Talk:高頂絲製禮帽

RFV discussion: December 2017–January 2018
only gives 2 results. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 22:27, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedied by deletion of the new version of the original spelling and moving this new spelling back to the original spelling. Otherwise, the revision history of the original spelling (necessary for the attribution part of our Creative Commons license) would have been at the new spelling, and any further edits to either entry would have complicated the task of restoring the revision history to where it belongs.
 * If you want to recreate the entry for the new spelling so you can continue the rfv, feel free, but I wasted more than an hour failing to come up with an explanation for the technical issues involved that wouldn't cause your head to explode- and I can normally explain almost anything.
 * At any rate, I didn't touch the entry for the new simplified spelling, so that still needs to be dealt with. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Alright, I think I kinda get it. Anyway, I've recreated the entry to continue the rfv. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 04:37, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Really, I don't think you need to recreate the entry to continue the rfv session. Dokurrat (talk) 20:25, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I think it should be recreated so that 高頂絲製禮帽 (and its simplified form) can be deleted through the right process. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 21:12, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I see. Dokurrat (talk) 21:13, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

I think you can pronounce rfv failed now. Dokurrat (talk) 19:37, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * RFV failed. I've deleted the simplified form (高顶丝制礼帽) as well. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 19:48, 15 January 2018 (UTC)