Talk:much-mocked

RFD discussion: January–April 2019
SoP, like much-derided, much-hyped, much-publicised, etc. Equinox ◑ 10:26, 4 January 2019 (UTC)


 * That would make a lot of terms SoP, well-behaved, well-deserved, ill-advised etc. We don't have mocked as an adjective, only mock. DonnanZ (talk) 11:06, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fay Freak (talk) 16:33, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I say keep as I created it. DonnanZ (talk) 16:52, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * : What is your opinion about, , ..., , all of which can be attested? Are all equally inclusion-worthy? And what then about , , ? (And so on.) --Lambiam 19:45, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this is a massive grey area. Firstly I would say that the eagerly- examples are not includable as it is normal English practice not to include hyphens with adverbs ending in -ly (but it's still done, of course). However I would like to see an entry for fully automatic, gets one, and so does semi-automatic. Yes, I would like to see the much- examples you gave, another one is much-maligned, the only one I could find in Oxford was much-needed, I don't know why no more are included there. But again I would only include them as attributive adjectives where a hyphen is normally used, e.g. the much-maligned president, but not where it is used after the subject without a hyphen (a predicative adjective): the president is much maligned. The same applies to well- combinations and others. That's my rule of thumb anyway, but I expect nobody else agrees with it. DonnanZ (talk) 21:18, 4 January 2019 (UTC)


 * My inclination is to delete per nom, though Donnanz points to a lot of comparable bluelinks and is right that this is a massive grey area. I will observe that terms formed with "well" can sometmes be found written "solid" (like "wellknown"), which points to them being considered single words, whereas this isn't (AFAICT). - -sche (discuss) 06:47, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The argument that well-known can be kept because it also exists as a non-standard spelling seems to be a bit flimsy, it should be kept anyway. I would keep any hyphenated adjective as they can be regarded as one word, albeit not compounded; words like much-mocked don't lend themselves to compounding. DonnanZ (talk) 11:12, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * All such hyphenated terms should be kept if they can be verified to exist. But I wouldn't go out of my way to create more of them. SemperBlotto (talk) 11:15, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I really don't see what's magic about the hyphens. Any such phrase ("not-quite-legal", "all-too-smug") has exactly the same meaning as if it were written with spaces. Equinox ◑ 17:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Words with more than one hyphen - what would you call them - ad-hoc? That's a slightly different issue, I think; I don't have any desire to enter anything like the examples you gave. DonnanZ (talk) 19:40, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * They would need to be set phrases, e.g. . DonnanZ (talk) 11:21, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Does it follow, then, that we should include hyphenated forms such as "not-legal" or "too-smug"? bd2412 T 20:57, 9 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete for sure per nom. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 14:21, 7 January 2019 (UTC)


 * It's hard to know what is acceptable and what isn't (to some), I don't see anything wrong with much- combinations, but I think this is the only one of its kind; perhaps that is the problem. It is no small wonder that I create very few English entries of this nature for fear of someone slapping an RFD on them (that action combined with the fear is often counter-productive), it's all very inhibiting. But they are still words that are used even so. DonnanZ (talk) 16:22, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - TheDaveRoss  16:29, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, SOP. Per utramque cavernam 20:38, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are potentially hundreds and hundreds of such combinations with "much-", all formed in a regular way as a regular feature of the English language. There is no need for a dictionary to list them all separately. Mihia (talk) 11:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep single word. Ƿidsiþ 15:47, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:53, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sure there are potentially gazillions of them, but, having the "well-worn" ones in the dictionary is useful for users. We already have so many in (ill-conceived, ill-begotten, well-intentioned, well-informed, etc.). Sonofcawdrey (talk) 00:07, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I count 8 in favour of deletion (Eq, Fay, -sche, msh, Dave, PUC, Mihia, LBD) and 4 in favour of keeping (Donnanz, Semper, Widsith, Sonofcawdrey). Lambiam and BD commented (seemingly in favour of deletion) but did not cast explicit votes. With 2/3 explicit support for deletion, this is RFD failed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:45, 14 April 2019 (UTC)