Talk:same old-same old

RFV discussion: March 2017
Is this form, with dash or hyphen (-), attested? It can be hard to search for, though. By contrast, same old, same old seems easy to attest. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:41, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Actually, pretty easy to search for - I just entered the search term "same oldsame old". It is cited. Kiwima (talk) 19:53, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

RFD discussion: February–August 2017
Um I don't know what to say about this except that it's inherently incorrect. If everyone disagrees then we'll keep it. Just drawing attention. Equinox ◑ 22:53, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * We'd need it as a redirect anyway. Keeping it as an entry is just a matter of attestation IMO. DCDuring TALK 00:47, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * After I put this to WT:RFV, attesting quotations are now in the entry. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:12, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

I vote to keep. It is a reasonably common variant. Kiwima (talk) 00:41, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * RFD kept: no consensus for deletion. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:42, 19 August 2017 (UTC)