Talk:take under

RFV discussion: May–June 2023
"Of a company: To be brought to insolvency; to be driven into bankruptcy." This suggests a sentence like "the company took under", not "the company was taken under", so even if it's real there might be a definition problem. Equinox ◑ 13:42, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This is one a large number of questionable "phrasal verb" entries by an anon. That the anon can't manage to define in the appropriate voice warrants perusal of all of the entries. This is readily interpretable as take + under. And shows attestation only for take-under, derived from takeover, not for a verb with this meaning. DCDuring (talk) 14:29, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @DCDuring @Equinox It's explained here . Equinox is correct that the entry uses the wrong voice, and it also misses the fact that it's still a buy-out. Theknightwho (talk) 17:14, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * We now have an entry for the noun take-under. The verb doesn't seem very common and would be buried in other uses of take (verb) + under, making attestation difficult. DCDuring (talk) 17:23, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Cited. 173.10.154.226
 * Passed. --Overlordnat1 (talk) 00:50, 20 June 2023 (UTC)