Talk:dangerouser

RFV discussion: September–October 2016
Any real use of this? --Yeryry (talk) 01:26, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Plenty, but I think it should be marked as "informal". DTLHS (talk) 01:27, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * And maybe obsolete? If you discount the ones talking about it as a word rather than actually using it, fictional vernacular, and humorous use (e.g. copying "curiouser and curiouser"), there's very little left, and mostly very old... Yeryry (talk) 02:07, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think obsolete. Doing a search for "dangerouser than" yields plenty post 2000 Leasnam (talk) 02:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * ... but most of them are dialect speech with deliberate mis-use, or discussions of common errors amongst learners of English. The OED doesn't have it as a word at all, not even an obsolete one.  I'd support the colloquial or informal tag.    D b f  i  r  s   07:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)


 * It is now marked as nonstandard/informal and has three citations. Equinox ◑ 10:35, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Can dangerous be updated to recommend against these forms (e.g. robust, obscene), or (better still) not show them at all (e.g. complex, proper)? I tried to remove them, but it was reverted. Yeryry (talk) 11:57, 13 September 2016 (UTC)


 * RFV passed. The entry now links to these forms in a usage note. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 17:35, 9 October 2016 (UTC)