Talk:Laurel and Hardy

RFD 1
For discussion about keeping this page see Fat and Skinny.

RFV
Rfv-sense: by extension: Any duo who are so inept at practical tasks, as to be humorous. Uncited. Would such a sense be a proper noun? Also the translations of the proper noun seem suspect, not to mention the proper noun itself. DCDuring TALK 01:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The translations look OK to me in the sense that that's how Laurel and Hardy appear to be called in those languages, if we believe Wikipedia. But I doubt if they are correct translations for the sense "inept duo". At least in Finland one would prefer Pekka ja Pätkä according to a domestic funny duo. --Hekaheka 15:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I suspect that there are regional and generational differences for the "extended" sense. "Mutt and Jeff" would work for many in the US, based on their newspaper comic strip, roughly contemporaneously with Laurel and Hardy. There are numerous "buddy" pairings that have some cultural resonance, eg, Starsky and Hutch, Burns and Allen, Bob and Ray. It is not very hard to cite them if our standard allows "the Starsky and Hutch of" to count. DCDuring TALK 19:23, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I've added quotations to Citations:Laurel and Hardy; all but one (the 2009 one) seem to use the second sense. - -sche (discuss) 02:54, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Moved to RFD. - -sche (discuss) 18:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Laurel and Hardy
From RFV. There are four quotations which use the phrase on the citations page, but no consensus was reached on whether they verified the term or not. See also WT:RFV#Mona Lisa. - -sche (discuss) 18:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Struck. Note my changes to the entry. - -sche (discuss) 02:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

RFV discussion: December 2018–January 2019
I'm a bit hesitant between RFD and RFV here. How is it used? Here are a couple links for "real Laurel and Hardy". Per utramque cavernam 18:32, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Makes me think of Talk:Rolling Stones. I could have sworn I had nominated something else of that kind for deletion but I can't find it. I thought it was but apparently not. Per utramque cavernam 18:32, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Take a look at the cites. DCDuring (talk) 19:07, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The "situation ... devolved into a Laurel-and-Hardy skit" does not match the definition, because it does not refer to a skit by some random inept people but rather to a (hypothetical) skit by the actual L&H. Equinox ◑ 22:26, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That's what bothers me with attributive uses: I always feel they can be interpreted in that way. I had exactly the same type of misgivings with the other entry I was speaking of above ; a pity I can't find it : see Talk:Marilyn_Monroe. Per utramque cavernam 22:44, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I read it as signifying: "... into something as funny to watch as the typical Laurel-and-Hardy skit, and funny for the same reasons”. In other words, I believe it refers to the characteristic aspects of a Laurel-and-Hardy skit, not to an imaginary one performed by the historical duo. --Lambiam 23:59, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * See Mutt and Jeff, which only has one cite. DCDuring (talk) 05:49, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 22:47, 24 January 2019 (UTC)