Talk:be up against

Deletion debate
Grammatical construct, use of up against. -- 124.171.169.189 22:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. DCDuring TALK 22:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I just deleted it, I figured there's nothing controversial about deleting it. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:43, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The second meaning listed on up against ("the tree grows up against the garden wall") is the literal meaning the phrase has by the individual words. The first one, to be up against is the "strange" one. "Being up against legions of angry parents" can only be understood knowing its non-literal meaning. I think be up against should be listed and up against should not. Joepnl 00:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Restored. I don't see why this was so rapidly deleted. A simple OneLook search would show that Cambridge Dictionary of Idioms includes it. As our prevailing standards for inclusion are not very demanding, I see no reason to single this one out for deletion. DCDuring TALK 10:46, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks DCD. Most dictionaries include this entry as a phrasal verb. But I wonder if anyone would mind if I removed all that verb table junk that some IP put in there? -- A LGRIF  talk 14:43, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, bad entry title. Just use "up against". We had a discussion on the tea room about be worth and the result wasn't favorable. At the very least, if we keep this, we need be worth as well. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * "Be worth" has nothing to do with this case. It is an entirely different thing. -- A LGRIF  talk 19:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect. &#x200b;— msh210 ℠ 17:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Redirect to [[up against]]. —Ruakh TALK 17:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Re-thinking it ... I guess redirect would be a better answer in this particular case. -- A LGRIF  talk 13:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah keep the redirect. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Deleted (redirect kept). Mglovesfun (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2010 (UTC)