Talk:be in on

Tea room discussion

Note: the below discussion was moved from the Wiktionary:Tea room.

Isn't this an idiom? I was looking it up but we don't have it currently. __meco 15:58, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps better: in on? As has come up before in similar cases, there are words involving "appearance" (seem, appear, etc.) versus "reality" (be) that also can be used with this in the same sense. I think the verbs all take adjectives. "in on X" seems to be adjectival. DCDuring TALK 18:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Seems appropriate. I found that the combination English definition had to be given two different Norwegian translations though: one for being part of and another for being privy to. Perhaps it's not possible to make that distinction in the English idiom. __meco 07:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

He smiled a little to himself, as he was in on the plan. Yes. It is an idiomatic phrasal verb. Thanks for pointing out the omission, which I shall correct at once. -- ALGRIF talk 14:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

RFD discussion: April 2017–May 2018

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

be in on

SoP, be + in on. It's hard to find it without be, but it seems perfectly possible that it could be used with e.g. wish or announce. Just found this: "Although more entrepreneurs wanted in on their success, only four Top Hats were ever opened." Equinox ◑ 02:46, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I think also get in on, bring in on, let in on, and probably slangy synonyms for most of the above. DCDuring (talk) 22:15, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

• Delete as SOP to in on. bd2412 T 19:28, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

What about a redirect to in on? Admission: OneLook dicts have "in on" but not "be in on". --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:02, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

• A redirect to in on would be fine with me. bd2412 T 18:30, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

• Keep or, if that fails, redirect to in on. "be in on something" is in Macmillan[1] and idioms.thefreedictionary.com[2]. dictionary.com[3] redirects be in on to in on; Longman[4] has "be/get in on something"; Collins English to French Dictionary[5] has "to be in on sth". If we try to reduce it even further, we may go to in since on is just a preposition, like "of" in "knowledgable of". We have let in on and get in on. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:34, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

"Be in on", "get in on", "let in on" and "want in on" are all very common. Theoretically we could handle them all with our existing entry "in on". But the phrases do seem idiomatic. Eh, redirect, I guess. - -sche (discuss) 22:22, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

{{look}}

If there is no further comment on this, I intend to redirect the entry to in on within the next few days. bd2412 T 23:24, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

abstain: in on is currently listed as adjective, but there is no in on person or anything like that, it's chiefly used with verbs, therefore it appears to be an adverbial phrase. As such be in on appears to be the most unspecific verbal phrase, for it cannot be used in other was adverbs might be used. Rhyminreason (talk) 08:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Redirected. bd2412 T 11:53, 15 May 2018 (UTC)