Talk:abstractionistically

RFV discussion: May 2024
Google books turns up exactly two uses (hardly widespread). Possibly coined by User:Neelix as asserted here. --Nickps (talk) 00:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)


 * There are three citations already on the page, one of which is probably older than Neelix, and, the page creator, is a very reliable editor. I see no reason to doubt the validity of this entry. Binarystep (talk) 00:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Guess who forgot to check the quotations on the page before nominating. I'm not too familiar with Wiktionary policy but if I understand correctly those are enough for attestation, aren't they? I'm sorry about that, everyone. Nickps (talk) 01:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey, don't worry about it. At least you know now. Binarystep (talk) 01:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

If there are no objections, I'm tagging this as RFV-passed. Binarystep (talk) 01:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)