Wiktionary:Requests for verification archive/2012/more

< Wiktionary:Requests for verification archive‎ | 2012


April 2012Edit


Rfv-sense: (obsolete) A brand of phonograph that introduced disk records. If it's what I think it is, it needs cites in accordance with WT:BRAND. -- Liliana 11:09, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

This was originally a trademark, but I'm more used to seeing it in lower case in modern use. -- Eiríkr ÚtlendiTala við mig 19:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
I don't see any capitalized uses that don't specify that the term is being used in relation to a product of a gramophone company. bd2412 T 01:31, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 19:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


-Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 12:09, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

English only. Wikipedia article is actually a redirect. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 19:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


A location the middle of the Atlantic Really? -- Liliana 23:05, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Good tag. Also, the adjective shouldn't have comparative and superlative forms.--BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 00:59, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, really. It's used both in literal ways — for example, the "Mid-Atlantic Ridge" really is a mid-ocean ridge in the Atlantic Ocean — and in figurative or idiomatic ways — for example, "Mid-Atlantic English" (or a "Mid-Atlantic accent") is a variety (or accent) of English that combines elements of British English and American English (or of British and American accents). But we're also missing some key senses: in the U.S., the Mid-Atlantic states are the states on the Eastern Seaboard that are south of New England but north of . . . whatever the states south of them are called. —RuakhTALK 01:08, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
I'll be darned. "In the Mid-Atlantic" gets quite a bit of action; a lot of times, it seems to be short for "Mid-Atlantic region." --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 01:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Cited — very thoroughly, if I do say so myself — but I'm not sure how to handle the capitalization. This sense is usually uncapitalized, and the other sense is usually yes-capitalized, but there are plenty of exceptions in both directions. —RuakhTALK 15:14, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, thoroughly. Why not put each set of full senses under its most common spelling and add the other spelling as a definiens? That might be better than {{form of|alternative capitalization of}}. I suppose it isn't consistent with the approach we use in more normal situations, but perhaps we should try something out before trying to get consistent.
I think recognizing and documenting differential preference for one capitalization rather than another is a not-uncommon aspect of supporting names of specific entities. Whether in general the game is worth the candle for Wiktionary, I don't know. DCDuring TALK 16:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Those are nice citations. I have one quibble, about the 2002 citation for meaning 2-4. I think it should actually be under meaning 1. The speaker, Juliet, is mentioned as being in Rhode Island here. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 02:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
...RFV-passed, IMO. - -sche (discuss) 19:52, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: "later life". Presumably meaning old age. Really? Sounds unlikely to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:03, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

It's real. Cited. I also stuck an archaic gloss on it, because I don't think it's used this way any more. Equinox 20:45, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Incidentally, I don't buy afterlife being a proper noun, as we claim. There can be afterlives (plural) and it isn't capitalised, and it just doesn't feel proper, like (say) Paris. Equinox 20:58, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Uncited. By the way, this sense is usually written as after life or after-life. —RuakhTALK 21:07, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
The usage in the cites doesn't mean old age, it just means "later in life", or the part of life that came "after". It's really SOP, but with an odd way of using "after". Chuck Entz (talk) 00:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Re: "The usage in the cites doesn't mean old age": Keep in mind that Mglovesfun made his presumption before Equinox added the cites. Re: "It's really SOP": The term "SOP" doesn't apply to single-word forms. Sometimes we debate whether a given form is really a single word (is "yesterday's" a word, or is it the word "yesterday" plus a clitic "-'s"?), or whether a single-word form is really correct (is "hisown" a word, or is it just an error for "his own"?), but once we've accepted that a given form is a single word, and not an error, "SOP" simply doesn't apply. —RuakhTALK 16:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
This appears in Moby-Dick, but as after life, not afterlife. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:29, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 20:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


More tiresome Luciferwildcat stuff. Ƿidsiþ 06:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Tiresome, yes, but are you sure it's Luciferwildcat? He would have to be editing as both an IP and a logged-in user within the space of a minute or two. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it has Lucifer written all over it (and the IP has previously edited Spanish terms). SemperBlotto (talk) 07:30, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I wonder whether WT:COALMINE motivated this. DCDuring TALK 11:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Well if attested it would allow for nigger ass, but here we're disputing niggerass. Curiously it does mean what I'd consider the most obvious meaning, a black person, but a person with a large ass (rear, derriere) chiefly African American, so I guess it can refer to whites, Hispanics, Asians (etc.) too. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes I created it, and I used to get called niggerass all the time as a kid by the black kids cause I had a bubble butt.Lucifer (talk) 01:14, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Here's a citation [1] that shows it is just a derogatory term for a black person, regardless of the size of their derrière. That is the only citation on Google Books. Many, more cites for "nigger ass." --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 01:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
@Lucifer presumably you don't know if it's niggerass, nigger-ass or nigger ass as they never wrote it down for you. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:31, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
They sure didn'tLucifer (talk) 23:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Encyclopetey wrote in his friendly tone that I should "not regroup senses for English entries, as your knowledge of English does not seem adequate to distinguish different senses". Therefore I need to ask the rest of the community whether you also think that the senses 2 and 11 on one hand and 10 and 24 on the other listed for drift actually constitute two senses instead of four:

2. A place, also known as a ford, along a river where the water is shallow enough to permit oxen or sheep to be driven to the opposite side.
11. (South Africa) a ford in a river.
10. A collection of loose earth and rocks, or boulders, which have been distributed over large portions of the earth's surface, especially in latitudes north of forty degrees, by the agency of ice.
24. (geology) The material left behind by the retreat of continental glaciers, which buries former river valleys and creates young river valleys.

--Hekaheka (talk) 09:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with you on this one. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I generally agree with the combination of the senses. But I wonder whether "drift" is used in a non-technical sense as well as a technical sense. I always wonder about definitions of a phenomenon that include stories of the origins of a phenomenon, whether those stories are based on science or folklore. DCDuring TALK 12:05, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I can't believe EncycloPetey doesn't consider "a place, also known as a ford" and "a ford" to be the same definition. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Resolved. - -sche (discuss) 02:07, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Really? SemperBlotto (talk) 20:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

If it's real, I wonder whether it's due to a misunderstanding of sleep-drunk ‎(in a drowsy state, similar to drunkenness, immediately after being awakened from deep sleep), or whether it arose independently? —RuakhTALK 21:34, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I added three citations. The second and third are actually hyphenated, but they are between lines, so it's not possible to tell whether they are intended as a single word or not. The 1963 citation is clear, though, and GB has plenty of other citations. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 05:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
They're definitely sleep-drunk. It's no coincidence that a search for "sleepdrunk", written solid, mostly pulls up cases across a line-break: it's because "sleep-drunk" is so well attested, and "sleepdrunk" so poorly attested, that the cases of "sleep-drunk" spanning a line-break greatly outnumber the cases of "sleepdrunk". And I'm not convinced that the first cite is in the RFV'd sense. —RuakhTALK 11:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I'd say that none of them support this definition. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:29, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh, right, yes, I agree. (I just focused on the first cite because it was the only cite for sleepdrunk.) —RuakhTALK 11:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I do agree the definition needs to be revised slightly. I've never heard this word before, so would rather someone familiar with it do that. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. Feel free to re-add with a correct definition if there are enough citations for one. - -sche (discuss) 02:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense 2x:

  1. "proof, more or less decisive, for an opinion or a conclusion"
  2. "(obsolete) due exercise of the reasoning faculty"

Tagged a couple years ago but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 20:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

2. seems to be referring to its use in premodern philosophy / theology (and discussions about them), which should be well-attested. It's quite hard to verify because it's difficult to distinguish from the "rational thinking" definition, but the distinction does hold. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 00:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
I've deleted the first sense ("proof") as RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:09, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed/resolved. - -sche (discuss) 19:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "(transitive, archaic) To cause something to descend to the ground (to drop it); especially to cause a tree to descend to the ground by cutting it down (felling it)". Tagged but not listed. There is one quotation under this sense, though it may or may not support this sense. - -sche (discuss) 20:14, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I looked around and could not find anybody who explained this Shakespearean use of "fell," but the OED includes it as a citation under the meaning of fall: "To let fall, drop; to shed (tears); to cast, shed (leaves); to bring down (a weapon, the hand, etc.)." As English is losing the few vt/vi pairs it has (rise/raise, lie/lay, fall/fell), "fall a tree" seems likely instead of "fell (a tree)." --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I think the rfved sense itself is an error for fell, but, as you say, this may have evolved from an error to a nonstandard usage out in the real world. The Shakespeare quote is different: instead of cause to fall it seems to be allow to fall. If the rfv fails, maybe we can replace the sense with the one suggested by the Shakespeare quote and the OED passage. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:15, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
The Shakespeare quote seems clearly to mean "bring down (a weapon)." It's labelled as archaic, though citations can probably be found that are more modern for various meanings, including "fell (a tree)" which sounds obsolete to me. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 02:46, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Resolved: sense removed / RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 19:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


RFV of etymology 1. Given how difficult it was to find modern English citations of note, I wonder if this is Middle-English-only. - -sche (discuss) 22:36, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


"The exchange, in turns, of swats, usually with a paddle and to the buttocks, either as a macho dare or imposed as a 'self-inflicted' corporal punishment or as part of a fraternity-type hazing." Distinct from a singular swat (sense 1). Probably added by Verbo/Fastifex since it originally went on about bare buttocks. Equinox 12:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Countable or uncountable? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
There are some GB hits that imply this.
  • [2] - I was paddled more than any other freshman in the house―but I remember the sportsmanship of several upperclassmen who traded swats with me on different occasions.
  • [3] - A "New Deal" was called for and the calamity averted, however, by the actives trading "swats" among themselves.
  • [4] - You paddled me, but you wouldn't trade swats.
I can easily imagine a fraternity tradition of trading swats being called "the swats," but I don't find an explicit statement of this. At the least, it should be noted that this is used only in the plural. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 23:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
But... these seem to back up "a hard stroke, hit or blow, e.g., as part of a spanking". Mglovesfun (talk) 09:24, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
I don't disagree. All I'm saying is that you can see that the meaning in question can easily grow from this. It's only one step from instituting the practice of "trading swats" to people saying "I did swats with Jack." Looking for forms of "do swats" or "swats with" in a student paper might turn something up. --BenjaminBarrett12 (talk) 06:27, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Again, that would be swats. I'm not really sure what this definition is even supposed to mean, and without wanting to prejudice the discussion, Verbo/Fastifex wrote a lot of stuff in poor English (though not sure what his first language is; his French and Dutch entries also had a lot of problems) that has failed RFV or RFD, so much that he got permanently banned for disruptive edits. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:14, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

penta chartEdit

Almost non-existent in Google Books and Groups. Also, should "Penta" be capitalised? Is it a trademark of some kind? Equinox 23:24, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it refers to w:the Pentagon? —CodeCat 23:29, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
It is a tool for evaluating proposals. Penta Chart Description[5] as used by NASA:
The Penta Chart format is a one page summary of a technology proposal. GCT needs to review many concepts and technologies. Having a standard summary page which emphasizes the technical context of an idea is useful and helps GCT to review of many ideas quickly and efficiently. The Penta chart format asks that a technology be described in terms of the problem/need it addresses and asks for a summary of the status quo in how the problem is addressed today. In the introduction and description of the idea, the Penta Chart asks for a description of the insight achieved which make this idea attractive. The proposer is asked to provide a description of the concept along with a summary of the benefits of its approach. If a development program is pursued, the Penta chart format asks for the goals that would be achieved.
A sample Penta Chart can be downloaded here[6]. I think the name comes from the number of fields or "boxes" in the chart. The description and example are from NASA but other organizations use the tool as well. The headlines of the fields vary by organization and kind of proposals evaluated. --Hekaheka (talk) 02:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Conceptually and linguistically, it is an extension of quad chart (which looks attestable), having five rather than four sections. It just doesn't seem to have left much trace in attestation space. pentachart is visible on the web. (Why isn't it a quinta chart/quintachart?) DCDuring TALK 12:33, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:11, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

data humpEdit

  • Sense given looks like a protologism to me. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Might as well add sexposition to that, which that entry specifically says was coined last year.. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:21, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

May 2012Edit


Some bollocks about internet slang or something. Ƿidsiþ 06:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Well apparently people use it on Facebook and other sites (I haven't yet, but I've seen many people use it) and it's not a typo. Here's an example: "crey how do I even study for this test omg." Here's some other links as well: UrbanDict, Quora, and this one on Tumblr where it's used as a tag name, but I think this tag includes both the "crey" as "cry" and the shortened form of "crazy" ("cray" or "crey" as used in "That shit cray"). Btw, this entry (crey) was originally created in 2008, when it was probably relatively new. - M0rphzone (talk) 06:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Also, it seems to be used to intentionally make fun of the actual "cry" and the seriousness of its usage/context. From UrbanDict. From what I think, "crey" is a purposeful misspelling to imitate the immaturity of younger kids when the person is faced with unfortunate events, except maybe using the actual word as a substitute for the sound or just to further de-emphasize the seriousness when "cry" is used. - M0rphzone (talk) 06:52, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable, but we need some valid citations for the entry. Ƿidsiþ 06:44, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't know if any books or reliable sites have mentioned it, since it's only used online and among younger people (teenagers and kids) at times of distress or unfortunate events (before deadlines, tests, unlucky events, etc.) - M0rphzone (talk) 06:54, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


I reverted an IP who added a comment about it not being a word, but a quick search turned up next to nothing except a different definition in English and what looks like the same definition for Scots. Are the current definitions attestable for English, or do we need to add the other definition and move these to a Scots one? Chuck Entz (talk) 21:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Verb RFV-passed, noun RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:15, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Is the sense 5, "A nonstandard way of pronouncing", really distinct from the previous sense, "the manner of speaking or pronouncing"? The example phrase seems to illustrated the previous sense just as well. — Paul G (talk) 17:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Everyone has a "manner of speaking or pronouncing", but not everyone has an accent. Defining exactly who has an accent and who doesn't is very subjective, and loaded with cultural biases- but most people would agree that such a thing exists.
I wouldn't use nonstandard, myself, since that brings to mind things like ain't and irregardless that prescriptivists love to hate- and having an accent can often be very positive and prestigious, with the implication the speaker is better than normal in some respect. I would say it's a "manner of speaking or pronouncing" that's recognizably distinct from what's considered normal. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:02, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Not everyone has an accent? In an area where most or all speakers share this accent, people don't tend notice their particular accent, but they still have it, even if it's just General American or Received Pronunciation. I think the distinction that the definitions are trying to make is accent as in "He spoke with an American accent" (sense 4) and "He spoke with a heavy accent" (without further context, sense 5). That said, I personally would reword sense 5 to "Any manner of speaking noticeably distinct from the speaker's own", which would explain the "I don't have an accent!" issue. Either that, or I'd delete that sense, and add a usage note that people often don't use "accent" to describe their own manner of speech. Smurrayinchester (talk) 05:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't think the speakers own speech is always the defining characteristic, it may also just be based on the relatively standard and most unmarked form of pronunciation. For example what one would call 'RP' or 'General American' could be the standard from which anything significantly different is perceived as an accent. —CodeCat 16:53, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
... but then people where I live would regard both 'RP' and 'General American' as "foreign accents". Dbfirs 13:38, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
True, but CodeCat is right that it has to do with a relative standard, not just with the speaker's own accent. For example, my parents both speak English with very noticeable Israeli accents (though all Americans agree that my mother actually sounds French, dunno why), and they would never contemplate using "he speaks English without an accent" to mean "he speaks English with an Israeli accent". The standard is locally defined, of course — for me an RP speaker "has an accent", whereas a GenAm speaker does not — but it's not strictly individual. —RuakhTALK 15:13, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
What about intentional accents where people copy supposed accents, such as people parodying or faking a British accent when making a joke about British people or related to a British topic? Or any other people saying things in stereotypical accents or fake accents, which would be a "nonstandard way of pronunciation", except "the manner of speaking or pronouncing" also works as well. - M0rphzone (talk) 04:59, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
The sense has been removed by Speednat. - -sche (discuss) 20:19, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Really? SemperBlotto (talk) 19:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

We have thizz, which is a slang term for ecstacy. I don't think it's much of a stretch to use it as a verb. A quick look at Google Books for thiz with one z turns up mostly eye dialect for this. I suspect that the one-z spelling is a very rare variant, and I doubt it will prove attestable. The two-z variant already has 2 cites and there are plenty more out there- though perhaps only enough for the noun sense. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:06, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Note that inflected forms like thizzes, thizzing, and thizzed are ambiguous as to whether the bare stem should be spelled thiz or thizz, so the current citations for the verb thizz could just as easily be for the verb thiz. —Angr 22:05, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

While "thizz," as a slang term for "Ecstasy," turned up a couple of times on Google Books, I could only find one use of the spelling "thiz":

  • 2008, "Students Suspended Over 'Ecstacy Pose'", KRCA.com, 1 May 2008:
    But Shad Canestrino from the Lodi Police Department said the gesture represents the words "thiz" or "thizzin'," which are slang terms for Ecstasy, or MDMA.

Astral (talk) 23:09, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


It's hard to find this word in other meaning than a surname (Narożniak). Etymologically it's correct, the stem -roż- is derived from róg ("corner"), so the meaning could be correct, but I suppose it was used as a surname only. Maro 22:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 02:12, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Patented material used in a soldering tool. Seems to be a WT:BRAND and should probably be at capitalised Athalite. However, I see nothing in Google Books. Equinox 23:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:20, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense (Australian, slang, automotive) Driving up and down the main street of a town, repeatedly, for show and to see what's happening.

The link for the existing citation is broken. Perhaps a neologism coined by Chris Lilley for Angry Boys? — Pingkudimmi 05:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:21, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: adverb. Is this just the use of an adjective? The door had been left ajar could be the same as the door had been left open or the flame had been left extinguished, where each thing is just an adjective, is that right? —Internoob 22:50, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

It's possible to read it either way, but the OED views it as only adverbial. Militating against its being an adjective, perhaps, is the scarcity of attributive use (like ‘the ajar door’, which exists, but sounds very wrong to me). Ƿidsiþ 07:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
I find "the ajar door" just as bad as you, but that's pretty common for adjectives with the prefix a- where that represents an original preposition; compare "the asleep child", "his askew hat", "the statue's akimbo arms", "an askance glance". (Also "in awake life": it turns out that the a- there didn't start life as a preposition, but it seems to have picked up this pattern by analogy.) —RuakhTALK 15:01, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-passed. The term is clearly widespread, and the POS is correct per the OED and preceding discussion. - -sche (discuss) 20:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Modern English? Really? -- Liliana 12:19, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

How can a 2006 citation back up Obsolete spelling of the? Mglovesfun (talk) 17:23, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
I have modified the context to reflect this, but it still needs 2 non-enm cites. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 13:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted (RFV-failed). - -sche (discuss) 04:31, 1 September 2012 (UTC)



The former has but two bgc hits; the latter has none. I found this post, about as old as the entry, to be rather funny: [7]. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:26, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: (computing, rare) To be put into a development request process. -- Liliana 21:37, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:38, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


I dare you. Just cite it and I will be in shock for days on end. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:56, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem. See w:ja:チャーゴグガゴグマンチャウグガゴグチャウバナガンガマウグ. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 10:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Great, and now, any citations? Mglovesfun (talk) 11:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
The obvious question: Is it really Japanese, or is it merely a foreign place name rendered in katakana? Chuck Entz (talk) 12:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
GIYF. According to the Japanese Wikipedia article, the name appeared in a Japanese TV program in 2004. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
If we can have an entry on the lake, Chaubunagungamaug, I see no reason why we could not have entries on all attested translations of that placename. bd2412 T 17:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Emphasis on "attested". -- Liliana 18:04, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, last I checked we still need evidence rather than just discussion over the validity of the term. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:06, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
How about Google Maps .jp? http://www.google.co.jp/m/maps?q=&ll=42.042154,-71.843033&spn=0.036078,0.067291&oi=nojs
-- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:39, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


This one too (see above). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem. See w:ja:チャウバナガンガマウグ湖. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 10:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Note that the Japanese Wikipedia article only cites English language sources. The katakana rendering seems to be the work of one of its editors, although I'd need a Japanese atlas (or trivia book) to know for sure. Smurrayinchester (talk) 19:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
How about Google Maps .jp? http://www.google.co.jp/m/maps?q=&ll=42.042154,-71.843033&spn=0.036078,0.067291&oi=nojs
-- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 21:20, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Looks good. Being owned and hosted by Google is probably as close to durable as an internet resource is going to get. Not entirely sure whether it's a use or a mention, but putting a word on a map seems to be a use (a map with a picture of the UK and a dot marked "London" is surely as much of a use as "London is in the south east of England", right?). Smurrayinchester (talk) 21:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
It hardly sounds like a use to me, but I would count it - if you can find all 3 citations. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:42, 1 October 2012 (UTC)



  1. (intransitive, slang) To be angry.
  2. (transitive, slang) To forget or not care about
    Screw that!

The first one I've never heard of, so it would be something like "I am screwing" to mean "I am angry". The second one seems like a pure mistake. In screw that, the screwing doesn't refer to the person but to the object (screw the Mets, screw Manchester United, etc.). Mglovesfun (talk) 12:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

A books search for '"I screwed it" -"I screwed it up"' (i.e., everything with the phrase "I screwed it", but not "I screwed it up") found nothing at all that made sense as "I forgot it" or "I did not care about it". I think that can be simply deleted as a mistake. I didn't check all the 25,000 results for '"He screwed" -"he screwed up"', but in the first 20 pages, I found nothing. There is another sense of screw up we don't seem to have, which is a reflexive use meaning "work oneself up", as used in Lord of the Rings, here, and here. It's possible this is where the sense came from, but I think it's more likely to be nonsense based on a misunderstanding of "screw" as a swearword. Smurrayinchester (talk) 18:42, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 21:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

make tortillasEdit

Not only does it need cleanup - it needs citations. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:39, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 21:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

make someone's nipples acheEdit

An extremely messy entry, and it might not be citable anyway. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:43, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I found only two citations, both from the same author, same book, but different year. --BB12 (talk) 18:06, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Same sentence, in fact. —Angr 06:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Whoops! I was looking at the sentence before, which is different. --BB12 (talk) 06:24, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 21:16, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense - having a single heart.

Could we have some citations please (I could only find the title of a book on a quick look). SemperBlotto (talk) 10:00, 27 May 2012 (UTC) (p.s. Is Dr Who bicardian or dicardian?)

I think it should be tagged rare, (~4 independent uses in nearly 200 years) but I've dug up a few uses:
  • 1838, William Swainson, The natural history and classification of fishes, amphibians and reptiles, or monocardian animals:
    In prosecuting our labours upon these principles, we shall, in the first place, inquire into the station occupied by the monocardian animals in the zoological circle [...]
  • 1980, Vera Fretter, “Observations on the gross anatomy of the female genital duct of British Littorina spp”, Journal of Molluscan Studies, volume 46, number 2, page 148-153:
    The precise function of this membrane gland is unknown. It is presumed that it is concerned with the production of the external bounding layer of the albumen, though in other monocardians such a layer is not associated with any diverticulum
  • 2006, Louise R. Page, “Modern insights on gastropod development: Reevaluation of the evolution of a novel body plan”, Integrative and Comparative Biology, volume 46, number 2, page 134-143:
    Continued leftward expansion of the mantle cavity and loss of the second gill produces the monocardian condition of most extant gastropods.
That said, I think these are referring to the second definition, having a single ventricle. As far as I'm aware, no creature exists with two separate hearts (though it's not necessarily impossible) and outside science fiction, this sense is unlikely to exist - I did find a few Doctor Who fanfics that talked about monocardial people. Smurrayinchester (talk) 20:11, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
According to WP hagfishes have 2. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 20:16, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Learn something new every day! Incidentally, the most common term for two hearted seems to be bicardial, with use in both textbooks and Doctor Who novels. Smurrayinchester (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-fails, right? - -sche (discuss) 22:02, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

dole outEdit

Rfv-sense: To generate.

I'm not really sure what sense of generate would even apply. DCDuring TALK 12:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Is "sorceror" really a legitimate alternative spelling? Axl (talk) 18:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not going to cite them right now, but Google Books has a plethora of hits, including books by Harper & Row and Macmillan. It certainly needs an entry; what makes you think it's not a legitimate alternative spelling?--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
sorcerer says sorceror is a misspelling. Siuenti (talk) 22:04, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
    • The only results that comes up for "sorceror" in One Look are us and Urban Dictionary (Wikipedia and TFD appear, but if you actually click the links it takes you to "sorcerer"). I think this is clearly a misspelling - no dictionary contains "sorceror". It does seem common enough for an {{misspelling of|sorcerer}} though. Smurrayinchester (talk) 22:24, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I think it's a misspelling. I note that a number of the top b.g.c. hits for "sorceror" are actually for "sorcerer" (cases where someone messed up the metadata), and that even in hits that do use "sorceror", many are from works that also use "sorcerer". That is not typical for alternative spellings, even rare ones. —RuakhTALK 22:58, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
I agree from what I saw on Google Books. Many usages are by authors with foreign-sounding names, who from my G.Books experience are more likely to make mistakes or use non-standards forms. Equinox 23:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Replaced definition with {{misspelling of}}. ~ Robin (talk) 21:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Tag removed by Axl (talkcontribs), who has the right to withdraw his/her nomination. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-senese: (informal) To bite a woman's pudenda. WTF? Sound it be shot on sight? ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It does seem like a bad definition because it uses the word bite which has a lot of definitions. Citations demonstrating distinctness from the other definitions sounds like a good idea. Would it be something like "he bit her" where the vagina/labia are implied but not actually stated? I dunno. I'm willing to assume good faith and give it a full 30 days but I concede there's a solid argument for deleting it outright too. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:56, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The trouble is that there are plenty cases where "bite" implies a body part that isn't stated. We talk about vampires biting people, with the usually unsaid implication that the bite was on the neck, but "To bite a person's neck" would be an odd definition of bite. Looking through Google books for sex scenes that include the phrase "he bit her" (without an explicit body part) finds examples where the unstated body part is the shoulder, the ear (possibly?), somewhere that is below the waist but explicitly not the genitals and the foot, and I'm pretty sure if I kept going I could find for any body part, a book in which is a woman is bitten on it sexually without it being explicitly stated. I don't see why being bitten on the genitals deserves a distinct mention from being bitten anywhere else. Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Searches for "bite pudenda", "bite the pudenda" get no hits in Google, "bite a pudendum" gets 1. "Bite a woman's pudenda" gets only Wiktionary-related hits, of which one on a Swedish website and another in China. Let's kill this before the disease spreads. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget that pudenda is at least partly a euphemism here, so you would need to search using the terms it substitutes for if you want to do a realistic check of usage. You have two different registers here: the sense of bite we're looking for is fairly vulgar and pudenda is rather clinical- I doubt you'd see them together much in the wild Chuck Entz (talk) 08:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
It may be an euphemism, but if a definition raises more questions than it gives answers, it should be at least reworded. What the heck does "bite the pudenda" mean? Should it be understood literally? Is it an invitation to do a cunnilingus? We should not have riddles as definitions. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Must be the coffee talking -- suddenly I had visions of an ambitious (and completely mad) project to rewrite all of Wiktionary into riddle format. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
This must have been intended to cover the sense of bite used in bite me. I never thought of that as gender specific. As me is not the only possible object ("Bite this", "Bite my ..."), we really could use a non-gloss definition of bite. Isn't this only used in the imperative (and in reported imperative "I told him to bite me"). We should have something similar at eat. DCDuring TALK 23:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
[[eat#Verb]] has:
(transitive, informal, vulgar) To perform oral sex on someone.
Eat me!
I have no experience with the use of "bite" in this sense except in insults or other maledictions or with the normal meaning of "use one's teeth on". DCDuring TALK 23:16, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
I have added the sense: (transitive, informal, vulgar) To perform oral sex on someone.
Clocked out. DCDuring TALK 00:40, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 21:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Really? Looks like a word invented by some motivational speaker. Fairly localized. Doesn't seem to be in wide use. JamesjiaoTC 11:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

  • I had already deleted it once as a protologism. There are Google hits, but many use the term in quotes. If OK, it needs heavy pruning back to a simple dictionary definition. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:32, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It is a term that many people in the field of nonviolent struggle have been using to describe the use of humor in protest and how it can create a dilemma situation for authorities. —This comment was unsigned.

    • In that case, you won't have any trouble finding three independent citations. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Two cites on ggc ([8]), but that's it. This is really close, so if anyone feels inspired to look for that one last quote, I can only laud you. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:43, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Couldn’t find any song lyrics with “laughtivism”. Note that the Google Groups cites are a few months apart from each other. Smells like failed protologism. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 06:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 21:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: "a scholar or learned person". I'm not convinced this is used in such a way as to be different from sense 1, ‘learned person in India, Hindu scholar’, or sense 4, ‘professed expert in a particular field’. Ƿidsiþ 07:21, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Could you clarify a bit what sense 4 means? Specifically — in "professed expert", does "professed" mean "self-professed", or "professed by the speaker", or "professed by anyone"? In the first and third cases, I think we should make that more explicit; in the second case, I think we should simply remove "professed". Either way, I think that will help clarify what would be necessary for this sense to be different from sense 4. —RuakhTALK 11:43, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
I think it means ‘self-professed’ – I read it as covering such cases as sports pundits etc. on television. Ƿidsiþ 12:32, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. I've now changed our def to read "self-professed". —RuakhTALK 14:45, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Move to RfD: This seems more like an RfD matter than an RfV matter. Any of the three sentences in the nomination can very easily be verified; the question of whether they are redundant or not is an RfD Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 00:27, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:41, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

industrial punkEdit

Defined as a type of science fiction (e.g. steampunk), but I think it is a type of punk music. SemperBlotto (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, dear. Methinks the initial contributing editor was a touch confused, and didn't do their homework very well. Sure enough, google:"industrial+punk" generates tons of hits that appear to be mostly about music, which is also the context in which I first heard the term. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:56, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:38, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Istanbul twistEdit

Created as a verb based on a single sentence in a Robert Heinlein book. I changed it to a noun to fit how it was actually used, but I still have doubts as to whether it meets CFI in any form. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:33, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Oddly, the version of the sentence in our entry is very different from the version in my copy of the book, which is also the version that google books:"Istanbul twist" pulls up (in two different editions, neither of which is the same edition as my copy). I can't decide if our entry used a genuinely different version, or if the contributor did a shockingly bad job copying the quotation, or what. But either way . . . The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress might count as a well-known work; but then, if this is the only place that the term appears, then it probably counts as a term originating in a fictional universe? And technically the quotation is structured as a mention rather than a use, but it's an extremely use-y mention. —RuakhTALK 01:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I think it qualifies. In addition to the Heinlein, here are to Usenet citations:

--BB12 (talk) 07:41, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

The first is good. But the second citation is discussing the book, so it doesn’t pass WT:CFI#Fictional universes. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 16:20, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)



3. (cultural anthropology) A now-defunct theory that all primitive cultures worshipped the Sun and its movements and patterns.
4. An obsession with the Sun and its movements and patterns.

I don't find these in other dictionaries, nor was I able to locate supporting quotes. --Hekaheka (talk) 22:03, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  • The correct names to go with these definitions would almost certainly be heliotheism and heliophilia. The first is attested, while the second is used almost exclusive with respect to sun-loving plants. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:11, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
    Heliotheism is belief in sun-worship. The belief that everyone used to believe that is not likely to be the same word (if there is one)> SpinningSpark 23:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


A lot of mentions out there, but that won't cite it. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 13:35, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

  • 2009 "That is the most interesting delusion I've come across since reading up on galeanthropy," said Sophie.[11]
  • 1967 Thus, in this city of several great institutions of learning Galeanthropy and Incubus came to life behind every lamp post, and for all I know these revenants may yet linger in many good Philadelphians who likewise ponder and act upon the notion that cats...[12]
  • 2008 kindred--golden-garlanded black-slit galeanthropic eyeballs cared nothing.[13]
SpinningSpark 20:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC) to 20:37, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but the 2008 cite is for galeanthropic, not galeanthropy IMO. So one more is needed (and they all need to be added to the entry). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:44, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Passes RFV, by my ken, thanks to the additional citations added to the entry by Astral. - -sche (discuss) 04:51, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


Couldn’t find cites for the language, only for the islands. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 23:41, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Certainly wouldn't pass muster as an EN entry, but then I haven't much knowledge of PT standards.
Adding the relevant JA entry in a moment. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 03:53, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Portuguese uses lower case. It’s correct as is in Portuguese. —Stephen (Talk) 04:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
I don't think the capitalization is being disputed. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
@User:Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV you seem to be correct. Is there a Google Groups or Scholar in Portuguese? I don't see them in the dropdown list. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:14, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
I don’t know. When results show up with different languages mixed up I add a few common Portuguese words to the search (de, que, o, a and um/hum usually does it). In this case I tried searching for language related terms like idioma miyako, língua miyako, palavra miyako, and went through various pages, but everything in Portuguese was about the Miyako island instead of the language. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 04:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:02, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

antlered godEdit

Is this really a variant of the Horned God and if so it is not supposed to be capitalized?Lucifer (talk) 00:11, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 21:50, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

June 2012Edit


Rfv-sense: One who denies or disputes. It's not in any online dictionaries AFAICT, but I haven't looked that hard, so it might exist. —Internoob 18:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

FWIW it was the only ever main namespace edit by an IP back in 2006. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Is it really a Persian word? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 07:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes. --Z 12:43, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Nevertheless, it has been deleted. - -sche (discuss) 21:34, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Dad's DayEdit

Probably fine, I don't know. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:08, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Then why did you bring it here?
I've confirmed: it's fine. A bgc search for the phrase shows quickly that that's the case. I can't be bothered (now, at least) to add cites to the entry, however.​—msh210 (talk) 05:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Sorry; I like to be on the safe side and sometimes I'm lazy. One of these days I'll atone for my verification-related sins in a day devoted to fasting and citing every possible term on RFV. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:02, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
I've detagged it. Can we close this discussion as resolved? - -sche (discuss) 00:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Resolved. - -sche (discuss) 03:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "(figuratively) Not straightforward." It doesn't ring a bell with me. - -sche (discuss) 20:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Nor with me, here since October 2004 by the IP (talk). Well over 7 years! Mglovesfun (talk) 21:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Probably exists, but not sure it means that. Ƿidsiþ 07:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Hmm. I was about to delete it on sight, but found two real usages on a Google book search. Difficult to know exactly what they mean though. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
    • In X-ray examination, cystoid degeneration (41.4%), mushroomoid degeneration (35. 4%), and deformtive osteoarthritis were frequently detected
    • The exact form of the indented central panel is also unique, although it bears a distant relation to those pieces with mushroomoid indentations on the vertical axis.
    • It looks like the definition is correct. -oid is a common suffix. My person preference is "having" rather than "in," but perhaps it makes no difference.... --BB12 (talk) 19:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
      • I think we should treat the QI transcript like we treat Google Books. If Google Books were to disappear tomorrow, the printed versions of the books would still exist. If that website disappeared tomorrow, would there be a written/printed version of it somewhere? Mglovesfun (talk) 19:04, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
        • It is reasonable to expect that there would be copies of the show (the studio and at least one library somewhere are sure to keep copies), which (not the transcript per se) is what counts. - -sche (discuss) 02:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
I formated SemperBlotto's citations and put them on the Citations page (thanks for finding them). I also tracked down a recording of the show (on Youtube), so I can verify the correctness of the transcript and have added that citation, making this cited, I think. - -sche (discuss) 02:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Passed. - -sche (discuss) 02:29, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "An event implying a degree of awkwardness." Possibly just an awkward way of wording a valid sense? - -sche (discuss) 20:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 02:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Noun, verb, adjective. Supposed to be a "canine version of a cat's purr". I can see that this is used in the furry subculture (and the word could possibly be cited from Usenet) but even the furry wikis don't seem to define it this way. It's just a growly noise, not specifically tied to cats or dogs — AFAICT. Equinox 01:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Being furry myself I can verify that this is not specifically tied to any species, pretty much any species can do it. Then again, so can purring. —CodeCat 22:10, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
I've cited the noun and verb, and found two citations of the adjective. - -sche (discuss) 06:27, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Noun and verb RFV-passed, adjective RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

black brotusEdit

"A kind of marine wildlife found in the area of the US Virgin Islands." So what is it: a fish, a seal, a bird? I can't see it in Google Books at all either. Equinox 19:19, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:16, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


"A person moving on his/her own, and only moving himself/herself, not transporting goods or other persons, such as a pedestrian, passenger, motorcyclist, skater and the like." Equinox 19:59, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Nothing useful in a book search for 'mobilian -jargon -language -indian -amerindian' (to filter out Mobilian), nor for '"a mobilian" transport'. Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:33, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
I, too, could not find anything relevant. RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:02, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


this can only be wrong, as neither the ԓ nor the ы̄ are actually used in Nenets orthography -- Liliana 21:37, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:04, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "An organization or state which enforces strong or oppressive measures against its population." I'm familiar with the statement "Mubarak was an authoritarian", but "Egypt was an authoritarian"? - -sche (discuss) 20:49, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Any comments? --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:07, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

It seems to be more common in English books than French ones, but searching for the phrase the one citation already in the entry uses, google books:"oui ma'ame", turns up 154 hits, of which at least 5 of the first 10 are valid (they're in French and not scannos): [17] [18] [19] [20] [21]. Do you think it's dated? - -sche (discuss) 05:25, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
It looks like a good entry for an attestable word to me. :) - -sche (discuss) 05:28, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
There are no relevant hits on Google groups, which indeed suggests that it is antiquated. This contraction is considerably rare ; I am betting that this is dialectal, but I cannot say for certain. (“bonjour ma’ame” or “non ma’ame” also turn up some hits.) --Æ&Œ (talk) 05:48, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
(after edit conflict) The original cite is suspect, since it's an anecdote about an Irish fellow in England trying to pass himself off as French: note the user of "shure" to show how bad his accent is. There still seem to be plenty of cites where one can eliminate imitation of English as the source of the spelling. I wonder if it's significant that all of the ones I looked at were servants trying to pacify someone in a superior position? Perhaps social changes have caused this form to disappear. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:57, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Good catch! Another reason to write "ma'ame" might be to stress the African accent of a servant or a slave. Before accepting a citation, check carefully the origins of the speaker.
In France, nowadays, I know of only three ways to verbally abbreviate "madame":
  • by omitting the first "a" (m'dame, much like m'sieur). This the most common way.
  • by omitting the "ma" (dame). Used in rural areas and only before a proper noun (afaik, you would not say "bonjour dame!")
  • by omitting the "da" (mame, m'ame or ma'me). Idem.
For a native French, "ma'ame" is difficult to pronounce because of the two successive "a". Therefore, this is definitely not a natural way to abbreviate "madame". From my point of view, "ma'ame" denotes someone of foreign origin who makes the effort to pronounce "madame" correctly, but without success. — Xavier, 07:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm with Xhienne on this, it's really counterintuitive. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:54, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
@Xhienne: without knowing any old French, I would guess "ma'ame" is intended to be pronounced with a single "a", like English "ma'am" (which is /mæm/, not /mæ.æm/). - -sche (discuss) 17:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Possibly. But in such a situation where the author wants to stress that the word has been altered by the speaker, it is very uncommon in French to write letters that should not be pronounced. I can quickly and easily find a lot of unambiguous examples on b.g.c. with "m'ame" or "ma'me" instead of "madame" (by unambiguous, I mean that these texts are not translations and the story happens in France, or the speaker is French).
This is much less obvious with "ma'ame". At first sight, among your examples, only #2 is unambiguous for me. #1 is a translation; in #3 the speakers have an English name; I have little context on #4 but it looks like a collection of novels of which the origin is unknown to me; #5 is not readable for me but its author has an English name. — Xavier, 22:47, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
The last one I linked to, I noticed, is the same as the one in the entry. So, it does seem to be a dated, nonstandard term. How's this? - -sche (discuss) 23:43, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Resolved. - -sche (discuss) 22:09, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Made by a newbie editor; could someone please check that it's right? —Internoob 06:21, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks it; the first three Google Book hits on books.google.es are in Spanish and support the definition. There are about 14 000 hits for it in Spanish alone. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Do you actually require someone to copy up three citations. Technically WT:CFI doesn't mention where the citations have to be, just that there be three citations. I'd just rather not copy three citations up when I can do something else with that time. It's basically a copy-and-paste exercise. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:13, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-passed per Mg. - -sche (discuss) 22:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: The main character in Lewis Carroll's books Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass. Needs cites meeting WT:FICTION criteria. -- Liliana 06:48, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

FWIW (nothing I hope) if cited I'm moving to RFD, as simple a specific way of using the given name. For example we don't have a Moby-Dick sense of Ishmael, though in the book, I believe Ishmael doesn't have a surname. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:17, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


A misspelling at best. I could not discover any relevant results on either Google Groups or Google Books. --Æ&Œ (talk) 04:51, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

It might be keepable as a redirect to it'd've. It is not a "common misspelling" AFAICT, but it looks like a mistake to me. It just might be the kind of mistake our users would make, though the search engine probably handles it adequately: I typed in "itdve" and "i't'd'v'e" and both (and only) it'd've and it'dve appeared each time. DCDuring TALK 04:59, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Delete as a typo, let the search engine do the searching instead of using a redirect. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:21, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:17, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

heavy drinkingEdit

Is this really specifically "Excessive drinking to the point of drunkenness", or is it just "drinking" + "heavily" (eg. heavy eating, heavy coughing, heavy reading)? Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:27, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I think they're pretty much the same thing, aren't they? Theoretically, you could have someone who drinks a lot of alcohol but spreads it out all day long so as to not get drunk, but I think that's pushing it. Delete --BB12 (talk) 08:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Move to rfd. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:23, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Citations could help, but not for attestation. If there is "a lot of" usage along the line of "heavy drinking" leading to "drunkenness" (under any of its many Wikisaurus synonyms}, that would provide support for our intuitions/experience of the use of this expression. But, it seems to me extremely unreasonable that including "Y", the frequent or even inevitable result of "X", in the definition of "X" should, by itself, make "X" a keeper when it would not otherwise be one. DCDuring TALK 14:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, I meant to take this to RFD, not RFV. Should I just close this now? Smurrayinchester (talk) 15:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, use {{movedto}} and {{movedfrom}}. I will let you do it as the original nominator. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:38, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Discussion moved to Wiktionary:Requests for deletion#heavy drinking.

Struck. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:42, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

preference Edit

Rfv-sense: A card game.

Not at WP. There might be a children's card game, but searching for "attention is a card game" got one hit, not in this sense. Searching for "Attention" and "card game" gets a lot of irrelevant hits. DCDuring TALK 16:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Attention? Anyway, added three cites to citations:preference, one of which is for Preference.​—msh210 (talk) 17:31, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I hadn't noticed my mindfart, which is what started the RfV. Sorry. DCDuring TALK 18:25, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
See also w:préférence and w:preferans.​—msh210 (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I should have looked at the translations. преферанс helped me find the WP article. The Russian-associated citations made me look there. We also now have preferans. Cited, IMO. Tag removed. DCDuring TALK 18:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the outcome, but isn't such a quick closure inconsistent with your objection to the closure on Greenpeace? bd2412 T 20:29, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Feel free to unstrike. The RfV was due to my faulty search. For some unknown reason, I had been repeatedly searching for the wrong word. DCDuring TALK 20:35, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
No point in unstriking now. The word is cited. bd2412 T 21:14, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


Is this used outside WMF? -- Liliana 20:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Uncited. Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 22:19, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


See above -- Liliana 20:49, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)



There seems to be consensus that the origin of sesquipedalian is the early 17th century, from the Latin sēsquipedālis. With the addition of the suffix "an" we have the word; "an" being used to form adjectives in English (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/-an). I have never seen the word used as a noun, and I suggest to you it, as such, would be grammatically incorrect. A noun form would be something akin to "sesquipedalianist". Both Merriam-Webster and Oxford only list the word as an adjective. —This comment was unsigned.

Cited both noun senses. Take a look at them, if you think they aren’t valid you can nominate the entry for deletion. — Ungoliant (Falai) 05:14, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
All the cites are valid, SFAICT. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:33, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Passed. - -sche (discuss) 07:40, 25 September 2012 (UTC)



I am requesting the attestation of the existence of the form in English, in the first place. I cannot find anything on Google Books and Usenet; even google:"xiguas" does not seem to find anything. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:36, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

  • If the "singular" didn't deserve RFV presumably the plural doesn't either. Siuenti (talk) 10:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
    Either this should've been speedily deleted, or xigua should've been fully RFV'd. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:29, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I've brought xigua back purely for the purposes of this rfv: it means that non-admins will be able to see the entry's history, contributors and so on. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:53, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

This is total utter bs. xīguā is the pinyin for 西瓜 (Citrullus vulgaris), which is the exact Mandarin equivalent of watermelon (Citrullus vulgaris). The author might have spotted its use in an Asian supermarket, written by someone who didn't know how to say it in English. JamesjiaoTC 22:42, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:22, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


This spelling appears to be rare, in my opinion. --Æ&Œ (talk) 09:50, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

That's why we have {{rare}}. Do you doubt that it is attestable? DCDuring TALK 10:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Usenet citations exist in reasonable number to supplement the meager number of books cites. DCDuring TALK 10:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
I was not certain what to classify this as. You can end this request for verification if it pleases you. --Æ&Œ (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
It pleases me. Struck. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense diamond; this Tok Pisin term crops up occasionally in the first sense, but I can't find any evidence of it existing in this sense. I suspect it to be an ad hoc translation rather than a truly existing word. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:45, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Verifiable word but incorrectly spelled. Diamond in the Tok Pisin langauge is daimen, not daiman. Daiman means "dead person" or corpse, so I think that needs some adjustment :) (Verified by the Human Languages Project, compiled by Terry and Sylvia O'Dell Barhorst (archived version by www.june29.com) BarkingFish (talk) 22:49, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

We already have the corpse sense, so I closed this and I'll move the content to daimen. Thanks! --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:53, 20 July 2012 (UTC)


RFV autonomy (Tok Pisin); commonly used in Indonesian to refer to the goals of ethnic Papuans in West Papua (the Indonesian half of the island, aka Irian Jaya, where Tok Pisin is not spoken), but I can't find any evidence that it is used in Tok Pisin or at all on the eastern half of the island (Papua New Guinea). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Unverifiable - Have been through most of my currently available resources of the language, and have been unable to find any reference to this whatsoever in any material. BarkingFish (talk) 23:14, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:42, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Again, definitely a word in Indonesian, but I can't find anything in Tok Pisin. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Unverifiable - A wide search of my material, plus google and other sources I use, again reveals no trace of this word in the Tok Pisin language. BarkingFish (talk) 23:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Another Tok Pisin term. I'm glad I decided to go through these. I can't find any evidence of it. Perhaps a typo for ambilop, which would make more sense, but I can't find that either. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:06, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Unverified - wrong term - Ambilok does not refer to an envelope. The word does not exist in Tok Pisin, and neither does Ambilop. The term commonly used in this language for an envelope is Skin pas (literally a skin purse, or a closed or sealed skin). (See daiman above for reference, same one used here) BarkingFish (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:46, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Bislama usually (if not always) uses the suffix -em for transitive verbs, not -im like other closely related languages. I think this might just be an error by the author (EncycloPetey), but I'm sending it here to be sure. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:59, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Cannot verify in this language ridim exists as Tok Pisin, to read (also ritim as an alternative spelling) however. You may wish to view this link (the front page of the Bislama Wikipedia, where you can see the word jenisim used to mean change/edit - so it is possible that this could be correct. BarkingFish (talk) 12:57, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Great job as always. I forgot to add Tok Pisin, so I'll do that. Also, I think you've provided enough evidence for me that Bislama also uses -im; I wonder if it's a dialectal thing (I'm still pretty unclear on the dialectal divergences in Tok Pisin). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

My mistake. I have since read up on Bislama grammar, and this is the correct term (there is a system of vowel harmony at work, which is more complex than most creoles). I have also found a sufficient citation in Crowley 2004 (if anyone wants it, just ask me). So, RFV-passed. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:27, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Resolved. - -sche (discuss) 07:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

mox nixEdit

No wonder this was on Urban Dictionary but not here. I can't cite it with bgc, and I might be able to with ggc, but it looks like every use is intertwined with a mention, and it's hard to tell if those count. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:39, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

I suspect this is from Yiddish, rather than German, and it might be just used in English as quoted Yiddish. I don't have any Yiddish references to check, though. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't know how you'd tell, although it was obviously in currency to use macht nichts in German for a while. BTW this is a followup to WT:ES#maski. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:06, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I found and added three cites on b.g.c., so I guess this can be struck. As to whether it originates with German or Yiddish, Eric Partridge's Dictionary of Catch Phrases says it originated with American G.I.s stationed in Germany after WWII (and indeed one of the cites is a letter from an American G.I. stationed in Germany after WWII), which strongly suggests German rather than Yiddish. —Angr 19:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it is from German, not Yiddish. It is (or was, at least during the latter half of the 20th century) very common in the normal speech of American military members who had been stationed in Germany. Rarely written, though. —Stephen (Talk) 19:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
(after second edit conflict) Well, macht nichts is very basic, common German, so that's not a factor. I was just thinking that Yiddish is a much more productive conduit for such terms to enter English. I'm also wondering if the origin is from "macht es nichts" (contracted to "macht's nichts"), which has the subject and verb inverted like you would expect in various clauses, but might be idiomatically used as a variant of "es macht nichts". I should add that Angr's information sounds pretty persuasive (and Stephen's, too). Chuck Entz (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

@Angr: I'd say that the first cite (the WWII one) actually supports a new sense/POS, because it looks like an adjective there to me ("of no importance"). If you agree, that would leave only two cites, and two more to be found for the adjectival sense. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

It might be use of a phrase along the lines of: "good-bye stress, hello vacation". That is, using the imagined utterance as a whole almost as a symbol rather than as a part of speech. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
At any rate, I've added an adjective meaning and some more cites. There are now four for the interjection and three for the adjective, including one using the alternative spelling "mox-nix" with a hyphen. —Angr 19:59, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Wow! Thanks! I must be very bad at citing things... --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:13, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

So is this now sufficiently cited that it can be struck and the RFV tag removed? —Angr 06:50, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Of course. I only didn't do it because I was criticized for doing it too soon once, and that seems subjective to me, so I don't wish to incur others' wrath. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
It looks cited to me. DCDuring TALK 13:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Good. I'm striking it here and removing the tag. —Angr 15:53, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


Afrikaans. Pretty unlikely. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:32, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense understand. I know the other sense, meaning listen or hear, is real, but this one seems bogus. BarkingFish? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Indeed you are correct - harim (to mean "understand") is utterly wrong! The correct term for "understand" is save, in usage it would be along these lines: "Dispela yusa i save long Tok Pisin kain olsem wanpela lokol." BarkingFish (talk) 11:19, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
From the tpi-4 template, eh? On that subject, can you check that luksave is correct? I have a quote, so it's real, but I can't find it any dictionaries, so I had to guess the definition. Maybe it's actually a synonym of save? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Entry fixed. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 04:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


Protologism? SemperBlotto (talk) 07:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

"Usage originated by LS and WG as a single-term description for the sides of a laptop used for peripheral bus location in Daleville, Indiana". Care to venture a guess where the Geolocate utility says the IP is located? 3 (Danish-language) Google Groups hits and 15 Google Books hits for "sideprint", 17 Google Groups hits for "sideprints", 0 Google Books hits for "sideprint", none remotely like the sense given. There are lots of Google Search hits, but they mostly seem to be for shirts printed on the sides, and they aren't durably archived. This has all the signs of a posting by the proud parent of a protologism. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Speedied - feel free to recreate with a citeable definition (I think there's at least one). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:37, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


Protologism? I think the commercial product may be capitalised. (irrelevent "see also") SemperBlotto (talk) 07:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


"A vehicle that is a hybrid of an Indycar and a motorcycle." Appears to be one specific person's pet project, not a generic term for things of this kind; and I doubt it is CFI-attestable. Equinox 11:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Nice vehicle, but it seems Equinox is right. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:09, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:47, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


This Norwegian entry defines it as a length unit scruple, but no length unit is defined in the English entry. The word skrupel is not in the Norwegian online dictionary[22] or in the encyclopedia SNL[23]. The weight unit is listed in SNL as skruppel[24]. Håkon (talk) 12:20, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy delete, created by a banned sockpuppet of Wonderfool (talkcontribs) who also doesn't speak Norwegian. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:23, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Gone, striking. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


Portuguese. Couldn’t find anything durable. — Ungoliant (Falai) 00:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually I too spotted this in Category:Tbot entries (Portuguese) some weeks ago, tried to cite it and couldn't. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:33, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


Equinox 18:18, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I find zero hits on GB and Usenet. --BB12 (talk) 18:22, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Found one single Usenet hit. — Ungoliant (Falai) 19:00, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 22:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Tagged but not listed. Five citations, but need to be checked for typos/scannos. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:39, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I added links to the citations. — Ungoliant (Falai) 13:21, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
It looks good to me. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:11, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Striking as cited. bd2412 T 23:56, 25 August 2012 (UTC)


Has 2007 really lived on as a year of infamy in Icelandic culture? I somehow doubt this is anything but a protologism, and I don't know how to cite it, anyway - maybe by searching with hrun ‎(collapse)? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:43, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Adjective? BTW IFYPFY. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:54, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Adjectival use wouldn't fit the current definition. Thanks for proofreading me, though. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:36, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

frictional blightEdit

Sense: a plant disease. Added by anon. All citations I found were about urban geography. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 04:17, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:42, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


Fear of money. As is common with phobias, only appears in word lists. Equinox 13:11, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

"He suffered from chrometophobia, the fear of money, a clinically documented disorder." (Moneymakers: the secret world of banknote printing - Page 17, Klaus W. Bender, 2006). I'll give it a full go before the month is up. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:36, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Passes by the skin of its teeth, IMO. Restore the tag and reopen this discussion if you disagree. - -sche (discuss) 07:01, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


It says it is a symbol for litre (unit). AIUI, this is just a script version of the letter l. All Wikipedia says is that it is "sometimes used in mathematics and elsewhere" (e.g. ℓ-adic representations). Equinox 00:00, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I have definitely seen this in use... —CodeCat 00:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
It is a script version of l, but it's used, just like l is. It's tedious to search for, but one book suggests it's most common in the US, Japan and Greece. - -sche (discuss) 20:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now, sense (re)moved: the entry now says "script version of l", and "l" is an abbreviation for liter, so the information is still there, people just have to click through to [[l]]. - -sche (discuss) 05:10, 12 October 2012 (UTC)


"1. A large penis. 2. The quality of exceptionalism or talent." The given Penthouse citation is useless. Equinox 11:46, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The other citation doesn't demonstrate this meaning in particular. Could equally mean a very large male chicken. In reality it's probably a pejorative meaning dickhead, bastard, etc. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:55, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
The citation from a 1973 issue of Penthouse originally given doesn't verify either sense 1 or 2, but there's a subsequent sentence in the same source that features a clear use of sense 1. The Penthouse writer assigns two meanings to "supercock", one reflecting sense 1, the other to "describe a man who knows what to do [with what he's got]" and is "a superlover as far as techniques are concerned." Which is a long way from the definition given in sense 2, and, even then, it's still an idiosyncratic meaning apparently used strictly by the Penthouse writer. Sense 2 should be removed. Sense 1, on the other hand, has been used outside the Penthouse source (found six other citations which feature it). There's also another sense referring to large male chickens. Astral (talk) 13:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Passed. Thanks, Astral. - -sche (discuss) 04:04, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


This may be a neologism in Irish... I can't find any uses of it in Google Books or Groups. - -sche (discuss) 18:08, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Embryomystic (talkcontribs) has an unfortunate habit of adding theoretically correct but seemingly unattestable terms in Irish. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:11, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 04:06, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: Periodic male tension (which itself seems unattestable). Seems to be only in one newspaper article, used humorously. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Obvious protologism. what do you say to speedying it? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:29, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
There is an odd mention in the Sunday Times: SCIENTISTS claim to have identified a masculine version of the female affliction PMT. Periodic male tension, they say, is rife among us. Alex Smith would probably date his monthly downturn in mood to around about now. Just when the recovery signs were evident, a woeful first-half display allowed St Johnstone a lead that was never reversed.
An article in the Guardian seems to have generated a very small amount of interest. The article says that the presentation was made to the British Psychological Society, and therefore is probably archived by them, though I cannot find the term on their website.
The article also appears on Usenet.
All of these occur in 2004, though, so the term does not seem to satisfy the requirement of citations spanning at least one year. --BB12 (talk) 06:52, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 04:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

attention whoreEdit

Verb. Is this used in any verb form other than the -ing form? Is the -ing form used as a verb (progressive) or just as noun or adjective? It could be that we should only have attention whoring as a noun. DCDuring TALK 19:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I tried "to attention whore", "is attention whoring", "was attention whoring", "attention whored", and "been attention whoring" in bgc and ggc. No durable cites on any of them. If anything, the verb is a rare back-formation. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:28, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Cited by Astral, apparently (see the citations page). So, it passes? - -sche (discuss) 07:35, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: Antic tricks or motions. I know this was in Webster's 1913 and they cite a "B. Johnson", but it seems weird and I want to verify it anyway. —Internoob 22:59, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

According to Wiktionary, antic means "grotesque, bizarre; absurd."
  • The monkey busied himself with the boots, and the light-minded drunkard laughed; and at every fresh gesticulation of the new boot-wearer the laugh grew louder and more tremendous, till at length it was found impossible to restrain it. [25]
  • They are all an essential part of the Shaker worship, and in authentication of it, they quote the fact of "Miriam and all the women going out with timbrels and with dances;" of "David's dancing before the ark," &c. &c. The manual gesticulation, too, which is incessant with them, is an act of worship, and justified by such passages as "glorify God in your body, and in your spirit," &c. [26]
  • [27]
I think these three fit, though I'm not too happy with the use of "antic" in the definition. --BB12 (talk) 06:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I've changed the sense (or removed it and added a new sense, if you prefer). I think that resolves the matter...? Refine the definition and change "dated" to something stronger as needed. - -sche (discuss) 22:12, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: (rhetoric) A series of terms in an utterance in alphabetical order. Ƿidsiþ 06:50, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

A very interesting word with four interesting meanings! It looks citable: [28], [29], [30] and probably [31]. --BB12 (talk) 06:32, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
As a lover of word play (aren't we all?) I am familiar with this usage. While looking for a citation, I came across this [32] which I do not regard as reliable but has yet another definition. Tesspub (talk) 18:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Compare #abecedarium. - -sche (discuss) 18:45, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Cited, IMO. - -sche (discuss) 21:57, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


This is badly formatted but that's not really important right now. I thought this was an obvious protologism but a simple Google search turned up a wider variety of results than I expected. So I wonder if this may be attested after all, even if not with the sense given. —CodeCat 00:51, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

According to professional photographer, Gabriel Biderman, the term ruinism, which he uses, is "the beauty of decay" (see ruinism.com/about). It is arguable that the definition I have provided uses the same definition, but talking of decay in an artificial sense. If it would help for the purpose of achieving a better definition, I could alter my definition to include natural decay as well as artificial decay. I believe this would, therefore, prove that my article can be verified by Wiktionary's terms.—This unsigned comment was added by (talk) at 19:04, 15 June 2012.

One use (or multiple dependent uses) isn't enough. That would make it a protologism. For WT:CFI it has to be in use by others, making it a neologism- which is proved by citations in at least 3 independent, durably-archived sources over more than a year Chuck Entz (talk) 03:01, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Most usage seems to be referring to something completely different, and in lowercase. I have created Citations:ruinism (I find the first citation to be extremely funny), but I haven't actually made ruinism yet because I don't know how to define it exactly. As for Ruinism, I can't find a single durable citation and I think it ought to be deleted rather soon. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 04:15, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Noun: (slang) £20,000.

If it is real, is it capitalized? This spelling? Etymology? Context? DCDuring TALK 14:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Also slang where? UK? Ireland? US? I've never heard of it but of course it might be UK, just not my part of the UK. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
UK - invented but does not seem to have caught on. You need to Google for Jeffrey Archer £2000 in order to understand it. (I would delete it) SemperBlotto (talk) 21:22, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
I see. So, it should be "£2,000". It mimics US Benjamin "$100", etc. We could give it its 30 days here in case someone has some idea of how to find a pocket of attestable usage. DCDuring TALK 23:44, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed per Semper. - -sche (discuss) 01:44, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Substance that kills a spider. Seems like a "book word", vanishingly rare. Equinox 21:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

French would be aranéicide unless I'm mistaken. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:49, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, you're correct, which is why I said French version. It can be found here and here, exactly as you spell it. I was using the French version as a way of substantiating the word's existence.—Giant SquidTalk 22:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Well, good research, and I think we have some rule that accepts anything that's been in a sci paper. We should flag it as rare, at least, though. Equinox 22:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
That's very reasonable. —Giant SquidTalk 22:55, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
May I remove the tag then?—Giant SquidTalk 23:08, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Leave it for now, because we usually have to find three suitable citations. (The "one mention in a scientific paper" might overrule this, but just be patient.) Equinox 23:09, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Alright.—Giant SquidTalk 23:10, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
One use in a journal is no longer sufficient for inclusion (see Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2010-11/Attestation in academic journals), but because it is used (rather than mentioned) in that journal, we only have to find two more uses. - -sche (discuss) 03:16, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. Each sense had only one citation. - -sche (discuss) 20:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)


Sense: "of or relating to a sleeping person or sleeping people". I don't think this can be right; sleep+bound seems like a poetic term for "bound by sleep", i.e. sleeping. "Relating to a sleeping person" sounds more suitable for some scientific term. Equinox 23:32, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 04:16, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Equinox 00:45, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Cited. Also created (and cited) quod google. Astral (talk) 15:35, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Passed. - -sche (discuss) 21:25, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

banc#Old EnglishEdit

I found one source that said this was not attested in any Old English texts. I am also curious about its etymology because the more usual descendant of this Germanic word was benc (from which bench). The lack of palatalisation is suspicious. —CodeCat 11:18, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Remember too that palatisation was not a universal feature in all OE dialects: it was a feature of primarily Southern OE dialects (West Saxon); those in the North (Anglian) usually did not palatise, or did so to a much lesser extent (cf OE ic > SouthernME ich, but NorthernME ik; OE finc > English finch but Scots phink) Leasnam (talk) 17:55, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
According to Bosworth & Toller, it appears glossed as tumulus in Somner's 1659 Old English–Latin dictionary. If that's the only place it occurs, that's just a mention, not a use, and the word can't be verified. Clark Hall doesn't include it, but Clark Hall doesn't attempt to be unabridged. —Angr 18:52, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
A slightly different form, OE hō-banca ‎(couch, literally hock-bench), more closely depicts PGmc *bankô, *bankōn. I wonder too if the word (if it exists) might have been a borrowing. Leasnam (talk) 17:51, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


Due to a change in our CFI, the one mention of this could be sufficient for inclusion. - -sche (discuss) 21:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
What was Somner's evidence? Did he also have benc#Old English? DCDuring TALK 22:14, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
I don't know. I only have access to Bosworth & Toller, not to Sumner. —Angr 22:32, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
I don't think we can trust a 1659 dictionary anyway. Somner didn't speak Old English or have access to any native speakers any more than we do. So how did he learn of the word? Was it attested in texts that he had available, but have been lost to us since? —CodeCat 22:35, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
It's not clear to me that we have a durably archived mention. If we say B&T is durably archived, we are left with a mention of mention. DCDuring TALK 23:15, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
It's not clear to me that even a durably archived mention is enough. The CFI says, "For terms in extinct languages, one use in a contemporaneous source is the minimum, or one mention is adequate subject to the below requirements", and one of the "below requirements" is "the community of editors for that language should maintain a list of materials deemed appropriate as the only sources for entries based on a single mention". Is there a community of editors for Old English, and do they maintain a list of materials deemed appropriate as the only sources for entries based on a single mention, and is B&T on that list? The fact that B&T only list another dictionary as their source shouldn't actually matter; if B&T hadn't given a source for the word at all, we would still accept their entry as a mention, wouldn't we? So we shouldn't "punish" them for giving their source. —Angr 22:00, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
I would prefer it if we accepted only mentions from people who might have actually heard it from a native speaker. If it's listed in a dictionary that just begs the question "where did they find it?". —CodeCat 22:33, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed, given the absence of consensus to consider the mention-of-a-mention as valid verification of the term. Cheers, - -sche (discuss) 07:43, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Three independent citations please. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 21:33, 8 October 2012 (UTC)


I found some hits in Google Books, but as far as I could see, they are all scannos of 蜂蜜. --Whym (talk) 08:27, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree. It's possible that it could occur as a (recurring) typo, but that seems a little far-fetched. --BB12 (talk) 10:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete. Looking more closely shows that the ZH entry here on the EN WT links through to the ZH WP article for 蜂蜜, with the first character of ("bee"), not 峰蜜, with the first character of ("mountain peak"). Searching the ZH WP for 峰蜜 produces exactly three hits on two different pages, and in all cases, the looks like it belongs to the preceding phrase and the to the succeeding phrase: 芳峰蜜香 ("fragrant mountain-peak honey smell") and 雪峰蜜桔 ("snowy mountain-peak honey tangerine").
Of the four items marked under the ===References=== header,
  1. is the ZH WP, but for the expected spelling of 蜂蜜 instead of the purported lemma of 峰蜜;
  2. is a dead-tree book that hasn't been scanned yet by Google, so I cannot verify;
  3. is a dead link to a non-existent PDF hosted on the website for Bhutan's Department of Trade;
  4. is a link to the Korean Traditional Knowledge Portal, which seems to be a Korean / Hanji > English glossary, but which also doesn't actually include the 峰蜜 term (but which does include the expected spelling 蜂蜜).
I think this entry fails on just about all counts of verifiability. -- Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 16:37, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:55, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: (music) The performance of music by local musicians in a public place, with its origins in Gaelic culture. A musical performance broadcast for a radio show.

We may be missing a more central music sense for session, though I think it is included in the first sense, but I don't see anything that would restrict the use of the word to this sense. DCDuring TALK 12:23, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

We do need a sense for music, but not as the definition is at the moment. I'd suggest something like - "an informal get-together of musicians". While the Gaelic culture mention is reasonable, as the word is common in Ireland, I don't think it is specific enough to keep that part.--Dmol (talk) 06:01, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:37, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


"The democratization of user-generated information through social networking sites, etc." How can information be democratized? And how does rubbish like Facebook achieve anything? Citations welcome. Equinox 00:20, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Seconded; I don't even know what this means! Mglovesfun (talk) 17:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I would imagine that it means 'to place in the hands of the people', as opposed to 'in the hands of corporations or governments'. —CodeCat 15:00, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
But surely user-generated information is already in the hands of the people. —Angr 15:55, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. The other sense could also stand to be improved. - -sche (discuss) 04:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


title was originally brainfuck

Haven't looked at it thoroughly, but it needs citations. -- 16:58, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Well, you should have done. Three citations added from a simple Google book search. Please don't waste our time. SemperBlotto (talk) 17:05, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I add three to the entry, could someone check them to make sure they're okay? I also moved to uppercase, as this sense doesn't seem to appear in lowercase from what I saw. 50 Xylophone Players talk 17:21, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm not impressed, but that's just my opinion. The criteria are unclear. DAVilla 02:03, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
"Brainfuck" occurs in lowercase as a synonym of "mindfuck." I've cited this and re-added an entry for lowercase. Astral (talk) 21:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Resolved. - -sche (discuss) 22:18, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


This article needs citations. —This unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).

Even if we did somehow get three citations, it should probably get deleted by the RFD process. -- Liliana 05:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
If this isn't a brand name, it's at least akin to a specific entity that should really prove some legitimacy in its cites. DAVilla 01:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 22:19, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

head of steamEdit

Rfv-sense: "Stress".

There is another definition is from the "work up a head of steam" idiom. This is supposed to be different. DCDuring TALK 02:51, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

If you you look at the edit history, head of steam was moved from "work up a head of steam", but attempts to convert the definitions to match the change in POS weren't done very well. This needs rewording to repair the damage, not verification. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:53, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
The RFC comment says 'start from scratch', I agree with that, speedy delete the content and replace with a good entry. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Sense removed. - -sche (discuss) 22:20, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

July 2012Edit

break bulkEdit

Rfv-sense: "To unload a ship."

I had originally contributed this entry with two senses, but the wording was wrong. I have reworded one sense to indicate a certain type of unloading of a shipment, not necessarily from a ship. I have ttbc'ed three translations of the reworded sense. I would have simply deleted this remaining sense, but there are translations and I still could be wrong. The reworded sense is intended to encompass the usage in old English legal cases, which still carries weight today. DCDuring TALK 20:11, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 22:21, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

bone-eating snot flower wormEdit

Equinox 19:13, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

This is a bad translation, since the generic name Osedax ('bone-eater') is the noun, and the specific epithet mucofloris ('snot flower') modifies it. It is, however, the translation used consistently since the discovery was first announced, and there are plenty of cites on Usenet for it (both with and without "worm"). Chuck Entz (talk) 20:19, 4 July 2012 (UTC)


Oddly, I only see two Usenet hits for it. It's mentioned in a couple of Google Books, but not used. - -sche (discuss) 09:10, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
I saw no Usenet hits for this (searching with quotes). I have added one cite I know is durably archived, from a print newspaper, one from a scholarly journal (Development)that I don't know is in print, and one from CNN. DCDuring TALK 11:57, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Now cited IMHO. DCDuring TALK 12:06, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Passed :) thank you! - -sche (discuss) 18:28, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Passed RFD, but has yet to meet attestation standards -- Liliana 13:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I've added two cites, both from native German writers. One is talking about English speaking Kiribati (but uses both Lunch and Mittagessen for separate meals, without (as far as I can tell) ever using both words to describe a single meal, so it doesn't seem to just an affectation), the second is about Zurich, and explicitly contrasts the two terms. (It also has a verb form, lunchen, which it contrasts with mittagessen, though it takes some elements of English grammar rather than German: "Lunches" and "Lunching", not "Lunchs" and "Lunchung" or "Lunchen".) Hopefully my translations are OK. Smurrayinchester (talk) 15:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
For the second one, can you double-check that the German actually says "Dann gibts es" and not "Dann gibt es"? If it's "Dann gibts es", it means "Then it's already time to eat it [some previously mentioned food in the neuter gender] again". —Angr 16:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Ah, whoops, don't know where that error crept in from. Yes, it's "Dann gibt es" not "Dann gibts es". Smurrayinchester (talk) 20:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-passed. - -sche (discuss) 07:07, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


Sense #2 of the adjective: Made from the skin of a still-born animal.Speednat (talk) 21:58, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

No idea, but example sentences are in with the definitions, could someone fix that. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:21, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. Was already removed by another user. - -sche (discuss) 07:23, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "The ability for a chief petty officer of the United States Navy or Coast Guard to set own working hours to achieve mission goals, regardless of their being above or below the civilian equivalent of an eight-and-a-half hour work day". I see nothing at google books:"cpo" "freeboard" "hours|bells" and nothing at google books:"chief petty" "freeboard" "hours|bells". I didn't check further.​—msh210 (talk) 00:57, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:15, 6 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: "{{golf}} The completion of a hole with a score of nine (9)." Seems a bit squirrelly to me... Chuck Entz (talk) 07:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

'"scored a squirrel" + golf' doesn't find anything relevant, on Google Books, Google Groups or even Google Search. Established golfing terms like "eagle", "birdie" and "bogey" all get thousands of hits for the same sort of search. Smurrayinchester (talk) 10:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 07:11, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

seven deEdit

No reference book or original text that I can find attests to the existence of this term. It is in Tok Pisin, so it only requires one citation, but I am unable to find even that. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Unable to verify - I do know that "seven de" is what speakers of Tok Pisin would also call "wanpela wik" - or a week, but it appears this particular version of the phrase (referring to seventh day adventists) appears to have been sourced from a user generated website, and remains unreliable. BarkingFish (talk) 22:38, 20 July 2012 (UTC) (admin to tpi.wikipedia.org)

Thanks. I don't think we should add the sense meaning week, because it is basically just the sum of its parts. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 18:31, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Lemma says suffix, header says noun, but translates to a pronoun. Which of these three is correct? -- Liliana 18:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy, no usable content given. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
This suffix is found in Hallanger dictionary (ed. 1973-1974) ; on Richardson's (1885), and on Rajemisa's : [33]. It is a pronoun suffix. --Jagwar (talk) 16:20, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Resolved, apparently. Kept. - -sche (discuss) 23:10, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Another Tok Pisin term that is possibly correct, but that I can't find any evidence for. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Partially verifiable - HLP gives the starting term "Pato" (integrated from the Spanish language), but does not give the actual term patogus to mean Goose. However, it is known among older people as patogus, but among the younger generations simply as gus. I will refer this to my colleague at tpi.wikipedia for a more definitive answer. BarkingFish (talk) 21:33, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, we have pato already. Do you think gus is derived directly from goose, or via patogus? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 21:38, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
My suspicion is it's probably derivative of patogus, since it is being taken and used by younger generations of speakers. I have notified one of my colleagues from the Tok Pisin Wikipedia though, and will get back to you with a definitive answer once I actually have one :) BarkingFish (talk) 23:13, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 23:15, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: Having arrived from a distant place, as by disembarking from a ship. Supported by reference to Oxford English Dictionary online (2011).

Is this a true adjective rather than a past participle? (Ie, comparable or gradable? Use as predicate? Different sense from past participle?) Does it exist apart from landed immigrant? DCDuring TALK 17:25, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:56, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


For background, see Talk:phenpropionate. Does it exist independently of nandrolene?--Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Quasi-RFV-failed for now (made an {{only-in}} quasi-redirect). In rare cases, a term fails RFV because nobody tries to cite it... I'm happy to say such cases are rare, but this is one of them. - -sche (discuss) 09:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Edit: I found two non-nandro citations:
    • 1991, Dictionary of Steroids: chemical data, structures, and bibliographies (R. A. Hill, Anthony Cooper, A. D. Roberts; ISBN 0412270609), page 705:
      20-(3-Phenylpropanoyl): [16915-80-3]. Oxogestone phenpropionate, []
    • 2000, Charles Yesalis, Anabolic steroids in sport and exercise (ISBN 0880117869), page 37
      [] and phenpropionate [] of nortestosterone.

So, entry restored. I'd pass it, but the discussion on the talk page suggests we're not sure of the definition. - -sche (discuss) 19:22, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

There's also "Decanoate phenpropionate". - -sche (discuss) 19:24, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Passed. - -sche (discuss) 23:15, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Not in any other dictionary. Protologism? SemperBlotto (talk) 09:53, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

It's from Satre (or commentaries about his work). nihilate and nihilation need work too, though. I can't figure out what either definition is meant to be saying - how can something be encased in a shell of non-being? Adding citations now. Smurrayinchester (talk) 12:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
I found this. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
it's been cited... cool. It passes now, IMO. - -sche (discuss) 09:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: IPA symbol equivalent to eth. —RuakhTALK 15:57, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


RFV-failed for now. Should be re-added if citations ever become available. - -sche (discuss) 18:40, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


"An ideological focus on hermaphrodites, and issues affecting them, possibly to the detriment of non-hermaphrodites. Contrast with androcentrism and gynocentrism." Practically nothing in the usual places, and what there is doesn't seem to have this meaning. Equinox 16:20, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

The handful of times I've come across this word, it seemed to mean a focus on people who identified as male or female, as opposed to third gender or genderqueer. Smurrayinchester (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
The problem I have is with the term hermaphrodites, since this properly refers to a pretty rare physical condition of the sex organs, rather than anything having to do with gender identification. —This unsigned comment was added by Chuck Entz (talkcontribs) at 07:06, 28 July 2012‎.
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:59, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense Arizona thunderstorm. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:14, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

I recall this (though about Utah or Nevada rather than Arizona) from the novel The Lonely Polygamist. Google isn't letting me see many pages of it, though, and none with this word.​—msh210 (talk) 21:35, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
The monsoon season in Arizona is a period in the hottest part of the summer when the extreme heat in the deserts makes the air expand and grow lighter, which causes heavier air to rush in from the Gulf of California to the south. This is moist, tropical air, so thunderstorms are a characteristic feature of the monsoon season. Someone who doesn't know that monsoons are a phenomenon of moving airmasses might assume that the thunderstorms are what the term monsoon season refers to rather than being only something associated with it.
In other words, monsoon as a thunderstorm is either an understandable mistake, or a back-formation from monsoon season, depending on whether this is isolated or has become part of the language. The similarity between the two means wording the search to distinguish them may be tricky, though I suspect "a monsoon" is more likely to be associated with the thunderstorm definition than "monsoon" with no article or a definite article. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:19, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
I dont live there, but Im pretty sure that residents of Arizona dont call all thunderstorms "monsoons", or even just particularly powerful ones. It's specific to the very slow-moving and predictable late summer storms that blow in from the southwest every summer. In other words, it's the same thing that everyone else calls a monsoon, it just happens that Arizona's the only place in the southwest that regularly gets it. Soap (talk) 21:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. I also agree with Soap. - -sche (discuss) 23:21, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


"A business process which decentralizes decision making such that decisions are made as autonomously as possible and as far down the organization as possible consistent with maintaining coherence within the business." Not in Google Books except as brand and Web site name. Equinox 23:14, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

All three books which together cover the process in detail are currently catalogued by Amazon UK (viz: The Co-Evolving Organization: Poised Between Order and Chaos, The Robust Organization: Highly Optimized Tolerance, and The Pattern Organization: Designed for Change. The title of the first of these was incorrectly catalogued by Amazon and by British Books in Print: the correct title is The Coevolving Organization... --Venator (talk) 20:37, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 23:28, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: Sunrise or sunset. Although they cite a dictionary for this, I'm skeptical. I can see how a phrase like "get up before the sun" could be interpreted that way, but I don't buy it (unless there's a similar sense at chicken to cover "get up before the chickens"). Chuck Entz (talk) 05:45, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't buy it either. I would prefer to delete the sense. (Isn't "get up before the sun" just a sort of synecdoche?). Dbfirs 19:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Adage: "Man may work from sun to sun/ But woman's work is never done." Valid usage. Collect (talk) 00:34, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Even supposing this is really a valid cite, we need three- in durably-archived sources. I have my doubts about this one: it looks more like something compressed to fit the format of this particular couplet, not something of general use in actual speech or writing. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:10, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Here they are: [34] Book title, [35] book of poetry title, [36] another book, [37] adage noted in book on culture, [38] usage for a record album, [39] usage in New York Times, [40] ditto, [41] ditto (any need to show the scores of NYT usages of the phrase? ). In short - well-known and exceedingly obvious usage of the term, so will someone consider the verification done? Cheers. Collect (talk) 01:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, you've certain cited the phrase from sun to sun, which probably deserves an entry, although quite a few of your cites are mentions, not uses. Anything that isn't that exact phrase, or a direct play on it? Chuck Entz (talk) 11:02, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Let's see -- hundreds of uses for the term. Yet insufficient? Yet "squaroid" survives with zero usages or nearly so? Um -- ok here goes ... Collins: 7. poetic a year or a day, Merriam-Webster: 4. the rising or setting of the sun <from sun to sun> , etc. for all the major published dictionaries. Is a dozen dictionaries sufficient (including the OED etc.)? Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
We don't need hundreds of uses, and we don't need any dictionaries at all; we just need three durably archived uses. The problem is, you've only presented uses of from sun to sun, which raises the possibility that this sense doesn't exist outside of that phrase. (Like how the existence of hot potato does not demonstrate a distinct sense of potato.) —RuakhTALK 13:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Try the OED for other uses. It gives cites for each meaning, but is copyrighted. I fail to see why the definition which is widely accepted in every other dictionary fails here, and why words which have zero usage get accepted here <g>. If this is how Wiktionary "works" then at least add "from sun to sun" in the "sun" definition list as a dead minimum, as it is exceedingly widely used. Tennyson And sun by sun the happy days, etc. Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:41, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
(after edit conflict) Oddly enough, no one has brought squaroid to rfv. You're welcome to do so. We add the template {{rfv}} for whole entries that need to be verified or deleted and {{rfv-sense}} if it's just a part of the entry. If you think there's something inherently wrong with it so that it should be deleted whether it's used or not (for instance, it's the sum of parts already covered by definitions of the parts), add {{rfd}}, or {{delete}} for cases where it's so obviously in violation of CFI that an admin is likely to agree that it should be deleted without going through any process. If the item in question isn't an entry, but something like an appendix, or template, or category, then use {{rfdo}}. For all of these, the box that's generated has a "+" link that you can click to start a new section in the appropriate page, and you can explain the reason you nominated it. Of course, you will need people to agree with you and vote to delete for the deletion pages, so I would recommend that you try to be a bit more diplomatic- and, in case you're wondering, smug, condescending pseudo-cheerfulness is not being diplomatic. Remember, this is a community, and things only happen through consensus. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:12, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Interestingly, this b.g.c. hit for "from sun till sun" seems to take to "sun" mean only "sunset", not "sunrise". —RuakhTALK 13:24, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
There are a few phrase that seem to use sun in the senses under discussion. "From sun until/to sun", "between/twixt/betwixt sun and sun". I've tried to find more at have sought the meaning of sun as the object of prepositions like "to/until/at/before/after" in likely collocations with "open|close|right|back|just", unsuccessfully.
Should we consider the small number of phrases as set and make entries for each? Or follow the lemmings? As this has become more an RfD than and RfV, I vote for following the lemmings and keeping this sense. DCDuring TALK 16:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

"At first sun" is found in [42], [43], [44] etc. pretty much ad infinitum - thus not just "sun to sun" at all, alas. How many similar cites are needed for allowing the meaning as stated in the first place? Cheers. Collect (talk) 17:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I read that as more like "first sunlight/light". It is hard to make sense of the use of "first" otherwise. *"At first dawn/sunrise/sunset"? DCDuring TALK 19:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
As opposed to "at the start of the day" which is far more in line with the definition being questioned? On what basis? We do not even proffer a definition of "sun" as "sunlight" in any sources, AFAICT. And the meaning at issue precisely fits the quote. Collect (talk) 00:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Every day, I kill myself trying to find citations that unambiguously demonstrate particular meanings-in-use of words. Do you think that this sense should be exempt from the need for lack of ambiguity? It is very easy to get over-committed to a particular term or definition. It is not always easy to find empirical support for one's beliefs.
It is a common requirement of a definition that it be substitutable in place of the term being defined. If sun meant "dawn" in the phrase at first sun, then at first dawn should make sense. But what is dawn the first of? If I substitute "light", then at first light makes sense to me as it would mean the "first light of day". Both at first light, at first daylight. and at first light of day can be found, the first very abundantly, at Google Books.
To my surprise, at first dawn can be found, with reasonable abundance.
Thus, we have laboriously demonstrated that the lexicographers at the other leading dictionaries do not have more relaxed attestation standards than we do, that this sense of sun exists outside of set phrases, and that we should keep it once we have actually put the least ambiguous citations in the entry. Good persistence, Collect. DCDuring TALK 01:05, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
I have added five citations, using four different phrases, three using ""sun in both of the senses. DCDuring TALK 02:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Passed. - -sche (discuss) 09:48, 13 October 2012 (UTC)



Looks to me like a neologism with promotional background. -- Gauss (talk) 20:33, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

In use, many more times than the required "3" for wikt., over many more years than 10 -- fully fits with listing criterion. —This comment was unsigned.

I don't see any citations in the entries or on the citations pages. DCDuring TALK 22:15, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
I was able to attest bulbophile (usage dates back to the 19th century), but not bulbophilia. Astral (talk) 00:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
bulbophile passes, bulbophilia fails. - -sche (discuss) 23:30, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Alternative spelling of boation. --Le Fondu (talk) 17:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:38, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


Old federal. Could this be an error? I couldn't find any citation beyond the one given (which is accurate to the scanned page contents). Equinox 22:11, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

This looks very citable Google books restricted to 19th century, preview available. I hope that users who type in "foederal" in our search box don't get lost. DCDuring TALK 03:48, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Yup, looks good. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Other example: The Fœderal Constitution of the United States of America
Kept per the linked-to citations. - -sche (discuss) 23:31, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

advanced adultEdit

"(euphemistic) An old person." Not seeing much in Google Books. Equinox 00:03, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 09:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Does this word exist in Latin? It's formed in a Latin fashion, but from Greek roots, and apparently is used only in the medical term alopecia androgenetica. Either this is a New Latin word, or else it is only a part of a compound term in medicine, and therefore not a word at all (just as English "Sri Lanka" does not imply that "Sri" and "Lanka" are English words).

If this is not a Latin word, then all the inflected forms will also need to be deleted. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:06, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Please take a look at WT:RFC#User:Lycomedes. This issue is one of the main reasons I brought it to rfc. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Deleted on the grounds that it's only used in one set phrase. Had that set phrase been a bluelink, I would have {{only-in}}-linked to it, like at [[diocotron]]. - -sche (discuss) 23:36, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

August 2012Edit

woman's roomEdit

Looks like a misspelling of women's room to me. Also I'm not sure if either of them are attestable with this meaning (citing a room belonging to a woman is trivial). It's probably worth including if attested, compare boys' room, girls' room. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Cited --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-passed. - -sche (discuss) 03:23, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


In English. Maro 12:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

A few examples of usage can be found here. Not exactly academic, but internet culture rarely is. —This unsigned comment was added by (talk) at 23:44, 4 August 2012‎.
See WT:CFI#Attestation. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:06, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Aside from attestability according to CFI, the internet term uses a regular l instead of the dark l Chuck Entz (talk) 12:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
I'd attribute that to the fact that the dark l is a letter that is inaccessible to most people online, so while in practice the word has changed, in theory it remains the same.-- 18:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Well, yes, but that may mean that bydlo#English is attestable, but that bydło#English is not. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:49, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh. Makes sense. I guess I'll go ahead and edit that.-- 03:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Striking, since, who first added the English section, has now removed it. —RuakhTALK 03:04, 7 August 2012 (UTC)


Ideal for navigation (best shore)?! Can't see it in Google Books at all. Thought it was something to do with bestshoring. Equinox 01:34, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Used by some businesses as a trade name, also as a model name by some businesses - but as a word? Nada. Collect (talk) 00:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:43, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Ooh! Good thing we unblocked Luciferwildcat multiple times! Otherwise he might not have been able to add various pieces of unattestable bullshit! Help me out here, friends. Equinox 00:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I’d expect that after having 8 out of 17 regulars voting to have him banned he’d learn the lesson: just because a certain string of characters resembles English, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s an English word. Seriously, just find citations BEFORE you add an entry, Lucifer. — Ungoliant (Falai) 01:18, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Clearly "a person who eats the night". Um -- I just looked at the recent entries - many of which are "(arbitrary adjective)(arbitrary noun)" combinations and then the plurals as well! And I kinda like "squaroid" which has essentially no recorded usages other than as a trademark <g>. I suggest that all of his recent words be examined closely. Cheers. Collect (talk) 01:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

FYI, squaroid was on the "Wanted" list, should I not create them? Or does someone just make those up, what's going on?Lucifer (talk) 02:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

"Creation" is precisely the issue. Find words on the list which exist as findable words first - the "write the definition when no one has used the word" system is a failure. Cheers. Collect (talk) 13:44, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Like the rest of Wiktionary, anyone can add to the wanted list. You have to use common sense and make sure they meet CFI before you add entries from the list (or from any source). In this case, it's apparently a protologism coined very recently for a McDonald's ad campaign. There are no hits whatsoever on Google Books or usenet, though it may very well survive long enough to meet CFI a year from now. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I suspect that even in the context of the McDonalds ad, the definition is wrong. -vore means a creature that eats in a certain way, so a nocturnavore is one who eats at night, not the habit of eating at night. Smurrayinchester (talk) 09:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Is there any sort of evidence for this? Something that's clearly unattestable can be speedy deleted. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:58, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Nah it's attestable on Twitter, that's it! Mglovesfun (talk) 10:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Following the logic of -vore word formation, you have herbivores that eat plants (Latin herba) and carnivores that eat meat (Latin carnis), but nocturna is an adjective, not a noun. Based on other Latin compounds such as noctivaga, I would guess that the correct form would be noctivore Chuck Entz (talk) 10:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Plenty of Google hits for noctivore but all in French. Nothing obvious for noctivorous. SemperBlotto (talk) 10:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I wouldn't expect there to be any. I was just speculating about what a correctly-formed protologism would look like. The French term seems to show I guessed right. Of course, usage doesn't follow etymological correctness. Nocturnavore stands a much better chance of being here a year from now than noctivore. As for the rfved term, MG has already speedied it as an open-and-shut protologism- no cites anywhere. Chuck Entz (talk) 11:14, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

pearl eye patchEdit

Um ok... need quotes to support that. JamesjiaoTC 00:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Was speedily deleted by Ruakh and then again by MK. - -sche (discuss) 04:31, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

chick with dickEdit

Note the RFD discussion (currently still on WT:RFD, though closed). - -sche (discuss) 04:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 03:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

suy haoEdit

Doesn't Vietnamese use tone marks? (And yes the entry needs cleaning up, I've contacted the user who created the entry about that) —CodeCat 13:47, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

There are a great many marks to differentiate between vowels, but not all the vowels have them. And yes, there are tone marks, but there's one tone that isn't marked.Chuck Entz (talk) 14:04, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
The are 21 Google Books hits for suy hao [45], of which 5 are accidental juxtapositions of other forms of suy or hao. That leaves 16 examples in running Vietnamese speech without the accents. I would say the spelling is citeable. I don't speak Vietnamese, so I can't tell if they support the definition, though. I haven't checked usenet. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:20, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I'm retracting my nomination then. Citations would still be nice, of course, but I was mainly worried about the spelling. —CodeCat 16:24, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense faulty, not functioning, etc. See Talk:Microsoftian, which suggests this sense was removed before but then re-added (who did this? why?). The single citation could just as well fit under the primary sense (relating to Microsoft). Equinox 01:45, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Removed in this edit [46], re-added in this one [47] by an editor who has since been blocked. - -sche (discuss) 02:58, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
I have removed the sense. It previously failed RFV and should not have been re-added without three clear citations. - -sche (discuss) 22:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

anglar regionEdit

(anatomy): An angular portion of the stomach between the lesser curvature and the pylorus.

I have found this principally in a small number of works with Japanese authors. I think it is a misspelling or "angular region", in a sense connected to angulus. DCDuring TALK 02:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I see only two cites, from different authors but both suspiciously at Kyōto University. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Furthermore, neither of the Kyoto cites verify the given meaning. They both seem to be in a particle physics context rather than anatomy. SpinningSpark 17:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
I concur. I'm happy with a speedy deletion if that's possible in this case. --BB12 (talk) 17:11, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
BTW, I have also deleted two references I made to this page. --BB12 (talk) 21:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 19:44, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Weevac 6Edit

I think this needs to meet WT:BRAND. —RuakhTALK 04:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

LOL at the etymology... that a product would actually be named after its ability to evacuate specifically six wee babies. - -sche (discuss) 05:21, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
The cites do support the etymology... --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 05:23, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
The name looks like it should be for a device that cleans up urine spills. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:39, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Agree, clearly a brand name. Note: Usage example has Weevac-6 with a hyphen, not consistent with page title. Equinox 02:49, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed / deleted. - -sche (discuss) 19:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

trailer trashEdit

RFV of this sense of the noun: "Deleted from the movie trailer. Not included in theatrical run." It's defined as an adjective, but I can't reformulate the definition until I can see some citations to get an idea of what it does mean and how it's used. - -sche (discuss) 02:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

The trailer is supposed to be the best of what is in the movie. What would be deleted from the trailer would not be especially bad, but would probably be in the movie. The most intelligible film-related usage in this sense that I found was the intro to a film review column [48]. DCDuring TALK 03:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
If it helps anyone searching for usage of the term: consider the possibility that it means "scenes that appear in the trailer but were, after the release of the trailer but before the release of the film, deleted from the film". - -sche (discuss) 03:25, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
Interesting possibility, defying normal economic logic. DCDuring TALK 03:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
I found some hits, but I don't think any support that meaning: [49], [50], [51]. In any case, I think this meaning would just be the sum of parts, not so? --BB12 (talk) 05:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
The trailer for America's Sweethearts had scenes that weren't in the movie; sometimes what works in clips doesn't work in context.--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:44, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


I think this is a protologism; there are a lot of Google Book hits, but they refer to the name of a website, not to a noun. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy-deleted. I think the purpose of the protologism is precisely to besmirch said website — see e.g. http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1121283/47187247#c48 — and we shouldn't let Wiktionary be hijacked this way. (Not that I disagree with the besmirching. PolitiFact is not very good at its job. But that's not what Wiktionary is for.) —RuakhTALK 01:56, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


Seems pretty borderline. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

It was previously deleted after being tagged {{rfv}}, but it's apparently never been listed on WT:RFV (until now)... bd seems to have deleted it after Wiktionary:Requests for verification archive/2012#sapiophile? Well, let's give it its month and see if more citations have come online since March. - -sche (discuss) 18:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I think there might be three Usenet citations, but possibly not used in any published works at all. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I was able to attest this as a noun, but not as an adjective. See Citations:sapiosexual. Astral (talk) 00:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


Supposedly a female given name. I see absolutely no relevant hits on Google Books for "dear Maegth", "named Maegth", "called Maegth", "her Maegth", "Ms/Mrs/Miss Maegth", "love Maegth", "inauthor:Maegth". There are also no relevant hits on Usenet, AFAICT. - -sche (discuss) 19:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

If you search Images for "Maegth", and page forward, you will eventually begin to see Facebook titles (Maegth Valonia, Maegth Efia, etc.) of lede with the name. Leasnam (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
On the one hand, if people with that name exist, their births should be public record (and may also have been announced in papers); it's also possible they did newsworthy things and got in papers for that. On the other hand, when I search on Facebook, I see only the 2 distinct individuals whose pictures appear in that Google Images search plus 2 others, and a handful of other people with the last name Maegth (which is also otherwise unattested), and people have been known to use fake names on Facebook ... and I see nothing relevant when I search Google News and Google Scholar for "Maegth". So I'm not willing to assume it's attested until there's more solid evidence. I'm currently trying to see if any of the baby-name websites make claims about how common a name it is for children born in particular years, which would at least imply the existence of birth records. - -sche (discuss) 20:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
I see what you're saying. Well, personally, I'v never met anyone named "Maegth", and were I to, I wouldn't think the name was weird, just uncommon. It kinda sounds like Megan. Leasnam (talk) 20:41, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Probably not evidence we could use, but a search on ancestry.com (I'm subscribed to the site, so I tried it, just out of curiosity) for an exact match to "Maegth" as a first name found no hits- and their database includes birth, marriage and death records for the UK, the US, Australia, and other countries. They don't have as good coverage for the most recent decades, and the older records are transcribed from paper and microform sources, so it's not conclusive. Searching for a non-exact match turned up millions of hits, but anything with an "M" followed by an "a" and ending with anything remotely like "th" is included (for example: "Massoud"). This type of permissive search can be very useful when there's other information to narrow down the scope, but for our purposes, it's pretty much useless. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:03, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. - -sche (discuss) 07:51, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Oddly enuff, I look'd about a bit and found Maegth as a last name (seemingly French!). My guess is that the last name isn't rooted on the meaning of maiden but one other meanings ... but that is only a guess. There's even a maegth.com. It is a conundrum that babyname sites list it as a girl's name that seemingly isn't noted but then they list a lot of odd names beginning with "Mae". However, it is listed and listed as meaning "maiden" which would be befitting for a given name. Now, I'm somewhat gewiss that they aren't only throwing words out. Somewhere, whether in life or fiction, someone must have noted these odd names. I would think it would hav been more of way to talk to a yung lady as title like one might say the "maid Marian", one might hav said "maegth Marian". This could hav been an oral thing. But that is all guesswork. I'm only throwing out how it might hav work'd its way onto a list of baby names. However, the question becomes, do we want an entry that has maegth with the meaning of maiden in case someone decides to verify the meaning found on a babyname site? (It is one of the meanings of the word and ties this to the other rfv.) Further, do we want to say that it is also a last name and listed as a first name? Or do we even care about names on Wiktionary? --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 22:58, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


"internet slang: To submit to Bash.org, or QDB." Equinox 19:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 09:52, 13 October 2012 (UTC)


Spanish. Sense: weedhead, pothead, stoner. — Ungoliant (Falai) 00:23, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I rearranged the entry to clarify things a bit: the motorcyclist sense has nothing to do with the slang word for marihuana, and there's a third sense. Each sense comes from a different word with a different final vowel, so I split it into etymologies, the rfved sense after the others because it seems to be the newest (and so we don't have to renumber the other two if this one gets deleted). Chuck Entz (talk) 03:13, 5 August 2012‎.
RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 23:41, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


"Someone who brawns". It is not clear to me what this sense would reasonably mean. Equinox 01:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Someone who fattens (male) hogs. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
It's hard to be sure, with thousands of references to people named Brawner cluttering up the searches, but I don't think there are any cites in either Google Books or usenet. Google Books has a few references to brawning hogs, but nothing I can find for either sense of the noun. Even the verb seems to be an archaic or obsolete term, so the noun might actually exist in sources we can't search easily online. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
I see lots of hits for "a boar killed for the table" and "a castrated boar," but none for this definition. --BB12 (talk) 21:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

push pollEdit

Rfv-sense: "A poll that tests political messages, some of which may be negative." —RuakhTALK 14:23, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 08:26, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


Seems highly plausible but since it is a loanword I think we should verify it is not Spanglish slang or a transliteration of the pronunciation of ferry used as a loanword in lieuLucifer (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Three or more of the first ten of books.google.es's results seem to support this sense, for example [52] tries to explain what it claims is the difference between a transportador and a ferri. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Passes, I suppose, per Mg. - -sche (discuss) 03:10, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

bliss upEdit

Sole sense given: to experience bliss.

Not (yet?) attestable, I predict based on my look at bgc and groups. DCDuring TALK 21:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

I get quite a few hits on Books for "blissed up" Leasnam (talk) 16:56, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
is bliss up also a drug reference? Leasnam (talk) 17:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
I would expect it to be. I greatly doubt the meaning given and don't think it exists except in the "-ed"-form. It may well be gradable and therefore blissed up might be and remain an adjective for our purposes. Even it isn't attestably gradable it should be shown as an adjective for now. This route to verbhood in English is common and often there is not a long gap between attestation of "-ing"- and "-ed"-forms in nominal or adjectival use and attestation as a verb (passive with "by", a complement, progressive use, other forms, etc). But sometimes it never happens. DCDuring TALK 17:47, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed, moved to blissed up. - -sche (discuss) 23:43, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


To be extremely happy.

Almost all uses are either of bliss out (transitive and intransitive) or closely related to that use, which normally refers to becoming stoned on some neuropharmacological substance. DCDuring TALK 21:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 23:45, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


I imagine that this falls under WT:COMPANY. —Internoob 05:19, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

So, if attestable as a common word it would be ok. So I tried citing it as a noun, but failed, google books:"Intersputniks" gets a scanno for Intersputnik8, for Intersputnik's and the rest are in German. google books:"an Intersputnik" only gets attributive use of the company name ("an Intersputnik system", etc.) so I can't cite it using Google Books alone. If anyone else wants to try, please do. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 23:51, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


This is normally two words news ticker. I'm not finding evidence for a single word form. -- ALGRIF talk 12:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Correct. Collect (talk) 12:43, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Did you put quotes around the word when you searched? Cited. DCDuring TALK 14:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Yes - and found it used as a registered trademark and as a German neologism (Germans always weld adjectives to nouns <g>). No actual independent usage that I found, and none for a plural justifying an entry here. [53] shows it is extensively German in usage. As does [54]. If you wish to list it, it should be marked as chiefly German usage. Cheers. Collect (talk) 15:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Also uses in URLs where spaces are generally removed -- when you remove such "false positives" and all German uses - the word basically is iffy at best.Collect (talk) 15:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
It either gets three cites or it doesn't. Is there anything wrong with the ones I've added? DCDuring TALK 18:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
I just limited the search to English to reduce the number of hits for the German websites and sorted through the remainder until I found three cites. (Sitzfleisch required)These are not the kind of terms I would ever bet against getting attestation. DCDuring TALK 18:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Even a rare misspelling — and we don't include rare misspellings — can have three citations. (That said, I'm not doubting this word's inclusibility.)​—msh210 (talk) 17:04, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Who is claiming that this is a misspelling? Or are we saying that news ticker is SoP? DCDuring TALK 19:28, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
I was claiming that it was an incorrect entry. But if you want to keep it on 3 (the minimum) cites, then I suppose the misspelling might be the way to go. As you wish. Just don't make it a misspelling of new sticker is all. -- ALGRIF talk 17:26, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
Why do you say it is a misspelling? Do you object to the three-cite minimum? If it is a misspelling, then there is no WT:COALMINE rationale for including news + ticker. DCDuring TALK 19:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
I would treat it as not a misspelling, unless "news ticker" is also used in those books alongside "newsticker". - -sche (discuss) 19:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

foc's'le lampEdit

I do reckon they meant to write fo'c's'le lamp (see fo'c's'le) but this might be attestable too. If so, is foc's'le as well? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:23, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Book title [55], used in book at [56], used by illiterate newspapermen [57]. Verified. Collect (talk) 00:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I can't view the last one, but I'll trust you on it. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:35, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Apparently resolved. - -sche (discuss) 00:17, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: countable, usually in combination "An individual good."

I am having trouble finding credible citations for this. My intuition would have wares as plural only (not counted: *"five wares") and ware as almost always uncountable, exception for genre/style sense used in archaeology etc. It would not surprise me if there were a time when there was singular countable sense, but I'm not seeing evidence. I would be satisfied three credible cites of "an [X] ware"/"an [X]-ware"/"an [X]ware" for any X. Evidence of contemporary usage would be particularly useful. DCDuring TALK 20:55, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Note that there is a suffix -ware, derived from software, patterned after hardware, that is not what this RfV relates to. DCDuring TALK 20:58, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm also doubtful of "Goods or a type of goods offered for sale or use." All the example actually back up -ware not ware. If it can't be used outside of combinations, it must be a suffix. A 'noun' can stand on its own without an accompanying morpheme. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

rfv-sense: "(uncountable, usually in combination) Goods or a type of goods offered for sale or use." Am looking forward to seeing unambiguous cites. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:22, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Really? There are so many instances of [X] ware (and even [X]-ware) for each of the words of the form [X]ware that we have, I'm surprised that you are RfVing it. Try this for bgc hits for "silver ware" limited to works published or reprinted in the 21st century. DCDuring TALK 00:32, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Sense #1 is in the sense of, for example, "sold his ware" for which phrase there are numerous gbooks hits - example Astbury was the more successful and made frequent journeys to London, where he sold his ware and obtained further orders. Sense #2 (An individual good) does not appear to be citable. SpinningSpark 01:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
rfv passed on the sense that I tagged. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Noting that it is also applied to metal goods and not just pottery per NYT use of "tole ware" and "damascene ware" etc. More sources on request, of course. Collect (talk) 16:23, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

The first sense has been cited; I've replaced the second with a pointer to "wares". - -sche (discuss) 00:28, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

teoiric chórasEdit

Has been entered as an Irish entry. I can't find it anywhere. How is this attested? --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:23, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

teoiric na gceallEdit

An Irish entry that I cannot attest. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:23, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


Sense 2: "To scheme in the removal of the black population." Probably a Lucifer invention. Equinox 20:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

I think he means "To scheme to remove the black population", the definition above means nothing to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
It would be citeable for the definition "To remove a black population" if we count orthographical variants like "DeNiggerize" and "deNIGGERize" (and I'm not sure if we do). --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
I didn't invent it look it up on Google books. I added one citation. Please vulture it at will or delete the whole entry I don't even care.Lucifer (talk)
Failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:39, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


"(UK|puerile) a person whom the speaker dislikes." I can't find it in Google Books, having tried a few possible queries like stupid plop, you plop, etc. Was added by Top Cat 14, whose entries sometimes included his local unattestable school slang. Equinox 22:51, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 00:40, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


"A model of learning that is needs-driven, life-centered, or auto-appropriated; The use of learning as self-actualization and transformation." I dunno what the hell this is supposed to mean. Citations please. Equinox 22:55, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I've looked pretty deeply into Google hits for "meism" and can only find the generally negative reference to philosophies of selfishness, not to any learning models. bd2412 T 02:02, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:41, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense WMF jargon "stub". Just because they use it on fr.wiki doesn't mean that it magically gets to be included. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 19:06, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

This may be more widespread than just WMF. Wikis outside WMF also use the English term "stub" because WMF itself uses it, so the French equivalent may have spread in the same way. —CodeCat 19:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
You're both right, so let's check out the theory and see if we can actually cite it. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:11, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:23, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: "(slang) A large hairy man, particularly one who is gay." Seems quite likely to me — English bear is used that way as well — but was removed by an anon who presumably thought it was vandalism, so I figured I should list it here. —RuakhTALK 22:27, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

It's probably legit, see the Wikipedia user page of the editor who added this sense, w:User:Peter Isotalo, claims to be a native speaker having lived in Sweden since the age of 10. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
I believe it's legitimate, as it was recently used in a video for Stockholm Pride by a man who said, "vi är björnar" (we are bears). Björnar being the plural form of björn, I think this is legitimate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pAPf7pSyj20 The Obento Musubi (talk) 21:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
I've detagged it. It seems we're all in agreement that it's real. - -sche (discuss) 01:23, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

social washingEdit

Seems to be too new to meet the CFI. —RuakhTALK 03:00, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Obviously intended to be along the lines of greenwashing. However, even the given definition ("A baseless attempt") is biased and makes it clear that someone is trying to force through a neologism to make a personal point. Equinox 00:19, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:23, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

viande dé boeuEdit

I can't attest this. --Dan Polansky (talk) 23:31, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:50, 15 October 2012 (UTC)


I don't like to RFV dialectal terms because I know how hard it can be to cite them, but as I said when I RFVed huckle, "Wiktionarians have deleted many dialectal terms by Top Cat 14 (talkcontribs) because they were found not to meet CFI" as they were used in only a very small geographic area. Quoth CFI, "A term should be included if it's likely that someone would run across it and want to know what it means" : if someone will only run across it in one city, and not in a book or on Usenet anywhere, our CFI deem it too unimportant to be included, now don't they?
All I can find on Usenet are instances where it means "jitter(s)". - -sche (discuss) 07:27, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

There is also "jidderbug" which I presume means jitterbug. SpinningSpark 09:37, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
The only thing I could find (not citable) is "Down our way we call pounds 'snots' and pence 'jid'. This leads to calling anyone who's poor a 'jidder'. I love the English language." I do think the jitter sense is citable though and will add it. SpinningSpark 09:55, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

sea vegetableEdit

Rfv-sense: agar.

AFAICT, this is based on a misreading of an encyclopedia article. See sea vegetable#References. DCDuring TALK 13:32, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Move to RFD as {{rfd-redundant}}. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 15:47, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
How can a specific definition be redundant to a general one? DCDuring TALK 17:28, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 01:23, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

cothromas diúltachEdit

Alleged Irish term. --Dan Polansky (talk) 23:35, 18 August 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 the reduced CFI to which it is now subject. - -sche (discuss) 22:34, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Has been cited. RFV-passed. - -sche (discuss) 18:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


A hard to find would-be Irish word. Recall that attestation does not need to be online, but has to be from durably archived sources. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:15, 21 August 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 may now meet the reduced CFI to which it is now subject. - -sche (discuss) 22:34, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Unlike the others, this one only seems to appear in sites that copy us. RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 18:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


Would be Irish: almost not hits at all: google:"úránagrafaíocht". --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:18, 21 August 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 may now meet the reduced CFI to which it is now subject. - -sche (discuss) 22:34, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 18:22, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


No chance of passing WT:COMPANY (or WT:BRAND for that matter). -- Liliana 17:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

It should be changed to something like - A car manufactured by the SAAB company. (We had a similar situation with firearms manufacturers, with Glock as a good example). A person who says they are buying a SAAB is not looking to buy a Swedish car company. Also the language should be changed from Translingual to English.--Dmol (talk) 20:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
Observation: I doubt it would usually be spelled in all caps by somebody referring to a single instance of the branded car, even if that is how they spell the brand. Equinox 18:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Moved to "Saab". - -sche (discuss) 02:03, 28 November 2012 (UTC)



rfv-sense: "To behave in an evasive way such as to delay action; to procrastinate."

The use of "prevaricate" to mean "procrastinate" might be widespread but is usually regarded as an error. The citation given for this use does not support it. Tesspub (talk) 17:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree. The quotation does not support the sense (it actually belongs with the previous sense) and I doubt that this sense is supportable. · (talk) 16:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Given its similarity, I have added sense #3 of prevarication to this rfv: "Evasiveness as a means of playing for time; procrastination, hesitancy." If I did wrong, don't hesitate to revert. — Xavier, 11:56, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:21, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


I cannot attest this English term. It seems to be sourced from Webster's Third. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:26, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Its alternative spelling Abbethdin seems to be attested, so I suggest we merge it with that entry if it is not attested in this spelling, to save the good etymology and pronunciation info Speednat has put in. :) (Even if it is attested in this spelling, Abbethdin is more common, and should be the main entry.)
This spelling, without the h, might just barely meet CFI as a German term. - -sche (discuss) 20:03, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't find "Abbethdin" obviously attested. Many of the occurrences are in the phrase "In Israel's courts ne'er sat an Abbethdin", so they are not independent. It may be attested, but it is not obvious from google books:"Abbethdin", whose first 20 finds don't look promising.
Of the etymology added by Speednat (talkcontribs), I wonder whether he got it from Webster's Third and whether it is a copyvio. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:23, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 17:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

velvet handcuffEdit

Protologism? Definition needs severe trimming if OK. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I found only three relevant hits in Google Books: [58], [59], [60]. I'm not sure about the third one, but the first two seem identical to golden handcuffs. Recommend this entry be changed to the plural form. --BB12 (talk) 07:07, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
golden handcuffs and velvet handcuffs don't seem identical to me. With golden handcuffs the idea is certainly that a large amount of money is the restricting influence. For velvet handcuffs more factors (benefits, possibly work environment, prestige) seem to be involved than money or the money seems much less. DCDuring TALK 12:22, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Move to velvet handcuffs once cited. DCDuring TALK 12:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
I've added some more cites. This differs from golden handcuffs mostly in degree. The definition could stand some generalization to encompass the full range of non-literal usage. DCDuring TALK 13:09, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Meh, moved to velvet handcuffs and kept. Modify the definition as needed. - -sche (discuss) 05:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

brain busterEdit

Any takers? SemperBlotto (talk) 21:11, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

FWIW spine buster is definitely real, and it's a generic term rather than just restricted to one wrestler. So it's plausible, but I don't know if it's real. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Getting quite a few hits with this gbook search string. SpinningSpark 00:42, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
...but not many uses of the sense given. RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:52, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

September 2012Edit

28 Days Later zombieEdit

The one citation in the entry, which is arguably actually of "non-28 Days Later zombie" and/or SOP, is the only citation I can find. - -sche (discuss) 23:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks like tosh. Nothing citeable I can find on Google Books. ---> Tooironic (talk) 13:37, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I think so too. In zombie fandom, the debate's between "slow zombies" vs "fast zombies". ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 22:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: An information worker who has signed a non-compete clause in return for employment.

Added in diff. The same edit linked to Beware 'zombie' clauses, eet.com, 8/2/2004 article for reference. The article contains e.g. this: "The slave clause says, 'You can't work for any rival for X years.'" and "Noncompete agreements — the ones Cooley calls slave clauses — are generally unenforceable under California law but are enforceable to varying degrees in other states, Snyder said."

Absent in other dictionaries. Suspectly overspecific. --Dan Polansky (talk) 22:05, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm getting a lot in gbooks comparing non-compete contracts to slavery, but this seems to be by way of analogy rather than an actual word for the party to the contract. In any case, I agree "information worker" is over specific. SpinningSpark 06:20, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:59, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

magia plomaEdit

Nothing on Google Books or Groups. — Ungoliant (Falai) 21:00, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Also no entry for ploma#Spanish. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:28, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 06:28, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Btw, there is plomo#Spanish, of which ploma is presumably a feminine form. - -sche (discuss) 06:29, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

at loose endsEdit

Rfv-sense: In an uncertain position or situation

I am really at loose ends about this choice, I am between the proverbial rock and hard place.

I don't think so. See at loose ends at OneLook Dictionary Search. DCDuring TALK 03:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

The American Heritage Dictionary has that meaning. Also, OED has "not regularly occupied", and "unsettled" as separate meanings for the noun. SpinningSpark 06:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. Withdrawn. Please insert the cite. DCDuring TALK 11:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I didn't think we cited dictionaries. SpinningSpark 17:59, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
My mistake. It could go under a References header near the end of the L2 section. DCDuring TALK 18:32, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Some cites that are definitely, and some that might be that sense [61][62][63][64][65][66] SpinningSpark 22:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Excellent. They all look good. All but one seem dated, which might account for why it seemed a bit strange to me in this sense. I usually check some of the older dictionaries, but hadn't this time. I have added the Webster 1913 wording to capture what I think is the older usage. I will search for citations for what I think is missing: "idle, bored", which Collins has. They also have at a loose end, which they think is more widely distributed. A lesser source has a at a loose end as UK with the "idle, bored" sense and at loose ends with the "uncertain" sense. Thus cites seem helpful, even necessary. DCDuring TALK 23:13, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
Also see loose ends and loose end. DCDuring TALK 01:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


I don't see a single durably archived cite in English. I'm sure Webster has their sources, but I just can't imagine what those sources are. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 13:00, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Cited by Equinox. Struck. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 13:11, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


Esperanto and Ido. —RuakhTALK 22:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I would speedy delete it. It can't be a noun in Esperanto, as it doesn't end in o; dh is never found in Esperanto (it's not inconcievable that it'll show up in some compound, but normally) and gh is never pronounced g--either g'h, like flug-haveno, or dʒ in old-school ASCII-izations. I believe programmer in Esperanto is programisto (for the occupation) or pragamanto (for someone who happens to be programming); in any case, it's going to be the verb + isto or -anto.
Likewise, Ido singular nouns end in o, and I would bet that the noun would be formed regularly from the verb there also.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Shot on sight as an obvious hoax. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:18, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

rided bitchEdit

This is said to be a nonstandard form, but I can find no clear example of it online- even on regular Google search. The few hits I can find are rided and bitch coincidentally occurring next to each other, generally in separate clauses or sentences. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:31, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Somewhat related discussion: Wiktionary:Tea room#ride_bitch. - -sche (discuss) 00:44, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Speedily deleted. - -sche (discuss) 05:28, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense "A small, ferocious creature." Added in this edit. - -sche (discuss) 22:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Dubious. Note the name of the editor proposing that definition. Collect (talk) 23:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Speedied (justifiably, IMO) by Collect. - -sche (discuss) 19:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)


I can find it as a name (of unclear derivation) and sometimes in Ojibwe or other Native American sentences, but I see no BGC hits for "a neechee", and the hits for "neechees" seem to be cases of "Ahwahneechees" or "Occaneechees" split across two lines. - -sche (discuss) 21:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

The alternative form "nitchie" seems to be attested (so if this spelling isn't attested, move it thither), though it may need a "sometimes offensive" tag rather than merely "pejorative". - -sche (discuss) 21:42, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
  • I entered it, which means I read it in running text somewhere. God knows what I was reading at the time though, I'll try and work it out.. EDIT – just realised it's in the OED, with plenty of cites (and a bewildering variety of different spellings). Ƿidsiþ 06:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
If they have enough for this spelling, I'll take your word for it, you don't need to enter them. I am still tempted to make "nitchie" the lemma, as it seems rather more common... but we should check all the alternate spellings for commonness, first. What else have they got? ("Nichi" is unfortunately hard to search for as it is also Japanese.) - -sche (discuss) 07:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
"Forms: 17–18 neejee, 18 nee-chee, 18 nichi, 18 nichiwa, 18 nidge, 18 nitche, 18 nitchee, 18 nitchy, 18– neechee, 19– neche, 19– neeche, 19– nitchie." I think I agree that nitchie seems slightly more common for a lemma. Ƿidsiþ 07:06, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
I've made nitchie the lemma, but kept neechee since the OED has citations. - -sche (discuss) 03:12, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


"Quietly Asked Questions". Seems to exist in this sense only relating to one particular Red Dwarf FAQ, where it is some nonce humorous variant of the usual FAQ. Equinox 23:46, 15 September 2012 (UTC)


I checked Google Books for this spelling, as well as aedoeotomy and edeotomy, but didn't see 3 uses of any spelling. - -sche (discuss) 00:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Speedy delete: dictionary‐only term added by accident. --Æ&Œ (talk) 02:26, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Again, is this attested in any spelling? - -sche (discuss) 00:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Looking at this word is like trying to interpret an optician's letter chart from thirty feet. Equinox 00:35, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Speedy delete: dictionary‐only term added by accident. --Æ&Œ (talk) 02:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 20:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


RFV of the verb, which was added by an IP in 2005. The rest of the entry also needs formatting. - -sche (discuss) 07:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Cited from Groups Judging from the spelling, most of those users were probably stoned while writing those posts, but hey, nothing in CFI says the citations have to be from sober people, right? Smurrayinchester (talk) 16:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Added ing-form and infinitive cites to show it is not just a denominal adjective. DCDuring TALK 18:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Other dictionaries additionally define the noun along the lines of 'an informal, noisily sociable party', MWOnline said, "especially a political rally". DCDuring TALK 18:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
Alright, the verb (specifically the intransitive sense; the transitive sense was never tagged) passes RFV. - -sche (discuss) 22:15, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense "A sleeping area within a large bush (i.e. boxwood) in front of a Lodge or Fraternity House." Really? - -sche (discuss) 10:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I doubt it -- the only sources appear to be on the level of a Wiki as well (possibly using Wiktionary as their source <g>). I found some interesting OCR misreads of "lodge" as "bodge" while searching, though. [67] The NYT even does this - it stores the text as "lodge to bodge." No book usage, no newspaper usage in this sense, etc. makes me a tad dubious of this meaning ever being remotely common. Collect (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Delete it. Probably a joking coinage by drunken students not quite making it to their beds one night. Hasn't caught on. SpinningSpark 08:04, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Speedily deleted by Collect. - -sche (discuss) 22:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

All Shona translations by User:

Half of these don't even match Shona orthography, I cannot find any of them even as words in a (small) online Shona dictionary, www.ancestry.com only gives hits for those that are also English (Maree, LuEtta, a few for Yaleena), the b.g.c hits don't point to Shona or even Africa. Either the language statement is wrong or the names are made up, from a fantasy novel for example. (How do you rfv translations? I would have deleted one name without discussion, but I think I need permission to delete 13.) --Makaokalani (talk) 15:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Several were already reverted by Semper and Equinox, I've undone the others (except this one, this one, this one), per your points. - -sche (discuss) 15:38, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


I wanted to delete this on sight but there may be some truth to it. Can anyone confirm it? —CodeCat 12:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps a mistake for CPA (Certified Public Accountant sense)? I got one relevant gbooks hit for "CPU certified" but unlikely that Canadian Paperworkers Union was meant. SpinningSpark 13:53, 23 September 2012 (UTC)
Couldn't find any likely sense at Acronym Finder. DCDuring TALK 14:48, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

terimah kasihEdit

A native Malay speaker (User:Amir Hamzah 2008) nominated this for deletion (replacing the entire entry with {{d}}) in the old format, which had Indonesian only. Not sure what he meant but the expression exists in both Malay and Indonesian. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I have now reformatted entry, asked the nominator but would like to check with someone if the entry is OK otherwise. I don't know Malay or Indonesian but the phrase is often used in online tutorials. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:30, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Actually, User:Amir Hamzah 2008 confirmed the correctness of the meaning by editing thank you - the Malay translation. I suspect he just didn't like the "Indonesian" heading or maybe he meant that the Indonesian translation was incorrect. Very strange. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:37, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
Never mind. He has removed the tag and edited the entry. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 07:39, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
It now says Common misspelling of terima kasih. I'm striking the title, if anyone if not happy with this please unstrike and continue the debate. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:49, 26 September 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense "A poorly played golf shot where the ball is struck by the top part of the club head." Tagged but not listed. - -sche (discuss) 06:04, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Never heard of it, though I'm not a big golf fan. I have found it in some on-line glossaries, so I'd imagine it exists, but citing it won't be easy at all. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:29, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
Strike that, google books:golf fat shot seems to produce enough usable hits for this to pass. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
So it does. Struck and detagged; kept. - -sche (discuss) 23:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: A person having an inflated opinion of himself; a conceited or arrogant person.

Dictionaries don't have it, so let's see if this can get attested by in-use quotations. I tried google:"he is a bighead", and found some non-durably archived hits.

Even if unattested, it would be nice to have an input from native speakers on whether the term is ever used in that way in the wild. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:22, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes I think I've used it, maybe a back formation from big-headed. Or maybe the way around. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:27, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I added three citations. Equinox 20:04, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
The citations unequivocally demonstrate use in the genus "person", even though the "conceited" differentia is not so perfectly discernible. Seems good enough to me, anyway, so thanks! What is the synonym of "bighead" in the sense of conceited person that you would most commonly use? --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
show-off is common. I'd probably say braggart, with a touch of self-consciousness: it is not quite an everyday word but it feels just right. Equinox 20:16, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
This is the common meaning in the UK. But I can't say that I have heard it used in very many years. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
I think it's largely playground slang. Children still seem to say it regularly (and Private Eye has its "Mary Ann Bighead" column). Smurrayinchester (talk) 22:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
The one I'm curious about is "The condition of being conceited, arrogant, or having an inflated opinion of oneself." Sounds like an uncountable now. I'm not challenging it per se, but I don't think I can understand it without a citation or a usage example. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2012 (UTC)


I've passed the "person" sense, and tagged the "condition of being conceited" sense. Perhaps it is used like "he suffered from bighead"? (Compare: "he had a big head".) - -sche (discuss) 08:51, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed for now. The sense was: "{{colloquial|mainly|_|US}} The condition of being conceited, arrogant, or having an inflated opinion of oneself." - -sche (discuss) 10:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: A proud or ostentatious person.

There are two quotations, but I do not see that they attest this sense. If the Hamlet quotation is accepted for this sense, would the "use in a well-known work, or" item of WT:ATTEST apply? If it does apply, should the sense at least be marked as archaic or even obsolete?


--Dan Polansky (talk) 19:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Shakespeare meets the "well-known work" exemption if anyone does! Why do you object to the given citations? Equinox 20:11, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Does the Shakespeare quotation convey the meaning of "a proud or ostentatious person" to you? On another note, if I use "pajock" to mean "conceited person", will I be readily understood? I would still see it tagged "obsolete" unless proven otherwise. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:15, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Certainly agree with "obsolete" (and probably "nonce word", because I think only Shakey used it), but the meaning seems accurate, doesn't it? It's the idea of showing off, metaphorically showing one's pretty peacock feathers; cf. peacocking. Equinox 20:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I admit that it makes metaphorical sense per the other meaning of the word, but not so much by the sentential context. To test for the semantic information provided by the sentential context, I replace the attested word with "X" in the sentence, to lose all morphological and etymological cues. On the metaphorical note, someone should probably add a person sense to peacock, per several online dictionaries. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:30, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I agree with Dan that not even one meaning, let alone two can be inferred from one citation, which is I why I object to the inclusion of any term (or sense) used but once, not matter how many commentaries there might be on the possible meaning of the term in that use. Not all the commentators agree, BTW. But as this is Shakepeare perhaps we can find some slavish imitators. DCDuring TALK 20:34, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
The citations make it clear that it is used pejoratively, of a person. The rest seems -- unproven. Century leaves it as "disputed". DCDuring TALK 21:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I've passed the term, but with a stripped-down definition. - -sche (discuss) 18:00, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: A grandee; a self-important or arrogant person.

The word may well be used to mean "grandee" whatever "grandee" is; what I wonder about is whether the word is used to mean "a self-important or arrogant person". If such a use is not attested, then the gloss "a self-important or arrogant person" has to go, IHMO.

Webster 1913 has "bashaw" 2. Fig.: A magnate or grandee. But for "grandee", it has "A man of elevated rank or station; a nobleman." --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Widsith added this in 2006. It does look wrong; grandee confirms what I thought it meant, a title for a nobleman, not a pejorative term. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
I'll just copy-paste some cites from the OED:
a1670 J. Hacket Scrinia Reserata (1693) i. 82 In every Society of Men, there will be some Bashawes, who presume that there are many Rules of Law, from which they should be exempted.
1794 W. Godwin Caleb Williams I. iii. 41 The young men..looked up to this insolent bashaw with timid respect.
1872 ‘G. Eliot’ Middlemarch III. v. liii. 185 You've taken to being a nob, buying land, being a country bashaw. Ƿidsiþ 09:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Tentatively kept with a modified def. Change the def further or reopen the RFV as needed. - -sche (discuss) 05:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense: the Heathen sense. Needs to be cited as distinct from the generic sense, as above (#goblin). - -sche (discuss) 08:57, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

There are dozens of these silly Heathenry senses, none of which seems distinct from existing senses. They were all added by the same user a couple of years ago. I think we should ditch them all personally. Ƿidsiþ 09:07, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
I've been removing the obviously redundant ones, like the separate "pagan" and "neo-pagan" senses of Thor. Side note: judging by Citations:Ancestor Night, some of the things that look like attestations are actually self-published and possibly not durably archived. - -sche (discuss) 19:17, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 23:39, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense: "A chariot used by the gods and goddesses or a symbolic cart used in rituals and shrines in Heathenry." - -sche (discuss) 19:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 18:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense: "An oath or toast made during a ritual." Boasting is significant in Heathenry, so a Heathen sense may be attestable, but I think the current definition is wrong (I would say "during a feast"). - -sche (discuss) 20:01, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I will make an effort soon to see if this is citeable (with the modified definition I propose), as it is both less dubious and less redundant than the others. - -sche (discuss) 20:19, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 18:02, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense X 3

  1. A ghost, apparition
  2. The spirit of an individual.
  3. The spirit of a group.

These were entered as if they were a single sense. They seem quite distinct to me, but perhaps two of them can be combined, possibly after rewording in light of the availability of supporting citations. I got even more confused because geist at OneLook Dictionary Search has various definitions with only some overlap with ours and questionable citations, some of which looked a lot like mentions to me. I wonder if all German senses are applied to this in English by someone or other, but with very low frequency. You would think that a dictionary like ours would need to make a hard-and-fast determination about the Englishness of a word like this. DCDuring TALK 02:57, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm more baffled by the history tab starting with the rfv ... What happen'd to everything before? I seem to recall putting a quote or two. Anyway, it looks like it has been flesh'd out more by Leasnam. The word is also noted in other ways ... There's a whole chapter in a book devoted to "pollster-geists" other another author notes the word as a thing that holds the spirits of the dead.
Don't get me on the soapbox about the "Englishness" of a word ... I put forth a way to do that in another rfv. If we're going to determine the Englishness of words, then I hav a long list of French and Latin loanwords need only be put under French or Latin, as befitting, that are now under English as well. Truth is that I don't think that is what we're doing tho. We're logging the words as they are noted in English ... not the Englishness of them.
Are you still baffled or can the rfv tags be taken off? --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (talk) 12:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Did someone forget to sign their contribution to this discussion?
Sense 1 appears cited. Senses 2 and 3 are do not have the required 3 cites. The capitalized Geist is suggestive that it is a use of the German word or possibly a proper noun. Can we get a less ambiguous citation? DCDuring TALK 13:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Nitpicky point, but the there is no required three cites for each meaning given. The wording for three cites is for the "term" meaning word or phrases, not each individual meaning. See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion. Many believe or assume that it does apply to each meaning, but the truth is that is not indicated by the wording.
Anent the capitalization, that's a poor indicator for the simple reason that so many folks needlessly capitalize a German loanword ... or worse ... capitalize a word like zeitgeisty which is an English adjectiv. (And adjectivs aren't capitalized in German either.) --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (talk) 16:53, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
My ramblings about Englishness were simply about the question of whether it is worth having an English entry rather than letting readers use the German entry to select an context-appropriate meaning. DCDuring TALK 14:49, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
While I understand your concern, bureaucratie seems like a waste of space, but there is no requirement that a word be English nor a criteria for determining the Englishness of a word. There are likely at least three cites in English of bureaucratie from the early days of it being borrow'd so that means that it fits the criteria for inclusion. Truth is, it's about 900 years too late to start worrying about it but I hav before put forth a list of criteria that would take a lot of the subjectivity out of it (and would cut a wide swath). I may go to the beer parlor and put it out there but I don't expect folks to want a true criteria. They kind of like the fuzzy-wuzzy way the go about it now which doesn't follow the written rules. --AnWulf ... Ferþu Hal! (talk) 16:53, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Looks good, though I wish that there were a third example of sense 2 without capitalization. DCDuring TALK 15:31, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
I share DCDuring's feeling that the second sense is not yet sufficiently cited. One citation puts the term in italics and is of unclear sense anyway, another is of "Geist", another puts the term in quotation marks... - -sche (discuss) 06:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Two senses RFV-passed, middle sense RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 05:53, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense - a notebook. Really? SemperBlotto (talk) 07:27, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

[68][69][70] SpinningSpark 23:43, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
That's the concept but the cites don't show that agenda means "notebook". In each case agenda is used in combination with another term (agenda book, agenda planner, homework agenda) before it is used alone. It is a good bet that students, teachers, and parents use the word agenda in referring to the notebook and/or its contents. For us to show that it means the "notebook" rather than the contents of the notebook, I would think we would need something like agenda being used with verbs that clearly indicate the notebook's physicality rather than its information content. ("throw", "carry", "drop", "bring", "take", "lose"/"find", "burn", "tear up", "page/leaf through", "write/draw/doodle in") DCDuring TALK 00:31, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
I don't see why that's a problem. Even if one first says "agenda book", going on to say "the children will neatly write [...] in their agendas" is clear enough, as is "A homework agenda, sometimes called a student planner, is a notebook" or "It may be better to simply buy an agenda at the drug store for five dollars".--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
google books:"wrote in his agenda" gets four hits. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
In two of the four Agenda is part of a title. In another it is used attributively in another sense as part of agenda memo. In the remaining one, a translation, it appears in italics.
I can't imagine that a user would suffer from us not having this as a sense. The sense of "things to be acted on" is metonymously transferred to various embodiments: a mental list, a list written down on sheet of paper, a whiteboard, a computer system, or a notebook. If vendors sell notebooks with "agenda" on the cover or self-help authors recommend having a notebook with such a title for their systems, I suppose we should seen some evidence of a sense. —This unsigned comment was added by DCDuring (talkcontribs).
I stand by the cites I added.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
My review of the citations:
  • I don't the Ruph one conveys the sense "notebook" rather than "list", "plan".
  • The Aronfeld citation is great.
  • The Brue citation is of "homework agenda", which could be an idiomatic term for "notebook in which to record assigned homework": I would prefer it if one could show that "agenda" means "notebook" in isolation before breaking down phrases containing it. (Because a phrase might be idiomatic, if its parts aren't used in a particular way outside of it. Somewhat comparable: don't break down brown dwarf and add "about the volume of the planet Jupiter: having mass approaching that of a star, but insufficient to ignite its elements and cause it to burn" to [[brown]] until it is demonstrated that "brown" is used that way outside of the phrase "brown dwarf" or reflexes of it.)
  • The Huerta citation uses "agenda book" earlier in the same sentence, but the subsequent use of "agendas" most likely means "notebook".
I think the sense is real, and favour keeping it. I may look for more citations myself. - -sche (discuss) 23:47, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept. - -sche (discuss) 18:05, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


Rfv-sense: ramp. As far as I know, farthinder is the normal word for a speed ramp, so I'm not sure how this would be shortened to just "fart". Unless someone thought that the fart- part of the word meant "ramp"?? —CodeCat 13:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

It means something like the place where you can or should drive/navigate (cf. färd), like for example infart, påfart (which is probably why someone added the definition "ramp"). The word is nowadays only found in compounds. See SAOB "fart" #4. Diupwijk (talk) 18:46, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
I have removed the sense. If you think it is attested but obsolete outside of compounds, reopen the RFV. - -sche (discuss) 18:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
Avfart/påfart, infart/utfart, överfart/underfart, tillfart are Swedish words where the -fart suffix has the meaning of a road, ramp or journey, but as far as I can tell this only happens in compounds, and these are probably loan words from German compounds with -Fahrt (Überfahrt, etc.). The stand-alone fart means speed (farthinder = speed bump). The stand-alone word for journey (German Fahrt) is färd, and there are also similar compounds using this word (avfärd, hemfärd, utfärd) with slightly different meanings. While avfärd = German Abfahrt = departure = away-journey; avfart = off-ramp (a road that provides a departure from a motorway). --LA2 (talk) 02:11, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
I have now added this under Usage notes, rather than a sense. --LA2 (talk) 02:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)


Doremitzwr certainly did a good job, but of all the cites given, only two are actually uses. Can we find a third, so we can keep this entry? -- Liliana 09:26, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed for now. - -sche (discuss) 18:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)


This word seems in all the bgc hits to be presented as a transliteration of a Greek term, not as an English word. It does not appear in any OneLook reference. Perhaps there are other cites. I would think that having the transliteration present in a Classical Greek should yield this entry in a search. Possibly a redirect, though the precedent of redirecting for transliterations would be no small matter. DCDuring TALK 19:16, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. For posterity, the term supposedly meant "Lacking the tendency to express love and affection for one's own family or kin; lacking natural affection for close relatives; heartless." - -sche (discuss) 06:25, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


-- Liliana 04:48, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 21:46, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


When the plant was first described, it was given the scientific name Fatsia, after the alleged Japanese name, "fatsi" (apparently an archaic reading of , which is now read as hachi). The real name is 八つ手 ‎(yatsude), which means something like "8 fingers". The only place fatsi seems to appear in English is in parentheses after the scientific name, identified as the Japanese name for the plant. Is this a dictionary-only term? (the common names I'm familiar with are "Fatsia", and "Japanese Aralia"). Does anyone actually actually use it in running English text? Chuck Entz (talk) 07:36, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 15:08, 29 October 2012 (UTC)


Needs to meet WT:FICTION. Compare Talk:Dothraki. - -sche (discuss) 02:23, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

There is a professional computer gaming team, probably quite notable, calling themselves Na'vi if that is any good. Probably not. RTG (talk) 12:10, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:32, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
The language sense has been readded, but all of the citations specifically refer to it as the language of Cameron's film Avatar. WT:FICTION requires that terms "have three citations that are independent of reference to that universe", so this still seems to fail RFV. - -sche (discuss) 00:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Here, however, Na'vi refers to something that actually exists outside that fictional universe: an artificial language named “Na'vi” which, like Klingon, people examine in college linguistics courses, learn to speak, and write books about. To clarify, Ferengi and Klingon are languages in Star Trek; however, the Ferengi language is imaginary, existing only in a handful of isolated words, but there exists a non-fictional artificial language named “Klingon” with a lexicon and developed grammar. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 22:16, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
It's true that the alien spoken in Cameron's film has been fairly well-developed, and also apparently not copyrighted because we have an appendix full of it(?), but the term "Na'vi" is still a "term[] originating in [a] fictional universe[]". Likewise, sonic screwdrivers exist (there's the prop Matt Smith uses, and the many mock-ups and knock-offs of it that fans buy or make), but the term "sonic screwdriver" is still excluded by WT:FICTION until/unless DW-free uses of it exist. OTOH, if people mention the language without referring to the film, the way Larry the Cable Guy apparently didn't explain that [[nanu-nanu]] was from Morky & Mindy, then WT:FICTION allows it, like [[lightsaber]]. - -sche (discuss) 05:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Replica sonic screwdrivers exist, but they aren't actually screwdrivers. A better example for your point might be frindle: though frindles indubitably exist in the real world, we do not use the term outside of references to that book. So, my rationale for reopening this page fails. Shazbot. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 05:50, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Re-closed. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 06:10, 28 October 2012 (UTC)


RFV-sense: does this Dutch word mean "to change shape"? The sense was tagged RFV but never listed. - -sche (discuss) 06:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

I can't think of any sentence where it could mean that. Maybe the idea is 'a gradual change from one thing to another' in the sense that as you move from, say, the bottom of a cone to the point, it 'changes' from a circle gradually into a smaller circle and then a point. But that really just seems like another missing sense, that of "gradually progressing". —CodeCat 11:25, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 03:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC)


I was able to find references for the other Nganasan words this user added (Talk:мәну, Talk:латәә, Talk:ӈүӈкә), but not this one; the references I found gave other words as the word for 'foot'/'feet'. The user also created two misspelt Forest Nenets words, which have been deleted. - -sche (discuss) 19:01, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 04:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)