Talk:NMSL
RFV discussion: May 2020–May 2021
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.
Is this really Chinese? see Revision History of 你媽死了. Abbreviation and emoji as Chinese word. Seems like wiktionary is slowly turning into urban dictionary. if this rfv is passed, i will go ahead and create more entries for urban slang such as NMD, TMD, TNND, CNM, 748, based on whatever criteria make NMSL, NM$L, 你🐴死了valid entry. — This unsigned comment was added by Iambluemon (talk • contribs) at 00:16, 15 May 2020 (UTC).
- @Iambluemon: If they're attestable per WT:ATTEST, then they're valid entries. However, I don't think it was necessary for you to create these entries in the first place if you doubted their existence. You could have just brought this to WT:TR for discussion. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 00:20, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- I removed the links from 你媽死了, but it was quickly reverted. I check the internet and they seem to be legit. I'm just not sure whether they can be cited properly. Does weibo, twitter, blog posts, forum posts count as citations? User:Iambluemon 01:04, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- Not direct citations but...
- NMSL: Chinese Wikipedia has a page on a April 2020 Chinese-Thai Twitter battle that made NMSL known to Thai Twitter users. w:zh:中泰網絡罵戰 Google News also finds mentions of NMSL in Western media, such as .
- NM$L: Wikimedia Commons has a NM$L graphic. w:zh:孙笑川#影响.
- —Suzukaze-c (talk) 20:50, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hmm, would this count as an attestation? It's not technically used by the user, but it's in the title of the link that the user shared. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 07:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- It's from the part of Google Groups that isn't Usenet, so it's not durably archived. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:00, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Chuck Entz Ah, I see. How can we tell if a group is in Usenet again? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 08:13, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Usenet is completely separate from Google (and decades older), but Google provides access to it as part of their service to Google Groups members. The structure of a Usenet address starts with one of a small set of top-level domain names followed by subdomains and sub-subdomains in descending order, all separated by periods/full stops. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:36, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Chuck Entz Ah, I see. How can we tell if a group is in Usenet again? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 08:13, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- It's from the part of Google Groups that isn't Usenet, so it's not durably archived. Chuck Entz (talk) 08:00, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hmm, would this count as an attestation? It's not technically used by the user, but it's in the title of the link that the user shared. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 07:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- RFV failed. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 17:54, 27 May 2021 (UTC)