Talk:woot
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
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: (UK) I agree. -- Prince Kassad 21:47, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
- Perhaps someone was thinking of Chaucer's usage of "woot", meaning "knew"? The modern meaning is not in the full Oxford dictionary, though they probably have it in their database awaiting a decision on whether it will become an accepted word. (Not that Oxford's decisions should dictate ours, of course.) I've never heard this UK sense in the UK. Is it just a misunderstanding? Dbfirs 20:41, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:41, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup (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.
Would like to speedy delete the Middle English. Only English definition I am sure of is #1. #2 seems like utter tosh, #3 I have never heard of; what context is it used in, a legal context or what? Mglovesfun (talk) 00:22, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
- I think the Middle English infinitive of witen (which we lack) so when we have it, if I'm right of course, this should be turned into a verb form. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:35, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yep, Chaucer "As who seitk, nay ; for no man travaileth for to witen thinges that he wot."[1]. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:44, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- Looks good now --WF on Holiday (talk) 16:07, 15 September 2017 (UTC)