Talk:Yurqi

RFD discussion: August 2021
Too rare in English --Geographyinitiative (talk) 21:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I have asked you so many times to stop wasting our time. Surely you know by now that RFV is where we send entries whose attestation is in doubt. Being rare is perfectly fine as long as a word passes CFI. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:59, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * My name is geographyinitiatve not Shirley. [Traditional joke when someone uses the 'surely you know' construction.] RFV will not be fruitful in terms of durably archived sources- I looked, and I got 0 so far. The two web articles aren't durably archived (as far as I know). Does that requirement mean nothing anymore, or does it mean something? I am trying to clean up my work area in Wiktionary so that it conforms with the rules of Wiktionary as stated. A Wiktionary following the rules is a more reliable, stable and valuable Wiktionary. If the PRM requirement is dead, then just go ahead and delete that from the rules. If it's not dead then this request stands. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 03:21, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see now that RFD is "for a reason other than that the term cannot be attested." I plan to transfer these rfd requests to the rfv page for deletion. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 03:38, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Let me know if this transfer to rfv is correct. I never realized the true difference between RFV and RFD. I just thought "if I want to delete, it's rfd. If I want to verify, it's rfv". --Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:36, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

RFV discussion: August–September 2021
Too rare in English. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:36, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 22:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)