Talk:reboant
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Dan Polansky in topic RfV March 2013
RfV March 2013[edit]
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
Rfv-sense
Actually, any noun sense at all. (A gloss that doesn't read like an adjective would be nice, too.)
Note the already-created plural. — Pingkudimmi 14:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- All the hits on Groups and Books are for either the Latin verb form, the English adjective, or in meaningless strings of random words. No hits in either place for the plural. Perhaps they were thinking of reboation. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:54, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- I would just delete it. I think it was originally created with a noun header for an adjective, which was exacerbated by another user adding
{{en-noun}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:37, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- I would just delete it. I think it was originally created with a noun header for an adjective, which was exacerbated by another user adding
- RFV failed: no quotation provided; the def under the "Noun" heading was adjectival, and redundant to another properly placed adjectival def. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:57, 21 August 2013 (UTC)