Talk:pearl necklace

RFV discussion: February 2018
(Adult content/NSFW image in Wikipedia link) Re: sense 2, the Chinese doesn't seem to be idiomatic. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 13:22, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You can link to the parts with square brackets within the template, like . And I don't think you have to place NSFW warnings for mere text - the image is not exactly adult content. ←₰-→  Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  13:57, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip about linking, but I am questioning the translation, I dont think it's correct. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:13, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Updated original post for clarity. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:23, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * My bad. It looks like some (most?) of the contents of the second table are protologisms taken from Wikipedia. I have removed the Esperanto, as it is completely unattested outside Vikipedio. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  14:37, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No, you are right, I deleted my original reply as it sounded rude. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 14:40, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Added by User:IvanScrooge98. Removed. Wyang (talk) 03:58, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 12:57, 9 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Resolved. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 21:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

RFD discussion: February–April 2018
SoP. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 13:34, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, the second sense is clearly idiomatic, since it describes neither literal pearls, nor a literal necklace. The first sense could be converted to an &lit, but I think there is still some room for idiomacity in the fact that the phrase describes a string of individual pearls, not a necklace carved from a single pearl. bd2412 T 14:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep the second sense; convert the first sense to an &lit, optionally retaining a short "definition" after the &lit as some entries do. To bd's point I would counter than one can speak of "diamond earrings" or "ruby necklaces" that are also set with diamonds or rubies rather than fashioned exclusively from those stones, and "steel airplanes" that are only principally steel, and so on. - -sche (discuss) 16:16, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * But can one call an airplane steel if virtually the only steel is in the landing gear? DCDuring (talk) 02:24, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That's the fallacy of the heap, no? An X(steel, oak, wood, jade, glass) Y is not usually going to be all X, but how much and in what ways is going to depend on the Y, and reasonable people are going to disagree on the dividing point, and probably with themselves on different days. Usually an X necklace uses X as the decorative, not structural elements.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:05, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Convert first sense per -sche (and obviously keep second sense). —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:41, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep 2nd sense; I prefer the 1st sense "as is", without &lit. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:54, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per Dan Polansky, Google Images suggests that this is more commonly associated with a necklace consisting of multiple pearls than with a pearl pendant. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  15:19, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * In that case, we should probably tweak sense one to indicate a string of pearls, or multiple pearls strong together into a loop. bd2412 T 22:51, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think that is necessary, many of them didn't form single loops or strings. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  13:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, have to Keep due to sense2. Genuine Urban Dictionary material, this. -- · (talk) 07:43, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

RFD kept. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 11:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)