Talk:慾速則不達

Is this a valid alt. form? Wyang (talk) 09:11, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * There seems to be some attestation in Google Books, but like other similar cases, I don't know if they're reliable. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 12:30, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't have the time and patience to check it recently, but my guess would be that the uses in books are simp-trad errors. Wyang (talk) 09:32, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

RFD discussion: May 2021
The form *慾速則不達 appears to be a typo form. The characters 慾 and 欲 are not equivalent. The latter is (typically) the verb form while the former is (typically) a noun form. Here the latter makes sense ("to want to hasten") but the former not so much. --Frigoris (talk) 20:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , it might be better to RFV this. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 00:27, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
 * yes, please. Could you help with verifying it? --Frigoris (talk) 11:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Moved to RFV. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 14:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

RFV discussion: May–June 2021
The form *慾速則不達 appears to be a typo form. The characters 慾 and 欲 are not equivalent. The latter is (typically) the verb form while the former is (typically) a noun form. Here the latter makes sense ("to want to hasten") but the former not so much. --Frigoris (talk) 20:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , it might be better to RFV this. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 00:27, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
 * yes, please. Could you help with verifying it? --Frigoris (talk) 11:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Moved from RFD. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 14:35, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No good hits with or . — justin(r)leung { (t...) 16:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)


 * RFV failed. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 02:41, 19 June 2021 (UTC)