Talk:identicus
Add topicLatest comment: 14 years ago by Mglovesfun in topic identicus
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Language: Latin.
I am sending the entry I have created for verification, as neither I nor EncycloPetey are able to find Latin quotations for attestation. Maybe someone else is able to attest this.
The term is found in an etymology in Century 1911 and also in an etymology in M-W online, but not in Lewis and Short. --Dan Polansky 07:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
- How about this? Mglovesfun (talk) 18:04, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- This? Mglovesfun (talk) 18:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Finally this. So it only seems to appear in Latin after 1800. I'll keep looking. Do we accept any Latin citation, despite the date? Mglovesfun (talk) 18:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- A single one before 1600. In case you haven't realised, I can't read Latin therefore I can't cite it myself. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Great job anyway!
- An additional find:[1], --Dan Polansky 13:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
- I have entered three citations into the Citations namespace, to satisfy the letter of the requirement.
- A good search strategy that finds many more citations is to search in Google books only in the full-view. --Dan Polansky 19:05, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- A single one before 1600. In case you haven't realised, I can't read Latin therefore I can't cite it myself. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Finally this. So it only seems to appear in Latin after 1800. I'll keep looking. Do we accept any Latin citation, despite the date? Mglovesfun (talk) 18:07, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- This? Mglovesfun (talk) 18:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Passes. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2010 (UTC)