Talk:kvira

RFV discussion: July 2017–January 2018

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification (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.

---

kvira 1

__Gamren (talk) 14:41, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Ligata cited it and removed the rfv template. So, formally: RFV passed.__Gamren (talk) 12:48, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Unstriking. I removed the quotes that do not appear to be durably archived, leaving only two, one of which is a mention. So we need two more citations to keep the entry. —Granger (talk · contribs) 10:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

And the other uses it in "kvira teorio", which I'm not sure I would count.__Gamren (talk) 14:04, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

RFV failed.__Gamren (talk) 12:53, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

As it turns out, the removed quotes in question (luckily still available in the Esperanto entry) were durably archived in the Austrian National Library. Finsternish (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

RFV discussion: January 2018

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

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

---

kvira 2

I have recreated kvira and added durably archived citations; if I did not misunderstand __Gamren then this should suffice; otherwise I apologize for the hassle. Finsternish (talk) 20:40, 19 January 2018 (UTC) corrected formatting Finsternish (talk) 20:41, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Of the citations currently in the entry, the 2014 one is clearly a mention. I am not sure if the Sennacieca Asocio Tutmonda and Somera Esperanto Studo ones are durably archived, but I'm guessing they're probably not. Moreover, as Gamren said in the previous RFV, it's possible that "kvira teorio" shouldn't be counted. We only have three valid quotations if we count "kvira teorio" and if the other two are durably archived. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:15, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

They've been saved on web.archive.org and the links point to this; isn't that durably archived? Finsternish (talk) 22:45, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

No. This has been discussed multiple times in the past, and I think there might even have been a vote on it. The Wayback Machine is not durably archived. —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:36, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

WT:Votes/pl-2012-10/Quality_of_sources. It failed, but seemingly not because anyone contested that the Wayback Machine is not durable, in fact it looks like noone cared about that bit.__Gamren (talk) 09:26, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I've added an unquestionably durably archived source, "Queer Warsaw. Historical and cultural guide to Warsaw," as well as apparently the first mention from 1996, in soc.culture.esperanto, though that one is in quotes. Finsternish (talk) 10:37, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

And another durably archived source, the publication Kontakto. Finsternish (talk) 14:05, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I am re-adding the two citations from Ligo de Samseksemaj Geesperantistoj, because it turns out they are archived at the Austrian National Library. Finsternish (talk) 19:52, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Impressive; I had made a search of publications through Issuu and saw the guide to Warsaw, but assumed it would be in English or Polish (searching for "kvira" turned up a lot of chaff, mostly in the form of Georgian-language hits and hits about the Georgian mountain Kvira). Magazines and the like are generally archived by (some) libraries, so the 2010 Warsaw and 2017 Kontakto citations look good. The 2014 Camacho citation is only mentioning the term (or does it go on to use the term later in the work, in running text?). But it also appears that the two Forumo / Ligo citations are indeed archived publications, so this would appear to me to be adequately cited. - -sche (discuss) 20:10, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Being familiar with Esperanto history and culture, I had a good hunch that a Warsaw publication might include Esperanto. It was a long shot, but it paid off. Finsternish (talk) 20:12, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

@__Gamren, is this satisfactory? Can the RFV tag be removed? Finsternish (talk) 23:26, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

RFV passed. Finsternish (talk) 20:33, 27 January 2018 (UTC)