

Moved to Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion/English#run. Mihia (talk)


Seeking verification for the senses under etymologies 3 and 4; "hot chocolate" (noun) and "(obsolete) to be restless" (verb). Not present in the revised entry in the OED Online. — SGconlaw (talk) 20:37, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The hot chocolate sense comes from this book. That's all I found so far. DTLHS (talk) 20:41, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
And that book says that it was just used at the Bryn Mawr womens college ... a hundred years ago .... college slang can be fun but I dont think this really counts as a word in the wider English language. Soap 01:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
The restless sense appears in Thomas Wright's Dictionary of Obsolete and Provincial English (1857): "Muggling, moving about, restless". Equinox 07:30, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
Judging from the evidence gathered on the citations page so far, it doesn't look like the "hot chocolate" and "to be restless" senses will pass – we only have dictionary entries and don't have at least three actual uses. However, the "muddle along" sense, which was not originally in the entry, seems verified. — SGconlaw (talk) 09:31, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
The EDD has a few more citations (than have been added so ar AFAICT) of some of the other senses, but is no help with these. - -sche (discuss) 02:53, 21 June 2020 (UTC)


Currently has but one citation. Tharthan (talk) 02:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

That was quite easy to find cites for. I've added several under the various alternative spellings/forms of this word. A lot of work though ! (whew) Leasnam (talk) 03:15, 20 June 2020 (UTC)


As far as I know this always means "for what it's worth". Has anyone encountered these other three claimed senses: "for whoever is wondering", "from what I've witnessed", "forgot where I was"? Please be careful as some of these could easily be used in similar contexts. Equinox 07:27, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

snow bunnyEdit

Sense 4: "a woman who loves to play in the snow" (presumably informal but not currently glossed). We need citations that are not covered by the first three senses: young attractive female skier; young female attracted to the promiscuous après-ski way of life; and (ethnic slur) white woman. Equinox 18:48, 20 June 2020 (UTC)


Is this a brand, hence the capitalisation? --Robbie SWE (talk) 19:12, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

The word exists in German as the plural of Stag, which means stay in the nautical sense.  --Lambiam 21:14, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

a farm upstateEdit

US euphemism for death. In Google Books I mostly find the literal sense, you know, "moving to a farm upstate" is an actual agricultural property upheaval, not the choir invisible. Convince me. What verbs is it used with? Equinox 22:14, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

"What happened to Rover?" / "He wasn't happy playing in traffic here, so we sent him to a farm upstate."
I have considered starting a business called "A Farm Upstate" from which I would send photos of "Rover" for as long as guilty parents would pay me to do so. We might need different names in different jurisdictions, eg, "A Farm Downstate" (for Illinois), "A Farm in the Ozarks" (for south central states). DCDuring (talk) 22:23, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
So that's what's over the rainbow bridge: a concentration camp. Erm so have you actually heard of this phrase? Equinox 22:33, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
When I float my business idea, people remember their parents' using the expression on them. I offer this as a hint at possible collocations, not as evidence itself. DCDuring (talk) 00:12, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
It was surprisingly easy to cite. If you don't like what's there now, it looks abundant at Google News. The problem may be durable archiving. DCDuring (talk) 00:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
BTW, it would seem that the euphemism is better moved to farm upstate. DCDuring (talk) 00:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
"In some of the worst news we've heard all day, multiple sources have confirmed that Queen Elizabeth II's last surviving corgi, Whisper, has gone to a farm upstate." DCDuring (talk) 00:44, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
It has been moved to farm upstate. J3133 (talk) 02:48, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
For a second there, I thought you were saying that "a farm upstate" had been sent to a farm upstate... Chuck Entz (talk) 04:07, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
I'm familiar with this, but surely the definition can be improved. Something more like {{lb|en|euphemistic}} {{n-g|A notional place animals "live" after they have died; heaven.}} perhaps? - -sche (discuss) 02:58, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
It is commonly used figuratively to mean "oblivion", "Siberia", and similar virtual places of virtual death. It is common on blogs and various other web writings. DCDuring (talk) 03:51, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Someone improved the definition a bit, and I tried to improve it some more. And I think this is also cited. - -sche (discuss) 18:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)


Short for wehraboo, an entry that failed RFD. The cites given may not be CFI-durable. Equinox 20:57, 22 June 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "In a big way, greatly; to a great extent, on a large scale", which User:Akeosnhaoe has tried to remove twice out of process. — surjection??〉 22:31, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Added three from books. The fourth existing one was Rush Limbaugh's Web site: okay for CFI? I imagine not. Equinox
Citable abundantly from Google News (WaPo, NYT, National Review, The Guardian, Hollywood Reporter, as well not durably archived sites such as Politico, CBS News, NPR, The Hill, CNN, BBC News, Slate). How could this be called rare? DCDuring (talk) 23:50, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
@DCDuring: If those are from recent years, aren't those just references to a mishearing of the incumbent U.S. president's pet adjective "big-league"? Tharthan (talk) 07:54, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I'd label it "nonstandard", since it definitely seems like the usual word for largely or greatly is "largely" or "greatly". I don't think it meets our usual (vague) criteria for being "rare", though maybe "uncommon" (or just let "nonstandard" do). - -sche (discuss) 08:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I think it is no longer, even its post-Trump incarnation, limited to articles about Trump. The numerous cites from contemporary (the past 5 years) opinion and news sources suggest that it is far from being non-standard or rare. I think writers and speakers have found it amusing to use it to the extent that it has become standard. It reminds me of muchly. See also adverbs big league and big time. DCDuring (talk) 14:46, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Something should definitely be added to either the sense line or the entry to clarify the usage. At present, there's nothing indicating that this is humorous precisely because it's non-standard. A non-native speaker using this term in the wrong social context might be unhappily surprised. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Based on the citations, there is no difference in meaning between the pre- and post-Trump meaning of the word (Adverb sense 1). The big change seems to be in its relative frequency. With the meaning in questions: not all uses are humorous, not all uses are political, not all uses are post-Trump, and not all uses are pre-Trump. Trump did not originate the term. He may have blundered onto it. DCDuring (talk) 18:48, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
@DCDuring: Not only did he not originate the term, audio analysts have confirmed that he was never using it. The supposed instances on the campaign trail of him saying "bigly" were actually "big-league". Moreover, when he was personally asked what he was saying, he himself said that he was saying "big-league. Tharthan (talk) 10:06, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Granted. That said, it's still non-standard, and as best I can tell still deemed inappropriate in higher registers (academic speech, etc.). ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:33, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Hmmm. It's formed morphologically in a regular way, with a meaning in accord with its morphology, long-standing use with that meaning, in some dictionaries. We should label it because we have a long tradition of prescription and it is non-standard because ??? DCDuring (talk) 23:17, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Not prescription, but rather description. Our brang entry clarifies usage, even though that word similarly has regular morphology (arguably more regular than brought), a meaning in accord with its morphology, and long-standing use with that meaning. Perhaps it's my particular sociolect; to my ear, bigly and brang are similar in register and carry specific connotations of non-standardness that synonyms greatly / largely / hugely and brought do not carry. Again, totally separately from the current US administration. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:29, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I think a usage note is in order. Something noting that although the construction is standard, most speakers of English would consider the term nonstandard, and that Donald Trump popularized the word, which is often used in allusion to his use of it. And that use of it as a serious word is uncommon to rare. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 02:19, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
But saying that Trump popularised it would be telling a falsehood, for reasons mentioned above. We can't say that he popularised a word that he didn't use. That is nonsensical.
What is said in the etymology section is enough. It was popularised due to misanalysis of a totally different phrase. Tharthan (talk) 10:10, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


Is there any evidence that primary can be used as an intransitive verb? -- King of ♥ 14:13, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

I can find this, but (some might argue it's a noun rather than a verb, and) it seems to mean something more like sense 1 (used without an object) than sense 2 as it's currently worded. As an aside, the split and wording of the definitions 1-3 could probably be improved. - -sche (discuss) 18:22, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
The cite you've found seems OK. The first definition also seems suspect to me. It would be nice to find any support for that while looking for cites for the intransitive sense. DCDuring (talk) 23:20, 25 June 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: the opposite of heteronormativity Kiwima (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

If there are citations where homonormativity refers to an assumption that everyone is gay, we should consider whether it's better to view it as a distinct definition or just tweak definition 2. The "especially" in def 2, "The assumption that sexual and romantic attraction and activity between people of the same sex is normal, especially in a culture which also treats opposite-sex activity as normal", already somewhat implies it could also refer to an assumption that homosexuality is the [only] normal. - -sche (discuss) 23:07, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Needs clarifying in any case. It says "The opposite of heteronormativity, the assumption that people are straight unless otherwise stated". What follows the comma might either be further explaining homo~ or repeating the definition from hetero~. (It's like the difference between defining red as "the opposite of green (grass colour)" or as "the opposite of green; the colour of cherries".) Equinox 19:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


By @Amin. I remember talking to him some time ago about not creating protologisms, but this looks to me like another one. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:07, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Looks like a neologism rather than a protologism, or at least not invented for Wiktionary. It is in use but without durable quotations older than a year. It seems to be the next way Apple is going to elevate style over substance in its user interfaces. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:30, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Our definition finishes in the middle of a sentence. Was it copied from somewhere? SemperBlotto (talk) 19:36, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
I added a quotation from this week. I don't consider it durable, but the word is new. It might deserve {{hot word}} and some non-durable quotations for now. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 23:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
The word was coined in December of last year as far as I can tell. Either it gets {{hot word}} or it dies. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:02, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 17:16, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 17:17, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 17:17, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


DTLHS (talk) 02:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I have added 2 quotes from 2011 and 2017 from a permanent web archive. More available here: https://trove.nla.gov.au/search/category/websites?keyword=kimslaw Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:07, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


"A romanization scheme for the Teochew dialect of Min Nan."

  1. Charlene Gia Lim Tan, An Introduction To The Culture And History Of The Teochews In Singapore
    Peng'im (潮州话拼音方案), the Teochew dialect romanization system published by the Guangdong Provincial Education Department in 1960.

The above cite appears to have copied entirely from Wikipedia, including tables (wikipedia:Peng'im). —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Suzukaze-c (talk) 06:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)



"Abbreviation of Bàng-uâ-cê."

  1. Dong, Hongyuan. "Language Policy, Dialect Writing and Linguistic Diversity." Proceedings of the 29th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-29). Vol. 2. 2017.
    The once popular form is the BUC system (Bàng-uâ-cê 平话字) designed by missionaries in the 19th century.
  2. Smits, Jan. "Geographical Thesauri: Choices to be Made in an Ever-Growing International Context." Journal of Map & Geography Libraries 10.3 (2014): 329-346.
    $E Báëk-gĭng #Min_Dong BUC

I suspect that the above two have taken information from Wikipedia (wikipedia:en:Bàng-uâ-cê). —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:01, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


"Abbreviation of Báⁿ-uā-ci̍."

Suzukaze-c (talk) 06:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


"A Latin alphabet-based orthography for Min Dong, abbreviated as BUC."

  1. Dong, Hongyuan. "Language Policy, Dialect Writing and Linguistic Diversity." Proceedings of the 29th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-29). Vol. 2. 2017.
    The once popular form is the BUC system (Bàng-uâ-cê 平话字) designed by missionaries in the 19th century.

Suzukaze-c (talk) 06:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Phofsit DaibuunEdit

"An orthography for Min Nan, based on the Latin alphabet."

  1. Christina Neder, Ines-Susanne Schilling, Transformation! Innovation?: Perspectives on Taiwan Culture
    Since 1997, a slightly revised version of Lin's TMSS, dubbed Phofsit Daibuun (普實台文, lit.: 'General and Practical Taiwanese Script'), serves as the basis for the promotion of written Taiwanese in the city of Taízhōng.
  2. Damm, Jens. "Chinese cyberspaces: Defining the spatial component of a “borderless” media." Electronic Journal of Communication 19.3 (2010): 4.
    Other forms are: the Taiwanese Language Phonetic Alphabet (TLPA), ModernTaiwanese Language (MTL), Phofsit Daibuun (PSDB) and Tongyong Pinyin.

The latter openly refers to Wikipedia, and whether it is durably archived (or even a reputable publication?) or not is unclear.

Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


"Initialism of Pha̍k-fa-sṳ.". —Suzukaze-c (talk) 07:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

This seems to be a linguistic type error. I don't see how the English definition of PFS (and BUC) could be "initialism of ...". That would seem to be just the etymology. No monolingual English speaker could think of it that way. One would have to define it as its real-world referent. The same line of argument should apply to all sorts of abbreviations, eg, SNCF, were they defined as English terms, but it hadn't occurred to me as an issue. Maybe we don't have such abbreviations defined as English. See also CCCP. DCDuring (talk) 14:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
See also MSF (Médecins Sans Frontières) and CJNG. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Good examples. I'd argue the entry for CJNG is closer to what we should have than the entry for MSF, which ought to be defined as something like:
An international humanitarian medical non-governmental organisation of French origin.
Synonyms: Doctors without Borders, Médecins Sans Frontières
Something similar should probably be done for PFS and BUC. DCDuring (talk) 19:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)


99-sided polygon. Seen in word lists only? Equinox 00:22, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


Recently added by relatively new editor @Dragonman9001. According to w:KenKen, this is a trademark for a specific kind of math game similar to sudoku. As such, I am uncertain if this runs afoul of WT:CFI.

Separately, the etymology is incoherent: a reduplicated term cannot be a clipping of one half of the reduplication. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:15, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


An anon changed it from "Belonging or relating to black people" (the correct definition if you check Google Books etc.; it's about racial literature and culture) to a new definition "Having a greater than average amount of melanin in the skin", which incorrectly makes it sound like a biological or medical term. Can we confirm this new sense? Equinox 18:38, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Cited (modulo durability) but the definitions need rewording. Original sense is containing melanin, not necessarily in the skin. Cultural sense is derivative of presence of melanin in the skin, probably not much different from black (or Black if you're a capitalizer). Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Here is my proposed rewrite, which I don't want to do unilaterally because it will leave the RFV template without a home. Sense 1: Containing melanin [from mid-20th C]. Sense 2: Specifcially, related to black people (whose skin contains more melanin) [from late 20th C]. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 22:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "A person who plays the game Clash of Clans." Needs WT:FICTION compliant cites. — surjection??〉 15:18, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


This was apparently a celebrity nickname for Andy Murray and Serena Williams in 2019, when they played a mixed doubles tournament. I can only find it used in July, plus once in August, of that year. Cnilep (talk) 03:42, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "(US, slang) A unit of available resources available to a development team." — surjection??〉 09:28, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Tagged by User:DCDuring on 7 January 2020, not listed. Sense: "A trend in music starting in 2009, in which bass distortion is synced off timing to electronic dance music." J3133 (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Tagged by User:HeliosX on 15 February 2020, not listed. J3133 (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Cited. Old Man Consequences (talk) 17:02, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Tagged by User: on 31 May 2020, not listed. J3133 (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Tagged by User: on 31 May 2020, not listed. J3133 (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Tagged by User: on 1 June 2020, not listed. J3133 (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Tagged by User:Literally Satan on 2 June 2020, not listed. Sense: "To have the active role during sexual intercourse." J3133 (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

weeping and wailing and gnashing of teethEdit

Tagged by User:Enervation on 13 June 2020, not listed. J3133 (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


Tagged by User:Cnilep on 15 June 2020, not listed. Sense: "One who is sexually attracted to boys or young men." J3133 (talk) 16:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)


surjection??〉 19:25, 2 July 2020 (UTC)