Talk:Ivrit

Request for deletion
This is just a transliteration of עברית. Yes, this can be found in English context, but so can español and Nihongo. --Yair rand 21:53, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: it appears unitalicized in running text. (This belongs at RFV, and I'd say it move it thither, but it will pass there easily, so no point.) &#x200b;— msh210 ℠ 21:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * "Nihongo" also appears unitalicized in running text, as do most language names. Do they all qualify as English? --Yair rand 02:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep (or move to RFV). Quite possibly. Why wouldn't they? —Ruakh TALK 03:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep, it's a word as it as it used in English colloquially. There should be at least a Hebrew or a Translingual romanised entry, like Nihongo, along with 日本語. Words like Nihongo and Ivrit may be called multilingual, they used in different languages to mean 日本語 and עברית, calling a language in its own language is common in certain circles and situations. By the way, Hebrew in Russian is called иврит (ivrít) only. --Anatoli 05:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * (I thought I've heard "po-evreiski"? In any event,) I don't think these count as translingual. Without data, I have to assume most languages don't use Ivrit: Russian, for example, doesn't, using иврит instead. &#x200b;— msh210 ℠ 18:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * по-еврейски (po-jevréjski) or еврейский язык (jevréjskij jazýk) means "in Jewish" and "the Jewish language" - which one? Hebrew, Yiddish? Anatoli 20:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. And note that English denotes Modern Israeli Hebrew, whereas Hebrew  includes all forms of the language — as, I believe, does Russian . (Don't get me wrong, I think the term  is really silly, all the more so because it doesn't actually mean the same thing as the Hebrew word it's borrowed from; but sanity is not one of our CFI.) —Ruakh TALK 18:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep/RFV. Mglovesfun (talk) 06:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep given it appears unitalicized in running text in three durably archived sources. --Dan Polansky 12:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes just keep, it would be "bad faith" to RFV something knowing that it would pass. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:35, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Kept, Mglovesfun (talk) 10:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)