Talk:ವುತ್ತು

ವುತ್ತು
I know I have already nominated "ವುತ್ತು" for deletion, but the discussion was moved to "Requests for Verification." You can see that discussion here. It was proven that "ವುತ್ತು" does not exist. The entry was created by a user who does not know Kannada, the language for which this entry was created, in the least (he likes to think he knows Kannada, but he doesn't). I am not sure why this still exists and why someone has not come along to delete it yet. This discussion under "Requests for Verification" abruptly ended without anything happening, and again, I have no idea why.

Someone on the "Requests for Verification" discussion stated that "Requests for Deletion" is the place to determine whether a word that does exist is worthy of inclusion, but I thought it was just when there was a policy violation (and isn't the requirement for attestation a policy?). So could someone clarify that in addition to getting rid of the entry "ವುತ್ತು" please?

Thanks a lot!

Princeps linguae (talk) 23:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * The item is attested, as pointed out at WT:RFV (later Talk:ವುತ್ತು); in that RFV, Stephen says it is a typo of ಮತ್ತು. After the RFV, ವುತ್ತು was redirected to ಮತ್ತು, which is not our common practice for dealing with misspellings. The question is whether we want to indicate this as a misspelling using or whether we want to delete this a rare misspelling. See also WT:CFI, which says "Rare misspellings should be excluded while common misspellings should be included". --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:29, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I've striken out the attestation claim; look at that RFV to see that three quotations attesting the term in use have not been provided yet. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:53, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It's had a full month and it's uncited. Just delete it. Even if it were cited, how could it be a common misspelling with just three citations? Renard Migrant (talk) 11:55, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don’t think typo is the right term for this. Probably scanno is more appropriate. It is not anything that a native Kannada speaker would type, accidentally or otherwise. It’s just that the letter looks superficially almost identical to the letter . A foreigner might make this mistake, or an optical character reader (OCR). —Stephen (Talk) 09:11, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
 * This is not a misspelling! When something is misspelled, it is misspelled because the correct spelling and the incorrect spelling could produce the same or similar pronunciation. "ವುತ್ತು" is pronounced "vuttu"; the correct "ಮತ್ತು" is pronounced "mattu." Just delete it! I thought the opinions of people who know the language took precedence when it comes to matters dealing with that language? Sorry for my irritation. :) Princeps linguae (talk) 18:31, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I have marked it as a scanno of ಮತ್ತು. It ought to be deleted, but because we have had it as an entry here for some time, other sites such as glosbe.com have interpreted its existence here on en.wiki as evidence of validity and have copied it, and as a result it gets 8000 google hits. —Stephen (Talk) 15:30, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * That's no reason for us to keep it, though. Our keeping it just contributes to the wikiality of this nonexistent word. If other sites copy us blindly without fact-checking us, that's their problem, not ours. I really really don't want to start adding all attested scannos of all words in all languages. It's bad enough we have "common misspellings" without adding "rarely attested scannos" as well. The nominator wants this deleted, Dan and Renard both want this deleted, and you yourself say "it ought to be deleted", so I'm deleting it now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:02, 23 November 2014 (UTC)


 * RFD deleted by Angr per consensus. The pro-deletion editors are 4: Princeps linguae, Renard Migrant, Stephen, and Angr; no one has expressed a clear opposition to deletion. Since there are no citations at Citations:ವುತ್ತು, chances are this fails RFV anyway. He who wants to keep this should provide WT:ATTEST-meeting citations at Citations:ವುತ್ತು. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:49, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

RFV discussion: August–October 2014
The entry "ವುತ್ತು" should be deleted. I speak Kannada, the language for which that entry was created, and I have never heard that word, and cannot find attestations anywhere, even on the Internet.

Princeps linguae (talk) 01:47, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Really? Because it took me about 1 minute, not reading the language, to find attestation, like at and on Google Books .--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:55, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * See, actually knowing the language, I can conclude that (a) the first example was a typo for "ಮತ್ತು," and (b) the second example was a Google Books misreading. You'll notice that all the "attestations" for "ವುತ್ತು" are from Google Books, because Google Books is not perfect, especially at reading non-Latin scripts. If it's a word for "and," which is a fairly common word, why can I find "ವುತ್ತು" less than five times outside of Google Books misreadings? (They're probably typos.)


 * Either way, this belongs at WT:RFV. --WikiTiki89 13:56, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * No, it definitely is not a word. I found less than five examples that were not from Google Books (which are all just misreadings), and those are probably typos for an actual word meaning "and" that is spelled and sounded very similarly, and appears very similar ("ವುತ್ತು" is the contested entry, "ಮತ್ತು" is the actual word).
 * RFV is where we determine whether words exist or not. Here at RFD, we determine whether a word that does exist is worthy of inclusion or not. --WikiTiki89 15:17, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'll do that.

The entry "ವುತ್ತು" should be deleted. It's defined as "and." I speak Kannada, the language for which that entry was created, and I have never heard that word, and cannot find attestations anywhere, even on the Internet. I requested deletion and I have some information there supporting this claim.

Princeps linguae (I couldn't sign with the tildes)


 * Delete. I agree that it is not a word. Whenever it appears, it is a typo for ಮತ್ತು, which looks almost the same. —Stephen (Talk) 15:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


 * We could keep this as a common misspelling if it has enough citations. Rædi Stædi Yæti  {- skriv til mig -} 17:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * We could, I suppose, but the language is completely phonetic, so misspellings are very rare. "Typo" would probably be more accurate. And the typo only occurs less than five times on the Internet... Princeps linguae (talk) 18:31, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Um...hello? Is anything going to happen now? It's been about two months. Now that we're done with the formalities, can we actually do something? Thanks. Princeps linguae (talk) 01:05, 5 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Changed to a redirect. —Stephen (Talk) 08:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Reopened this RFV AKA request for attesting quotations: can someone please post attesting quotations at Citations:ವುತ್ತು meeting WT:ATTEST? Above, two links were posted by Prosfilaes, but one of them does not seem durably archived, and we need three attesting quotations as per WT:ATTEST and Criteria for inclusion/Well documented languages. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:46, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The second link posted by Prosfilaes was a Google Books misreading for the actual word for "and": "ಮತ್ತು" (which for some reason unknown to me is being reviewed below). "ಮತ್ತು" and "ವುತ್ತು" look similar, and it was probably these misreadings that misled the creator of that page. No software is perfect, after all. The first link posted by Prosfilaes--I don't know, probably a typo. But if the word we're talking about is "and," you would think there would be multiple results, since Kannada is not a very obscure language. And again, why isn't it on the Kannada Wiktionary (with I think about 100,000 pages) if the word is "and"? Now, I'm no long-time Wiktionarian to recommend anything, but I think that the bar should be a bit higher than three attestations for "and." Thanks. Princeps linguae (talk) 13:30, 5 October 2014 (UTC)


 * PPrinceps linguae, you just need to choose a couple of sentences from the thousands found here. They are printed books and Google tries to convert the images of Kannada pages to Kannada text, but makes mistakes. You will probably need to look at the sentences on the pages that you want, and type them yourself. —Stephen (Talk) 13:43, 5 October 2014 (UTC)