Talk:mume

RFV discussion
This is not a Latin adjective. I am unwilling to accept this. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:06, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. The specific epithet in taxonomic names is, by definition, either an adjective in the nominative case, a noun in the genitive, or a noun in the nominative, in apposition. This would seem to be the last of the three, so even if you accept the assumption that taxonomic names are Latin, this would still be a noun in the nominative case, not an adjective. I'm not so sure it's a case for rfv, though. It's probably best to just convert it to a translingual proper noun, and forget about Latin. Another problem is that apricot is a mistranslation. The species in question (Prunus mume) is sometimes referred to as "Japanese apricot" (when it's not called a "flowering plum"), but it's not the same as the true apricot (Prunus armeniaca). Chuck Entz (talk) 05:39, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Move to Translingual DCDuring TALK 01:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Closed. Language changed to Translingual, POS changed to noun and definition changed to (per Chuck Entz’s comment). — Ungoliant (Falai) 14:20, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

RFV discussion
Last time I RFVed this entry, it was Latin, and other editors decided to keep it, but as Translingual (see Talk:mume). I am now sending it back to RFV, because it has never been cited in any language. It is only used as a specific epithet for one species,. This is only one cite, so the best course of action would be to have no longer link to, and explain the etymology on that page. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:15, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * RFV failed. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 15:24, 11 April 2019 (UTC)