Talk:caught with one's hand in the cookie jar

RFM discussion: February 2016–October 2022
Move to hand in the cookie jar (now a redirect to this), which is included in many more expressions than this one, eg have one's hand in the cookie jar, to catch someone with their hand in the cookie jar. I would be happy to add redirects and for all possessive determiners and for the various verb forms of catch and have and usage examples for a selection of these and perhaps others, such as put and keep. DCDuring TALK 21:35, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As it is now a search for "catch with his hand in the cookie jar" does not find this entry. DCDuring TALK 21:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. - excarnateSojourner (talk|contrib) 03:17, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I've created hand on the cookie jar, but was forced to used a non-gloss definition because I could not find a suitable gloss. Accordingly I did not delete the entries that use the expression. I'd welcome comments or other help. DCDuring (talk) 18:12, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It appears DCDuring meant hand in the cookie jar. - excarnateSojourner (talk|contrib) 18:53, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Thanks. DCDuring (talk) 22:04, 29 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Hang on, is this kind of edit okay? I thought we didn't use redirects in most cases. And this is indeed a prepositional phrase, may have its own translations, etc. Equinox ◑ 19:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Equinox I was partly trusting @DCDuring's judgement, as that is what they initially suggested above, and partly being WT:BOLD to try to resolve a stale discussion, so feel free to revert. But what are we to do with since it is now SOP (as we have )? - excarnateSojourner (talk | contrib) 20:04, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I think we do use redirects in the case of variations on an idiom (some variations use soft redirects, some use hard). The problem of the idiomatic kernel of a set of expression having a different part of speech than the most common phrases it's encountered in is, well, a problem, but it's a general problem: you normally verb your way out of a paper bag, but we lemmatize way out of a paper bag; you're normally a noun of your word, but we lemmatize of one's word. OTOH, we have both rain cats and dogs and cats and dogs. So we could either handle this by lemmatizing the idiomatic kernel and, if any translations require additional words/another part of speech, explain that with a q, or we could have two entries (crosslinked, of course). Meh... - -sche (discuss) 22:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Equinox I assume your lack of response here and decision to leave my edit as it is indicates a lack of objection, so I'll convert to a redirect as well. - excarnateSojourner (talk | contrib) 01:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Nah, I just tend to ignore my talk pages and notifications forever. Do what you want. Equinox ◑ 04:06, 21 October 2022 (UTC)


 * ✅ - excarnateSojourner (talk | contrib) 23:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)