Talk:exaampere

RFV discussion: February–March 2017
Recently changed from a no-entry by User:Gamren. DTLHS (talk) 23:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that this (and many more similar) are valid constructions that just haven't been used in the real-world yet (except in dictionaries and the like). I would keep them all, but with a note to that effect. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:42, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * This is RFV not RFD. And we already had that note with . DTLHS (talk) 16:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I added this and other entries under the presumption that they would all be attestable. As I cannot seem to do so, I have no objection to reinstatement of the {no entry}.__Gamren (talk) 05:30, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * RFV failed. Page converted back to a no-entry. Translation table kept (disagree?).__Gamren (talk) 15:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC)