Talk:ĝermana vo
Add topic
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
And the alternative form ĝermana vo, which Kwamikagami has made a redirect for some reason. Esperanto for double-u. There are lots of mentions on Usenet, but I can't find any uses. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 02:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
- The redirect was left behind when Kwamikagami erroneously moved ĝermana vo to germana vo in January, presumably mistaking it in good faith for a misspelling. I've moved it back and added a misspelling-of entry for the hard-g version. Left rfvs on both. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 09:50, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- I'm having more luck attesting the more convenient vavo than either formal name ĝermana vo or duobla vo. Seems like many speakers prefer two syllables to four. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 00:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
- germana vo failed, ĝermana vo passed. — Ungoliant (falai) 23:57, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
- Unstriking. All of the citations for ĝermana vo are mentions, not uses. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 01:52, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
- Fuck me! Failed. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:24, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
- Sigh. I was really hoping Mr. G would withdraw that nomination before it came to deleting a name of a letter of the alphabet. At least someone else stepped up to swing the axe. The CFI is a harsh mistress. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 02:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
- Unstriking. All of the citations for ĝermana vo are mentions, not uses. —Mr. Granger (talk • contribs) 01:52, 11 July 2014 (UTC)