Talk:老作

RFV discussion: November 2021–January 2022

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.

---

老作

Rfv-sense: "lawyer". Added by @MSG17. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:26, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

@RcAlex36: Are you rfv-ing this sense (which you have modified) or "lawyer"? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:04, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

@Justinrleung: I meant to rfv the sense "lawyer". My apologies. RcAlex36 (talk) 17:16, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

No worries, @RcAlex36. @MSG17: I have a suspicion that there might have been a typo/confusion in the dictionary that you cited. It's write next to 老狀, which means "lawyer". — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 17:25, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it is next to 老狀. The dictionary identifies both lemmas as having the sense of "lawyer". MSG17 (talk) 19:32, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

So since I think there are some doubts about this dictionary (because it looks it could be a typo/confusion), we would need at least one other independent source or one cite per WT:ATTEST. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:42, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

• RFV failed. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)