Talk:wikt
Latest comment: 11 years ago by -sche in topic RFV discussion: October–November 2012
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
-- Liliana • 15:30, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- The only book hits I could find were a large number of Wikipedia-derived books which use it in the index. I'm guessing indices don't meet the CFI, but I'm only guessing at that. SpinningSpark 20:16, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- Well, do any of these instances 'convey meaning'? I think that's the test. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- No more than any book index entry usually conveys meaning. Such Wikipedia-derived books have machine-generated indices which are pretty devoid of meaning (or usefulness) anyway - [1] is a typical example. Note that both "Wiktionary" and "Wikt" are used, presumably depending on how the original editor typed it in the interwiki link. SpinningSpark 07:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
- They may possibly convey meaning, but they're not independent, being derived from Wikipedia. -- Liliana • 20:45, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- No more than any book index entry usually conveys meaning. Such Wikipedia-derived books have machine-generated indices which are pretty devoid of meaning (or usefulness) anyway - [1] is a typical example. Note that both "Wiktionary" and "Wikt" are used, presumably depending on how the original editor typed it in the interwiki link. SpinningSpark 07:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
- Well, do any of these instances 'convey meaning'? I think that's the test. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:44, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 08:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)