Talk:Habsburgus

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Al-Muqanna in topic RFV discussion: September 2020–January 2023
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RFV discussion: September 2020–January 2023

[edit]

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

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


I added the Latin definition "Habsburgus." Anonymous "93.221.41.43" added the verify sense rfv. Anonymous failed to create a verification post here. Aearthrise (talk) 05:40, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

The existing quotation is unverifiable – to which edition of Comenius’ enormous œuvre does the page number correspond? Moreover, the “64b”, “31b” and “32b” are strange; is the quote not taken from running text but from an Index? Three uses: [1], [2], [3] – the last one not authored by "Jezuité", as Google Books would have us believe, but by Georg Widmanstad.  --Lambiam 12:38, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Lambiam: I received the index here. Aearthrise (talk) 13:51, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Aearthrise Quoting from the index is usually a bad idea, since indexes aren't really part of the work and are often added later by an editor. Also, "Ferdinandus I. Habsburgus, imperator 64b. Ferdinandus II. Habsburgus, imperator 31b. Ferdinandus II. Habsburgus, imperator 32b." is terrible formatting. In English, items in a list should be separated by commas or semicolons, not periods. If you want to use separate lines instead, you need something like <br> to force a new line. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:29, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
I guess, it's also a matter of RfC: Which sense of Habsburg is meant (proper noun: castle; proper noun: family; common noun: family-member)? In "Rudolphus Habsburgus" and "Ferdinandus I. Habsburgus" it looks to me like the common noun. --93.221.41.43 06:50, 26 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Apologies, I just realised after seeing this I removed the RFV-sense tag on the article by mistake while cleaning it up. I'll restore the tag until this resolves properly, but I've split it into two senses and provided a citation for each of them. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 17:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Al-Muqanna, what remains to be resolved here? It looks cited. 70.172.194.25 02:49, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
Just wanted to give the usual week for objections. RFV-passed. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 03:11, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply