Talk:splendiloquent

Inclusion
I hesitated to include this word because there is limited evidence for usage, and the OED has not admitted it yet, but bgc has the 1848 usage (possibly coinage?) and there are quite a few usages in blogs, websites etc. What does anyone anyone else think?  D b f  i  r  s   10:38, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
 * (later) Thank you to Ruakh and Visviva for their excellent citations.  Has anyone found a usage before 1848?    D b f  i  r  s   08:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not so sure about the 1848 usage; b.g.c. usually does a bad job dating periodicals, and with snippet-view, it's impossible to look around enough to say for sure. Further, the mere fact that b.g.c. shows it in snippet-view rather than full view, even though the copyright on an 1848 publication would have expired by now, suggests that b.g.c. “knows” it's mis-dating it. —Ruakh TALK 15:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The Hathi Trust is a wonderful thing. But while this is a valid 1848 cite, I'm not sure it has quite the same meaning as the 1971 and 2006 cites ... "Scheidam" is a type of schnapps, if I'm not mistaken, so perhaps it is being used to mean something like "lending to splendid loquacity"?  Or perhaps just "splendid"? -- Visviva 00:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Good move. :-)  —Ruakh TALK 02:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

RFV — passed
Per concern raised on the talk page. Conrad.Irwin 10:40, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Now has three cites, which is all that is required AFAIK. Not sure why we would care whether it is in the OED or not. -- Visviva 03:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for checking and finding good citations. I was just surprised (and delighted) to find a word that the OED lexicographers have not picked up in the last 160 years!  Perhaps they will now include it when they see it in Wiktionary!    D b f  i  r  s   18:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * congratudolences. --Una Smith 16:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Appears to be cited and resolved, so striking. Equinox ◑ 19:30, 12 May 2009 (UTC)