Talk:milk it

RFV
Supposedly "Faking it, pretending a sickness". Not seeing it, but it's hard to look for (note the existence of milk:). &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 18:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * There are a number of these "verb + it" expressions. The it in maqny of these is a particularly weak form of of the pronoun, it not being at all clear just what it might be that is being "milked". Often it is just "the applicable aspect of the situation". Doesn't this look like more of an RfD than an RfV? DCDuring TALK 19:12, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not afaIct, as we don't have a "fake" sense of milk. Should we? I've never heard of it. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 19:19, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * My gut reaction is that it's just plain wrong. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that I wasn't clear. I agree with Msh210. I viewed the definition as an excessively narrow specialization of the sense of "milk" he identified. Maybe RfV is the best we can do. I look with suspicion on all "verb + it" expressions, as on all expressions beginning with forms of "be", with adverbs like "all", or with pronouns or determiners. DCDuring TALK 21:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, the range of meanings is wider than that (or perhaps different in the UK?), but the definition would be better at milk.   D b f  i  r  s   22:57, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * A nice couple of anecdotes here, but I don't see anything to warrant an entry separate from the verb. Pingku 02:33, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Failed RFV. Had anyway failed RFD in July 2009, so should not have been re-entered without citations. Equinox ◑ 00:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

RFC discussion: July 2007–June 2009
Move to "milk"? Rod (A. Smith) 20:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. --EncycloPetey 21:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Moving to Requests for deletion. Mglovesfun 11:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)