Talk:amogus

Add Date of Popularization?

Add mention of 2021? Spaokobb (talk) 05:13, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

RFV discussion: April–October 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.

---

amogus

Equinox ◑ 03:24, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

WP redirect was deleted multiple times before it got ECP salted. But then someone created it again and it still stands. 2600:387:9:9:0:0:0:26 18:23, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

What is "ECP snowed"? Equinox ◑ 02:27, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

I think the IP means "ECP salted". See [1]. This, that and the other (talk) 02:38, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, got confused with W:WP:SNOW and W:WP:SALT. 2600:387:9:3:0:0:0:1C 12:41, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

what 142.113.162.38 21:59, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Someone put a citation. Check please. 2600:387:9:9:0:0:0:5D 17:27, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Not durably archived, but that shouldn't get in our way anymore. Now let's have two more good ones. Apparently this figure was royalty back in the day [2] This, that and the other (talk) 10:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

We have empirical evidence (See #for all intrinsic purposes.) that linkrot for "non-durably archived" citations removed 4/6 from 2007 to ~May 1, 2022, ie, a half-life of ~9 years. DCDuring (talk) 15:22, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

There are ways around this, such as the Internet Archive. Theknightwho (talk) 17:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Failed for now. - TheDaveRoss 14:36, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

@TheDaveRoss Why did you delete a term with 3 citations and over 5 million ghits? Ioaxxere (talk) 15:02, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

All 3 cites are for capital-A "Amogus", and they are poor: e.g. the one that says "the intentional misspelling Amogus" is a mention, not a use (and not even a terribly convincing mention). Equinox ◑ 15:08, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

@Equinox I've added a few articles into Citations:amogus. Hopefully these are enough. Ioaxxere (talk) 21:50, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

RFD discussion: December 2022

The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Undeletion of amogus

Recently failed RFV having only one quotation, but User:J3133 and I have added many sources, including print newspapers, to Citations:amogus so as to meet CFI. Ioaxxere (talk) 20:39, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ioaxxere Since there are now qualifying cites, you can just recreate the entry. Undeletion at RFD is mainly for RFDs that failed in the past. AG202 (talk) 21:17, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I've recreated it to the best of my memory. Ioaxxere (talk) 22:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

✅ RFD-resolved. AG202 (talk) 01:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Add "amogopodes" as a plural, maybe?

it's sometimes used 2001:999:781:5A33:CD8C:727D:6029:1FD2 11:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

If you can find a citation for it, go for it. InfoManiac297 (talk) 00:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

amogus as a verb?

Chuterix (talk) 19:01, 3 July 2023 (UTC)