Talk:literal coefficient

Deletion debate
SoP literal + coefficient. &#x200b;— msh210 ℠ 19:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * What's the meaning of 'literal' in this phrase, then? If it's so SoP, how come I don't know what it means? Mglovesfun (talk) 00:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The question is not whether any one person knows, but whether it can be determined from inspection of the parts, given inclusive definitions of the parts. If the term is specific to a context, then it may be that only someone with some knowledge of the construction rules of the context may be able to construct the meaning. As we have no limits on the number of senses we have, I see no reason why such an argument from personal incapacity or from the limits of existing component definitions should have any sway. We need positive reasons to include idioms to prevent the exponentially increasing clutter of non-idiomatic collocations which will, in turn, keep us from having good-quality entries of our component words. DCDuring TALK 12:35, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, answer your own question instead of mine then. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:33, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * "literal" - sense 3; "coefficient" - sense 1. DCDuring TALK 11:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah right, delete. I didn't think of that. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Deleted. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:49, 9 March 2010 (UTC)