Talk:take a dump

RFD discussion: November 2016–June 2017
This is covered by the appropriate sense at [[dump]], whither it should redirect. (It's also covered at [[Appendix:DoHaveMakeTake]], not that that affects this discussion. But the content of that appendix shows we ought not (and generally do not) have a page for every "take a [noun]".) &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 09:32, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It could also be have a dump in British English, so the appendix is relevant. DonnanZ (talk) 12:55, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a job for Wikisaurus. bd2412 T 20:21, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If I I would be taking a . I do enjoy  though. DonnanZ (talk) 11:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Fallacious. The American (or whoever) could argue: "If I had a bath, I would own it; but I can take a bath at my friend's house." I don't suppose you consider yourself to be stealing when you "take" time, precautions, or a phone call. Equinox ◑ 16:38, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If you really want it to be fallacious it will be fallacious. It would no doubt depend on context, e.g. "I have a dump nearby", meaning a rubbish dump. DonnanZ (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm reminded of the bit in Beavis and Butthead where one of them is parodying by saying "Did you ever wonder why they call it taking a dump instead of leaving a dump? I mean after all, you're not really taking it anywhere!" —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:16, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * The lemmings speak: . DCDuring TALK 01:48, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The only link that works is Merriam-Webster, an American lemming. DonnanZ (talk) 23:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep using the lemming heuristic: Merriam-Webster has it. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:33, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

No consensus to delete. bd2412 T 00:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC)