Talk:kangatarian
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Kiwima in topic RFV discussion: August–September 2018
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Three independent cites? Hot word if passes. SURJECTION ·talk·contr·log· 23:12, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- There are cites in Google Books (https://www.google.com.sg/search?num=100&hl=en&tbm=bks&q=kangatarian&spell=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizloeVgYfdAhUGfSsKHesHDMEQBQgmKAA&biw=1280&bih=584&dpr=1.5) and on Google Groups (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!search/kangatarian) that make this meet CFI, so I don't really know why it was nominated. Sonofcawdrey (talk) 01:08, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- All words can be RFV'd for any reason, even if they are likely to pass. I wouldn't take it personally. DTLHS (talk) 01:19, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I shouldn't take it personally. However, a quick look before RFV'ing would surely save everyone a lot of time. - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 01:36, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- None of the Google Groups hits meet CFI: one isn't on Usenet, and the other is only a mention (and if you think there are more than two, you don't understand what "independent" in CFI means. As for the Google Books hits, there are exactly three that meet CFI. They are also mentions, but they do use the term, which makes them okay. Two of them only use the plural, so they wouldn't show up if one searched for the singular in quotes. In short, it's not at all obvious that this meets CFI. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- OIC. I didn't know that Google Groups has non-Usenet stuff like that. Yes, those cites are useless for CFI as you say. My bad. - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 02:39, 25 August 2018 (UTC) - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 02:43, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- None of the Google Groups hits meet CFI: one isn't on Usenet, and the other is only a mention (and if you think there are more than two, you don't understand what "independent" in CFI means. As for the Google Books hits, there are exactly three that meet CFI. They are also mentions, but they do use the term, which makes them okay. Two of them only use the plural, so they wouldn't show up if one searched for the singular in quotes. In short, it's not at all obvious that this meets CFI. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I shouldn't take it personally. However, a quick look before RFV'ing would surely save everyone a lot of time. - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 01:36, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- All words can be RFV'd for any reason, even if they are likely to pass. I wouldn't take it personally. DTLHS (talk) 01:19, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Citations:kangatarian, I'd say this is cited. Not a hot word. DTLHS (talk) 02:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 23:46, 1 September 2018 (UTC)