Talk:узел крепления главного лонжерона

узел крепления главного лонжерона
Can't attest. . Even finds almost nothing, but maybe it should be searched for inflected forms? --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:57, 5 December 2013 (UTC)


 * In some environment it may be considered an important piece of equipment but I don't see it as an important dictionary item or an idiomatic expression. It seems a pure sum of parts to me. Delete. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I've already nominated this quite a while ago at WT:RFD. There's no point RFVing it if it will be deleted soon anyway. (All it needs is some votes, as no one has weighed in yet.) --WikiTiki89 02:31, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * If you refresh yourself about our processes, you will realize that boldfaced keeps in RFV are rare, since RFVs are largely based on provided evidence or its lack. See also Requests for verification/Header.
 * If a term appears unattested and at the same time sum of parts, RFV seems to be a better venue than RFD, since lack of attestation is easier to check than being sum of parts, easier especially for those who do not speak Russian. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:55, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not talking about the likelihood; it will be deleting either way. I'm talking about the fact that the RFD has already been there for two weeks and so it will be sooner before it is deleted. --WikiTiki89 15:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not talking about the likelihood; it will be deleting either way. I'm talking about the fact that the RFD has already been there for two weeks and so it will be sooner before it is deleted. --WikiTiki89 15:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I think the best way to handle such word combinations is a usex. --Vahag (talk) 12:30, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Why would you add a word sequence that no one uses as an usex? --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:54, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Usexes don't have to be attested. The word sequence is the correct translation of English "main spar attachment point" and that's sufficient. What do you have against this sequence? "узел крепления лонжерона", without главного, is given as the translation of German Holmanschluß in a serious print dictionary, Немецко-русский политехнический словарь. © «РУССО», 2004, Бардышев Г.М. и др. 110 тыс. статей. and of Holmbeschlag in Немецко-русский авиационный словарь (Москва, Военное издательство Министерства обороны, 1964, 630 с.), Сост.: Горский В.В., Дремичев И.Д., Столбов В.С. It is also given as the translation of English "spar attachment" and "longeron fitting" in two electronic dictionaries, possibly based on print dictionaries. --Vahag (talk) 14:14, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The English term seems unattested: . While sentences used as usage examples can be unattested, a short phrase's being unattested suggests the phrase is not used. As for "узел крепления лонжерона", finds almost nothing, as does ; a print dictionary can be wrong, and we do not include English dictionary-only terms in the mainspace. Anyway, I suspect no one says or writes "узел крепления главного лонжерона", so it should ideally not appear in English Wiktionary at all. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:26, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * We don't know if узел крепления главного лонжерона is used or not. Only a fraction of Russian technical literature is available on the Internet and searchable. --Vahag (talk) 14:40, 7 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Deleted: RFD-failed. - -sche (discuss) 09:24, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

узел крепления главного лонжерона
SOP in both Russian and English. The definition given is a word-for-word translation. --WikiTiki89 23:05, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. My reasoning is at WT:RFV. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 09:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)