Talk:prequirement

RFV discussion: July–October 2019
Scannos again I think. (Remember, if you do super-hard work and verify this by scraping three from the bottom of the barrel, it's your responsibility to mark it as rare or nonstandard.) Equinox ◑ 09:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)


 * scraped from the bottom of the barrel --Habst (talk) 18:46, 27 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Most of your cites seem to be by Indian/Asian authors, probably NNES, and I would consider this a simple typo or error. "Uncommon" is as much as I can hope for I suppose. Equinox ◑ 20:43, 27 July 2019 (UTC)


 * it definitely isn't a typo in the random sense (because there aren't attestations for e.g. qrequirement, wrequirement, rrequirement, etc.) and i would disagree with the prescriptive characterization of "error" for something that occurs often enough independently. finding cites for this word was just like finding them for any other word, i thought the phrasing "scraped from the bottom of the barrel" was funny but also kind of contradictory, because if you have to scrape cites from the bottom of a barrel then the word shouldn't be on wiktionary anyways. evidently that wasn't the case with prerequirement or clustersize. --Habst (talk) 22:53, 28 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Someone should check if the word occurs multiple times in the cited works (evidence that it's intentional) or if "requirement" is otherwise the spelling used (suggesting "prequirement" is a one-off typo). Also, bear in mind that we have the option of labels like for Category:Non-native speakers' English. - -sche (discuss) 18:23, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 21:07, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Unstruck: following up on my comment, I see that the first citation (copied and pasted complete with OCR error "cmo" for cm3) only uses "prequirement" once (p. 32) and "prequirements" never (when I put the word in quotation marks to ensure only matches for that exact spelling turn up), whereas it uses "requirement(s)" at least six times (including on pp. 25, 52, 44, 83, 87), suggesting the one occurence of "pre-" is a typo, not a use of some word meaning "prerequisite requirement". Likewise, the second citation, which has other -requiring errors even within the sentence of it which is quoted, uses "prequirement" only once vs "requirement(s)" 44 times, even more strongly showing the one-off error to be just that, a one-off typing error. Ditto for all of the other citations. (This reminds me of the RFV of the use of they as a demonstrative article the: some users put forth books where the was used a hundred times and typoed as they once, but those didn't verify the sense, we needed works that used it consistently or in contexts that made clear it wasn't a typo.) - -sche (discuss) 20:13, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 20:56, 16 October 2019 (UTC)