Talk:hic et ubique

RFD discussion: May 2020–October 2021
Supposedly English. I don't think so. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:50, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Clearly not a noun (except in the rare sense “Royal Forester”), more an adverb. This expression sneaked into English discourse through a dialogue between Hamlet and the Ghost (Hamlet Act 1 Scene 5). The Bard may have lifted it from a prayer. While widely recognized as a Latin phrase, some Latin phrases are so entrenched that they are considered part of the English lexicon, such as, , and . Some citations of hic et ubique in English texts: , , . Is this code-switching? The authors expect the reader to understand the phrase. --Lambiam 17:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think an argument can be made that it is indeed code switching. It hasn't replaced the native-English expression here and everywhere, neither authors nor speakesr use it as a drop-in replacement for that phrase, and indeed, this only persists in use in English-language contexts precisely because it's Latin.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 15:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - Dentonius (my politics | talk) 15:54, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:56, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep, maybe move to WT:RFVE (is it common, also used without italics etc.?). --幽霊四 (talk) 01:56, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete from English WT but keep as a Latin entry. Just because a foreign word/phrase is uttered in an English sentence doesn't mean its become part of the language. Répondez s'il vous plaît? Facts707 (talk) 02:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Convert to a Latin entry, per the above. bd2412 T 23:22, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Converted language or at least started, but I don't know Latin. Could use another look. DAVilla 01:00, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, not convert, does not mean anything particular and is SOP as Latin. Fay Freak (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It is clearly at least a set phrase. bd2412 T 05:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Deleted. bd2412 T 01:54, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

This entry should have been kept, simply be kept as a phrase in English. The code-switching argument is unconvincing as it's used without expectation the reader will know Latin, and has a long history of usage starting from Hamlet and recurring in centuries since. Criteria for inclusion in wiktionary is "A term should be included if it's likely that someone would run across it and want to know what it means". Peer dictionaries include it for this reason.

There were also some irregularities with the deletion process: it seems it was never tagged for deletion on the page itself, limiting participation, and perhaps due to the language ambiguity. This was raised on the deleting editors talk page, without action or response, before repeating it here. Conflatuman (talk) 04:10, 22 November 2021 (UTC)