Talk:surbaisé
Add topicLatest comment: 6 years ago by Per utramque cavernam in topic RFD discussion: November 2017–January 2019
The following information passed a request 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.
correct form is surbaissé --Diligent (talk) 12:14, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete unless there's a verb surbaiser ("to over-fuck"???) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:24, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- nope, fun but no... you'll see it attested in Google search but there are spelling mistakes. --Diligent (talk) 11:10, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
- There are a few legit occurrences: [1], [2], [3], [4] and probably others. But this is a rare and humorous formation, not idiomatic. Please let's not start creating entries like fr:rererererecommencer... --Barytonesis (talk) 22:06, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- If there are at least three durably archived usages, the form can be created. We have rare and humorous formations here, and everything written as a single word is automatically considered idiomatic. The same applies to rererererecommencer: if it meets CFI, we can have an entry for it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:21, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- Given that we (or bd2412?) seem to have applied it to "great great great great great" grandparents, Wiktionary:Votes/2014-01/Treatment of repeating letters and syllables might apply here and result in rererererecommencer being a mere redirect, but yes, humorous formations are not forbidden. - -sche (discuss) 18:05, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
- If there are at least three durably archived usages, the form can be created. We have rare and humorous formations here, and everything written as a single word is automatically considered idiomatic. The same applies to rererererecommencer: if it meets CFI, we can have an entry for it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:21, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- There are a few legit occurrences: [1], [2], [3], [4] and probably others. But this is a rare and humorous formation, not idiomatic. Please let's not start creating entries like fr:rererererecommencer... --Barytonesis (talk) 22:06, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Keep, provided the quotes I mentioned are added, and it's properly tagged as rare and humorous. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 16:37, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
- French adjective. surbaisé, surbaissé at the Google Books Ngram Viewer. (
{{R:GNV}}) does not find surbaisé, and therefore, no frequency ratio can be determined, and thus, this could be deleted as a rare misspelling. On the other hand, if it is a rare humorous form, then it is intentional, and not a misspelling. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:52, 10 June 2018 (UTC)- @Diligent, Angr, Barytonesis, -sche, Per utramque cavernam, Dan Polansky there is still the template "rfd" in the article 6 months later. What is the conclusion? Pamputt (talk) 18:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Pamputt: Kept. It's cited; see the quotes I provided above. I don't feel like adding them to the entry, though. Per utramque cavernam 18:36, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Diligent, Angr, Barytonesis, -sche, Per utramque cavernam, Dan Polansky there is still the template "rfd" in the article 6 months later. What is the conclusion? Pamputt (talk) 18:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)