Talk:oft mentioned

RFD discussion: December 2015–May 2016
This seems to be a sum of parts. It would be protected by WT:COALMINE if "oft mentioned" were significantly more common than oftmentioned, but it is approximately similarly common per, and therefore, does not seem protected by WT:COALMINE.

By contrast, oft-mentioned with hyphen is protected by WT:COALMINE since it is significantly more common per. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:08, 28 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: Put in - it is overly bureaucratic to delete it, especially since it seems to be used just as much as oftmentioned. —Aryamanarora (मुझसे बात करो) 00:20, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. Not idiomatic and not a work in a language. Renard Migrant (talk) 10:09, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per RM. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep as an alternative-form-of. bd2412 T 03:37, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Obvious from the two words; many similar constructs occur, e.g. oft vaunted. Equinox ◑ 03:41, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. DCDuring TALK 08:25, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Deleted. bd2412 T 16:20, 10 May 2016 (UTC)