Talk:中華膠

RFV discussion: June–August 2024

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

中華膠

This entry, or one or more of its senses, has been nominated as derogatory pursuant to WT:DEROGATORY. It may be speedily deleted if it does not have at least three quotations meeting the attestation requirements within two weeks of the nomination date, that is, by 14 June 2024.

Chinese. WT:DEROG. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 16:04, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Not my fight but fwiw there's apparently an entire thoroughly sourced Wiki article on it. — LlywelynII 21:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

• RFV failed. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

  (I've moved the citations that were on the deleted page to Citations:中華膠, but I think only the 陳建甫 quote is durably archived. @Ultimateria, do you think the rest of the quotes are good enough for attestation for this page to also be restored? It's an edge case for WT:WDL since where Malaysian Chinese is kind of at the edge of what is considered Standard Written Chinese.) — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 18:28, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

  Looking back I believe it was a mistake to delete this page and the one below. I've restored it but will leave it to you to change the outcome of the RFV discussion as I don't feel qualified to judge the sources. Ultimateria (talk) 18:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

• RFV-passed. Ultimateria (talk) 17:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)