Talk:taint

Request for verification
RfV-sense for taint: “The perineum.” I hope this is real, but we need cites, methinks. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 02:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Definitely real and with widespread use. I've heard it used on at least three different late-night TV shows in the US. --EncycloPetey 01:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * One such example would satisfy me. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 01:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Three uses would satisfy CFI. DCDuring TALK 11:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * That was merely a way for me to say “I take that on trust, but for protocol’s sake, please add at least one citation of use”. Since I requested the verification, that seems a reasonable thing for me to have done. (There’s a precedent for this: one citation was enough for to pass.) †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 20:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Languages other than English seem to have other rules, often for good reason. I didn't think our processes were personal ones. I think we need to act in a way consistent with having lots of contributors, all of whom play by the same rules, in hopes that we will actually get more contributors to help. Maybe with another 100 contributors each doing 1000 edits we can get this thing finished this year. DCDuring TALK 21:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Indeed; English is probably the easiest language to attest. I don’t disagree with your principles. I was just saying that I trust EP on this. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 22:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Not the kind of entry I normally like looking for cites for, so I'm not going to work any further on this than than I have in finding the numerous (and I think sufficient) citations at . &#x200b;— msh210 ℠ 17:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Cited. *sigh* This is what I get for signing up for RFV dishwashing duty. (Usually dirty-word cites are kind of interesting, at least, but somehow this batch is really just vulgar and gross without redeeming qualities.) —Ruakh TALK 02:21, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Aphetic form of "attaint"
Webster 1913 has a sense for a transitive verb, defined as "aphetic form of ". Perhaps we are missing this, despite our existing sense derived from attaint that has slightly different meanings. Equinox ◑ 23:34, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

RFV discussion: December 2020–January 2021
Rfv-sense: To hit or touch lightly, in tilting. La más guay (talk) 22:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 21:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

What's the difference? Consolidation?
Etymology 3 & 4 seem to be the same, one is just 'it's a contraction' the other, 'it's a contraction, that was used here....' 2601:14E:4180:6880:D485:D916:9484:E0D7 03:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)