Talk:I'll be right back

RFD discussion: December 2020–March 2021
(note: This entry is part of the phrasebook project.)

We already have be right back, don't see how this is any different. For instance we have see you later, not I'll see you later. The abbreviation BRB shouldn't be there either. --Robbie SWE (talk) 18:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep . I'll say more when I get back from my run. It's a part of the phrasebook project. This phrase is literally in every phrasebook ever printed. &mdash; Dentonius 19:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Wiktionary has in most cases opted not to include a personal pronoun if the phrase can be applied to various constellations: one can say I'll be right back, we'll be right back, they'll be right back, he'll be right back, she'll be right back, etc., not to mention formal forms like I will be right back, we will be right back, etc. To keep the entry and any translation at be right back just makes more sense. An alternative to deleting would be merging or redirecting to be right back. --Robbie SWE (talk) 19:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Abstain. I've added all the new information from I'll be right back to be right back. What now? Should we redirect? &mdash; Dentonius 19:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * But Robbie, just for argument's sake, how is using be right back better for translations? For your language, we have "vin imediat", "venim imediat" for the 1st person singular and plural. In terms of what makes sense for a phrasebook, well, I think "I'll be right back" and "we'll be right back" would make sense. These are the phrases you would find in a real life phrasebook. It's less likely that you'd find the other forms. The elliptical form -- "be right back" -- should be here too since that's how we speak informally. What would be the best way to deal with this? I'm not sure. &mdash; Dentonius 19:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * A phrasebook is always inherently flawed, because all languages are unique and adhere to different rules and semantic traditions. In this case, the Romanian translation you provided is ok, but not satisfactory - it does not imply that the person has been in one place, leaves the place, but intends to return shortly. "Vin/venim imediat" is closer to "(I'll/we'll) be right there". But that's the thing with phrasebooks; many translations are tangent at best, therefore, what is included and how it's worded, should be chosen with the utmost caution. For all intents and purposes, be right back is the most neutral phrase which allows for a more inclusive translation section. --Robbie SWE (talk) 00:13, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * But that's what I'm getting at. What do you think we gain by having one entry instead of three? On French Wiktionary, for example, they don't even care about reduplication of information. For them, an entry is an entry. They don't use any "alternative form of" or anything like that. Here, we have tools and templates to help us reduce redundancy, so there really is no need to delete. If we deleted this term, however, you'd be erasing the most natural way for us English-speakers to express ourselves. I can assure you that I'd much rather say "I'll be right back" than "Be right back" in real life. And we still haven't addressed the main problem: why delete the one entry which you'd actually find in a phrasebook? I'm looking at a phrasebook now and I can't find "Be right back". I do see "I'll be right back." Seeing is believing. Here's an Italian phrasebook. &mdash; Dentonius 05:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The English Wiktionary is an independent project, which has its own set of rules and guidelines. We don't and shouldn't do whatever our sister projects do just because it's easier. Lambiam summarised the difficulties of this phrase and other phrases like it, more so than I did. --Robbie SWE (talk) 09:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. The subject need not even be a pronoun; it can be a noun phrase instead:  the doctor will be right back;  the robbers will be right back. Or it can be omitted:  ∅ will be right back. And the being right back need not be a promise, set in the future: he would have been right back. --Lambiam 01:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to be right back. bd2412 T 01:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 07:33, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to be right back.--Karaeng Matoaya (talk) 10:27, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect. Ultimateria (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirected. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 08:26, 7 March 2021 (UTC)