Talk:ĉiseksemo

RFV discussion: February–April 2014
Esperanto for pansexuality. Nothing on Google Books, Usenet, or Tekstaro. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 16:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Seems like our contributor was misled by our entries and, treating them like they were prefixes instead of just a common denominator numerator of sets of correlatives.
 * SEK's suggestion of tutseksema for pansexual is better formed. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 07:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Is there any good reason we should have pseudoprefixes and pseudosuffixes for the ĉi-, ki-, and neni- sets? It seems like they engender misunderstandings. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 07:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean...I think our definitions of those prefixes and suffixes are potentially useful to users, but maybe we should edit the entries to clarify that they are only used in a very limited set of correlatives. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 13:36, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Been over a month and no one has shown up to defend the poor misbegotten thing. ✅ with its -ulo and endings, and removed from the sexual orientation list promoting it. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 08:27, 4 April 2014 (UTC)