Talk:power structure

power structure
Seems like power + structure to me. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:00, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. --WikiTiki89 19:16, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The lemmings at seem to think it worth having. For example, MW Online has two definitions:
 * a group of persons having control of an organization: establishment
 * the hierarchical interrelationships existing within a controlling group.
 * I'll follow the crowd: Keep. DCDuring TALK 20:17, 12 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. powerstructure is attested.   . Cheers! bd2412 T 20:19, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep at least per WT:COALMINE and per OneLook dictionaries, so per DCDuring and bd2412. --Dan Polansky (talk) 21:36, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm questioning myself as well now. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:13, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Kept. — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:46, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep it. I think it's a unique term, and the "sum of parts" argument can be ridiculous sometimes, and overused. Donnanz 18:17, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it's a fundamentally good argument, just no argument is good when it's used in the wrong context. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as common collocation. Also in the OED. Ƿidsiþ 18:46, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Are we ready to close this? Ringbang (talk) 23:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)