Talk:अझ़दहा
Add topicLatest comment: 1 month ago by Anupam in topic Page blanking by User:نعم البدل
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
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.
the results I get in google books are just no-previews. अज़दहा is OTOH well attested. —Svārtava [t•c•u•r] 10:06, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- RFV-failed —Svārtava [t•c•u•r] 13:37, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Page blanking by User:نعم البدل
[edit]User:نعم البدل, you are not permitted to blank this referenced article. Please discuss your objections here, rather than doing that. If you feel the article should be deleted, please nominate it for deletion. Thank you. With regards, Anupam (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- User:AryamanA, I am pinging you as you have knowledge on Indo-Aryan languages and wished to gain your thoughts about this issue. Thank you. With regards, Anupam (talk) 12:58, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Did you even read the talk page you wrote this onto? It failed RFV before. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 14:57, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hello User:Surjection, thanks for your comments. It appeared that the reason that the article was deleted was because it lacked references. I did source the article with the same. What do you advise as the appropriate way to proceed? I look forward to hearing from you. With regards, Anupam (talk) 15:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hey @Anupam, my apologies for not leaving a message.
- I added a no entry template as it failed the RFV / WT:CFI, and has done so previously. As per WT:CFI, three suitable citations are required to show a term is attested in any given language. I did try to skim through Google to find any suitable citations but unfortunately wasn't able to. If you are able to provide them, please do so and hopefully the page will be reinstated. Thanks. نعم البدل (talk) 15:29, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your willingness to work with me. Please see this dictionary (Shabdkosh). This is a suitable reference, making it the third dictionary, in addition to the two that were already present in this article (Exhibit A & Exhibit B), that corroborate the entry. In written Hindi, people often save time by omitting the nuqta, and it is evident that the word is used; for example, see this newspaper. Another dictionary Urdu Hindi Shabda Kosh includes the word as well. In view of the fact that there are at least four dictionaries that list this entry, I would appreciate it if you could kindly restore the article. Thank you, Anupam (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Anupam: WT:CFI typically requires three durably archive citations (ie. quotes), which would mean that references from dictionaries aren't sufficient on their own. Personally, I also avoid Glosbe and (to a lesser extent) Shabdkosh, as they're web-based projects. As for the nuqta, if the published dictionaries are to be considered, I would feel more comfortable if other Hindi-contributors (@Svartava, AryamanA, Surjection etc. apologies for the mass ping) also had a say on this as अझ़दहा (aźadhā) is quite an exceptional word since it could be seen as an indication of /ʒ/ in Hindi. Normally, we do distinguish between nuqta-variants of lemmas in Indic scripts (आवाज (āvāj) vs आवाज़ (āvāz)). نعم البدل (talk) 20:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please provide an example of such a quote. The fact that four dictionaries have this word, and are used across Wiktionary, indicates that it is used in Hindi. As far as other references, various popular Hindi news sources, such as Kolkata Times and News Track Live use the lemma. User:AryamanA and User:Foreverknowledge, I would appreciate it if you could please share your thoughts. Thank you, Anupam (talk) 20:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Anupam: You need to read WT:CFI for what qualifies as an entry. For words that are very borderline like this one (which has already failed RFV once), we need three quotes that use the word, not merely say its definition (like a dictionary) or mention it (like the news articles -- they don't use the word freely, they just say a dragon is called that in Hindi). Please read CFI. I am not reinstating the page until enough quotations that meet CFI are provided. @نعم البدل is absolutely correct in this case. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 23:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Quotes without nuqta are fine too btw, since that's just orthographic variation. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 23:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- User:AryamanA, thank you for responding. I appreciate your insight and at this time, I will leave it to you both. Perhaps in the future, if such quotes are found, they can be used to reinstate the article. With regards, Anupam (talk) 01:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
- Quotes without nuqta are fine too btw, since that's just orthographic variation. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 23:47, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Anupam: You need to read WT:CFI for what qualifies as an entry. For words that are very borderline like this one (which has already failed RFV once), we need three quotes that use the word, not merely say its definition (like a dictionary) or mention it (like the news articles -- they don't use the word freely, they just say a dragon is called that in Hindi). Please read CFI. I am not reinstating the page until enough quotations that meet CFI are provided. @نعم البدل is absolutely correct in this case. —AryamanA (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान) 23:46, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please provide an example of such a quote. The fact that four dictionaries have this word, and are used across Wiktionary, indicates that it is used in Hindi. As far as other references, various popular Hindi news sources, such as Kolkata Times and News Track Live use the lemma. User:AryamanA and User:Foreverknowledge, I would appreciate it if you could please share your thoughts. Thank you, Anupam (talk) 20:49, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Anupam: WT:CFI typically requires three durably archive citations (ie. quotes), which would mean that references from dictionaries aren't sufficient on their own. Personally, I also avoid Glosbe and (to a lesser extent) Shabdkosh, as they're web-based projects. As for the nuqta, if the published dictionaries are to be considered, I would feel more comfortable if other Hindi-contributors (@Svartava, AryamanA, Surjection etc. apologies for the mass ping) also had a say on this as अझ़दहा (aźadhā) is quite an exceptional word since it could be seen as an indication of /ʒ/ in Hindi. Normally, we do distinguish between nuqta-variants of lemmas in Indic scripts (आवाज (āvāj) vs आवाज़ (āvāz)). نعم البدل (talk) 20:22, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your willingness to work with me. Please see this dictionary (Shabdkosh). This is a suitable reference, making it the third dictionary, in addition to the two that were already present in this article (Exhibit A & Exhibit B), that corroborate the entry. In written Hindi, people often save time by omitting the nuqta, and it is evident that the word is used; for example, see this newspaper. Another dictionary Urdu Hindi Shabda Kosh includes the word as well. In view of the fact that there are at least four dictionaries that list this entry, I would appreciate it if you could kindly restore the article. Thank you, Anupam (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hello User:Surjection, thanks for your comments. It appeared that the reason that the article was deleted was because it lacked references. I did source the article with the same. What do you advise as the appropriate way to proceed? I look forward to hearing from you. With regards, Anupam (talk) 15:11, 3 October 2024 (UTC)