Talk:tufa

RFV discussion

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.

---

xinwen

A non-standard entry (anon user: 91.104.40.130), missing traditional, not sure about toneless pinyin. --Anatoli 02:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Same user's new enries: Muqinjie, Fuqinjie, tufaxinwen. --Anatoli 02:26, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what to do with him. We keep blocking his IP's, but everytime he comes back with a different IP. Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 02:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I see, thanks. Is it 123abc striking again? --Anatoli 02:37, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

What are we verifying here? Mglovesfun (talk) 09:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure about our rules for inclusion of toneless pinyin. If not allowed, then the entries should be deleted if they are allowed - need to be fixed. I don't see much value in having pinyin entries, though. The pesky user appeared as 91.106.51.144 today. I blocked him (those who know how many warnings he was given, will understand why). --Anatoli 02:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Does anybody want to keep these entries? New ones are tufashangma, shangma and huaxinluobo. --Anatoli 02:28, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

• All I'm going to say is these entries are doing my head in and we really need someone talented to draw up a proposal to exclude such useless entries. ---> Tooironic 06:57, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

RFV failed, deleted all seven entries plus [[tufa]]. —Ruakh_TALK 17:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)