Talk:double-stop

RFV discussion: May–June 2019
A series of pages recently created by Equinox, none of which I can find much rationale for, and even then, are best left as alternative or nonstandard form formats of double stop. The pages are as follows: . -/ut͡ʃxʎørnɛja ☭/ (탁ᷞ, кон-, ឯឌឹត្ស, 𐎛𐎓𐎄𐎛𐎚𐎒). 21:00, 12 May 2019 (UTC).
 * double-stop
 * double-stops
 * double-stopping
 * double-stopped


 * I don't understand why you deleted the verb. If you are challenging the verb, don't just delete it and then come to RFV! Please put it back. Equinox ◑ 21:11, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Because I left it as I think it should relate to double stop? And I'm not just questioning the verbage, but also the term itself. -/ut͡ʃxʎørnɛja ☭/ (탁ᷞ, кон-, ឯឌឹត្ស, 𐎛𐎓𐎄𐎛𐎚𐎒). 21:16, 12 May 2019 (UTC).
 * It doesn't matter how you think it should be- wait for the rfv to complete before wholesale removal of content. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:45, 12 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I have cited the verb. Note that it's very common (formerly almost required) that for a spaced noun "X Y" the verb is hyphenated "X-Y", so I'm not sure why Учхљёная finds it so strange. Equinox ◑ 11:19, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Because you included the nominal definition as well, where it's typically not used. -/ut͡ʃxʎørnɛja ☭/ (탁ᷞ, кон-, ឯឌឹត្ស, 𐎛𐎓𐎄𐎛𐎚𐎒). 12:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC).

The hyphenated form is amply found on Google Books. I don't understand why this was rfv'd.-Sonofcawdrey (talk) 21:54, 16 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I have now cited the noun form as well. Kiwima (talk) 22:12, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 23:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)