Talk:theosophe

RFV discussion: March–April 2016
RFV for the alleged Latin adverb. Not in Lewis & Short, du Cange, Gaffiot, the OLD, Niermeyer, or the NLW. Only du Cange and Niermeyer have entries for the related noun. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 01:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Dictionaries often do not include adverbs derived from 1st/2nd declension adjectives (adjetive in -us and adverb in -e, like theosophus -> theosophe). If there are theosophus and theosophically, then it's not unlikely that there's theosophe. -80.133.119.105 18:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * It's not too unlikely, no, but there has yet to be presented any evidence that exists. (See WT:CFI.) — I.S.M.E.T.A. 12:52, 4 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I looked through Google Books diligently and only found the vocative singular. RFV failed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:35, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

RFC discussion: February 2016
English section. The two  sections need to be combined. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 13:43, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅ 14:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Angr. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 14:44, 20 February 2016 (UTC)