Talk:sweet shop

sweet shop
A shop that sells sweets. The UK equivalent of a candy shop. --Jackofclubs 14:21, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure. Why are you RFDing it? Do you not like this form with the space, or don't you like sweetshop either? If you just want citations (RFV), let me know and I'll add some. Equinox ◑ 15:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Sum or parts. It's SoP like a shoe shop, fruit shop, music shop, toy shop, pet shop, sport shop. --Jackofclubs 15:51, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * This is possibly complicated by the fact that a "sweet" can also be a dessert/pudding in UK usage, but a "sweet shop" would not sell desserts, even though that is a plausible sort of shop. Equinox ◑ 16:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps the SoP alternative spelling should appear without a wikilink at sweetshop, along with "sweet-shop " (or "mostly in ..."). DCDuring TALK 15:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons listed by Equinox. Sweet means different things around the English-speaking world, but sweet shop has only one meaning.--Dmol 08:36, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep, as above. Mglovesfun 15:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Kept. Bad nom. not thinknig straight--Jackofclubs 18:55, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete or add all attestable "shop" collocations involving any polysemic terms in attributive-noun slot, including all those redlinked above. DCDuring TALK 20:47, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


 * But what else could e.g. pet shop mean? No other sense of pet is anything one would expect to find in a shop. That isn't the case with sweet shop. Equinox ◑ 21:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Well it actually can mean two things (before it get my inventive juices working for the really exotic):
 * A place that mostly sells pets (especially non-aquatic animals)
 * A place that mostly sells things for pets, but only a limited range of living things (like fish).
 * There are 2 senses now at pet and at least one missing noun sense. There are 4 etymologies shown (one seems redundant). There are 5 senses at shop.
 * An English learner could easily be confused especially if institutional arrangements were different in the learner's experience. Once we allow for including collocations based on the standards that are being advocated with their flimsy connection to WT:CFI, there is hardly a redlinked related term that would be rejected and there are many more to be added as well.
 * Of course, another interpretation is that some of the potential for user confusion is attributable to the poor quality of meat-and-potatoes entries like [[pet]] and [[shop]], which, just maybe, might in some small way be attributable to the proliferation of entries for non-idiomatic compounds and encyclopedic terms well covered in other WMF projects. DCDuring TALK 22:49, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Delete This is just a combining use of sweet (sense 2, not 3). Sum-of-parts, plain and simple.

The collocation sweet shop is probably important for foreign-language learners, but inclusion as an entry is a not supported by our CFI. This comes up again and again. We should either expand the CFI to include “combining form of X” entries, or allow run-in mentions by listing non-linked compounds and combinations under Derived terms subheadings. —Michael Z. 2009-05-16 23:28 z 


 * Keep per Equinox. DAVilla 19:02, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Apparently kept by nom. DAVilla 04:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)