Talk:CheckUser

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

There are a couple of cites available in Google Books, but for checkuser. Not sure caps is the normal spelling. Equinox 22:20, 16 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

RFV discussion: August–October 2017

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.


This spelling in particular. --WikiTiki89 21:29, 22 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

With this casing, it seems to refer to either the tool or the authority to use it. The actual people seem to be all lowercase. Kiwima (talk) 23:28, 22 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

When referring to a person, Wikipedia (the primary source origin of the term) refers to the people as "CheckUsers". Unfortunately, this cannot be used for verification of a term here. Perhaps we should include in the usage notes that the more proper way to say it would be "CheckUser" though it is not attested? PseudoSkull (talk) 02:14, 23 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Wikipedia is not a primary source. Period. Any Wikipedia page on sourcing will tell you that. Not only that, for our purposes it's not a source at all. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:32, 23 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 21:51, 25 October 2017 (UTC)Reply