Talk:true believer

RFD discussion: February–June 2018
It seems like SOP to me: +. If it is kept, the current senses are probably too narrow. This can also be used for anybody who is enthusiastic or zealous about any belief or proposed action ("a true believer in pivots to video") or holds unfashionable beliefs. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  12:49, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Abstain. It sure seems SOP, but it's a set phrase at the very least. When I use it to refer to a certain religious individual, I don't mean that the others don't believe in the religion just as much as he does, but that he's a zealot who can never examine his own beliefs. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 19:10, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The sense which pertains to true-believer syndrome seems idiomatic; someone could be a true (senses 4-5: loyal, faithful, genuine) believer in e.g. string theory or the existence of an axis of evil, but shift their view if strong evidence subsequently came to light that it was wrong/impossible; whereas, a "true believer" is defined by not changing their view even in the face of conclusive proof that their view is bogus. So, clean up and keep sense 2. But sense 1 is just an &lit. - -sche (discuss) 19:42, 22 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep using lemming heuristic: shows this is in Merriam-Webster. I think substantive arguments can be made as well, but the point of lemming heuristic is to spare us the effort. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:05, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * &lit sense 1, keep sense 2. PseudoSkull (talk) 07:00, 7 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Kept, but I cleaned up sense 2 and added to sense 1. - -sche (discuss) 01:37, 3 June 2018 (UTC)