Reconstruction talk:Proto-Semitic/Urušalimmi

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Reconstruction talk:Proto-Semitic/Urušalimmi. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Reconstruction talk:Proto-Semitic/Urušalimmi, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Reconstruction talk:Proto-Semitic/Urušalimmi in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Reconstruction talk:Proto-Semitic/Urušalimmi you have here. The definition of the word Reconstruction talk:Proto-Semitic/Urušalimmi will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofReconstruction talk:Proto-Semitic/Urušalimmi, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.

RFDO discussion: September–November 2017

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others (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.


As the name of a city, there is no reason to believe this word existed in Proto-Semitic. More likely it was borrowed from the original language into other Semitic languages at a much later time. There is no agreement about when and where Proto-Semitic was spoken (or even about whether it ever existed as a single language in the first place), but regardless, it very likely predates any settlements in the Jerusalem area. --WikiTiki89 21:49, 7 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Delete unless scholarly references can be found. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 00:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
Delete. This is the same idiot who added Old English and Gothic translations at television. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
No it's a different guy I think. And this one is a much less drastic anachronism. --WikiTiki89 15:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
My mistake. The IP I'm thinking of did edit that page a month after it was created, but wasn't the creator. No, this user has his/her own baggage to deal with, but playing time-travel fantasies with the dictionary isn't something they do. I still wouldn't trust their judgment on this, though. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:32, 15 September 2017 (UTC)Reply