Talk:pretotype

RFV discussion: August 2017
Would anyone consider this word’s usage wide enough for having an article? —britannic124 (talk) 18:35, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The noun looks very common. The verb is more questionable. DTLHS (talk) 18:54, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * http://www.pretotyping.org/, http://pretotyping.blogspot.nl/, https://disruptionhub.com/at-a-glance-pretotyping/ this seems fairly common to me.. I'll add some (book) sources. W3ird N3rd (talk) 19:29, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Both the noun and the verb are cited, as is the noun pretotyping. Kiwima (talk) 19:43, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh shoot, we were working on this at the same time.. Just wasted too much time on Citations:pretotype. Only realized a minute ago that those descriptions aren't actually using it as a verb, so changed the title from "As a verb" to "Describing use as a verb". Those entries should be checked btw, the page number for the noun cite is missing (I can't see it) and most of it was hand-typed because I can't copy-paste on Google books, so there could be typos. W3ird N3rd (talk) 20:24, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 21:07, 15 August 2017 (UTC)