Talk:很cute

Deletion debate
Two things with this entry. Firstly, I believe it is sum of parts as it's a very generic adverb / adjective combo (not an idiom at all); the adverb can be replaced with any intensifer and the phrase will still stand. I have raised the issue with 123abc on his talkpage. Secondly, I removed his rebuttal comment from the page itself; however, in his defence, he decided to revert my edit and put the comment back onto the entry page resulting in a potential edit war. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 03:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It is indeed SoP. The user has also added 好Q and *shudders* 很cute. Why s/he didn't just add a Mandarin entry for Q is beyond me. I'll go do that now. All three of these should be deleted. AFAIK the only two character word on Wiktionary we have that is prefixed by 很 is 很少 which IMO should probably be deleted but I suppose might be useful for CSL students. Tooironic 19:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * 很Q/好Q should not be deleted, please see the discussion of 很Q.
 * Delete all for the reasons above. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If someone need to check the meaning of Q棍, can she/he get the meaning from Q+棍? There are too many meanings for Q in Chinese.  Do we have enough meanings at Q?  And can she/he select the right meaning?
 * Yes. Tooironic 00:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem here is: you are treating every phrase as if they are the same, when others are trying to make you see the individual differences. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 00:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * delete I think this is beyond any shadow of doubt. I have dicussed this in detail with 123abc on Talk:很Q. Jamesjiao → T ◊ C 23:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I mean, nǐhǎo, you can add almost anything to Q and make more or less the same meaning - 非常Q, Q死了, Q不得了, 太Q了, etc. IMO 123abc is not fit to continue editing Wiktionary if s/he continues to create non-dictionary entries here requiring more work from other editors. I just checked out Q and the user has made a complete mess of the entire Mandarin entry which we are going to have to fix again. And is it too much to ask if the user could sign his/her entries! Tooironic 00:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

All fail. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)