Talk:aspirational recycling

RFD discussion: June 2018–March 2019
This is a preemptive RFD, as my last contribution was sent here and I'm twice shy now. Does anyone think this term ought to be deleted/excluded, or would it be safe for me to spend time on it? Here's a few attestations across the last four years: .--Father Goose (talk) 03:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)


 * You didn't suggest a definition. Apparently it's when people put stuff in the recycling that they think should be recyclable but isn't. (I know the feeling. Damn those plastic lasagne trays.) I see maybe one or two hits on Google Books. With these buzzwords you just need to check whether there is real usage, or just some journalists talking about them on a slow day. Equinox ◑ 03:20, 28 June 2018 (UTC)


 * It's a clearly a fairly new term, but not this-year new. Your definition is more or less the one I'd use.  The Google Books hits don't match that definition; all the usage I see is in articles (in fairly high-profile media) and waste-industry specific sites.  It's not exactly a conversational term.  So there's real usage, but is it Wiktionary-real?  This is why I am soliciting opinions here.  Can I create the entry, or would people recommend against it?--Father Goose (talk) 18:26, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I've created it. The synonym wishful recycling is attestable too, as is aspirational recycler but I still won't assume deletion is not forthcoming.--Father Goose (talk) 19:03, 2 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Passed. Send to RFV if anyone feels it isn't attestable. — SGconlaw (talk) 04:30, 6 March 2019 (UTC)