Editing Talk:Anglicism (section)

== Original research ==

The article is almost entirely based on [[WP:OR|original research]] and unsourced assertions.  This is somewhat understandable, because everybody feels like an expert in their native language (and sometimes, in others as well).  However, Wikipedia's core principle of [[WP:V|verifiability]] is very clear on this point: {{xt|All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable}}, and that: {{xt|Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed.}}  

It should be noted that adding an inline citation consisting of two definitions, one from an English dictionary, and one from a foreign dictionary of the same, or similar-appearing word, may verify the meanings of each, but that does '''not''' verify the foreign word's status as an anglicism; that would be [[WP:SYNTH]] and thus still subject to removal as unverified. Perhaps this is stating the obvious, but for a word to be verifiable as an anglicism for this article, you need a single source that says it's an anglicism; often, a foreign etymological dictionary or article may be the source for that. (A good example of that is ref 'JP' in the Polish section.)  Failing that, the example can be challenged, and removed if no source is forthcoming.  [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 08:22, 28 September 2018 (UTC)