Talk:جعل عالي الشيء سافله

RFD discussion: February 2021–February 2023

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

---

جعل عالي الشيء سافله

“SOP, add as an usex to the main verb lemma”. — فين أخاي ^{(تكلم معاي · ما ساهمت)} 02:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Delete. Roger.M.Williams (talk) 23:33, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

The sense given as idiomatic sense seems rather non-composite to me? Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 11:18, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

@User:Allahverdi Verdizade It's a Qur'anic idiom, literally meaning "to make the top (or height) of sth its bottom (or low)", hence "to overturn", hence "to raze; to annihilate; to exterminate; to eradicate" as of cities and other localities, peoples and nations, and so on. The problem here is the question of whether every Qur'anic collocation merits a separate entry, considering that such phrases are often quoted in countless discourses and contexts. One could say that these phrases are so popular that they have become somewhat proverbial (perhaps akin to love conquers all), but that may be easily generalized to every widespread sequence of words regardless of composition, be it from holy books, movies and shows, philosphers, or somewhere else. One could think of The Matrix, Stars Wars, Game of Thrones as examples of this: someone who is familiar with these programs may, perhaps subconsciously, "quote" them in their speech, such as red pill or, more markedly, its alteration, black pill.

I personally think that "quoting something", in itself, is too fluid a standard, much more than the existing SoP criteria, even if the quotation arguably borders on "proverbs". Roger.M.Williams (talk) 17:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

@Roger.M.Williams: The problem is not about quoting; after all, we do have red pill as an entry! What we want to determine is whether someone unfamiliar with the Qur'anic usage could come across this in Arabic and correctly interpret its meaning in a modern context. (I think the answer is probably yes, but I am open to the possibility that it is no — in which case we would want to keep it.) —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 09:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

• Keep It’s idiomatic --51.223.134.239 18:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

RFD-kept — Fenakhay ^{(حيطي · مساهماتي)} 09:37, 13 February 2023 (UTC)