Talk:ridden
The following discussion has been moved from the page user talk:msh210.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Hello. I sent the following by e-mail two days ago but got no answer:
I question your assertion that "ridden" can be a past participle of "rid". Can you convince me? Eric Kvaalen (talk) 16:10, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- google books:"have ridden them of, google books:"have ridden it of shows that it exists: "the French devised a plan, which, if successful, would soon have ridden them of the English encroachments", "They have ridden it of dangers till the zest of it is gone", "we have immersed our vocabulary in an autoclave and have ridden it of any sense of feeling or emotion". But is rare. I could see having a sense-line at ridden, tagged as rare and nonstandard, for people who look it up, but I agree (with Eric's edit and with previous discussions of similar sitations, e.g. laugh) that listing it prominently in the headword-line of rid was likely to mislead/confuse readers. (If it needs to be mentioned in rid at all, usage notes are where other entries list such obsolete or rare nonstandard forms.) - -sche (discuss) 17:15, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me.
Thanks, -sche, for doing the research that I shoulda done in reply to that e-mail but hadn't time to. (Sorry, Eric Kvaalen.)—msh210℠ 14:06, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me.
RFD discussion: June–November 2022
The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Not RFD'ing ridden, but a few (all?) of these...
- angst-ridden
- bedridden
- book-ridden
- caste-ridden
- church-ridden
- cliché-ridden
- cloud-ridden
- conflict-ridden
- court-ridden
- crime-ridden
- crisis-ridden
- debt-ridden
- devil-ridden
- disease-ridden
- drudgery-ridden
- drug-ridden
- dust-ridden
- fever-ridden
- flea-ridden
- gout-ridden
- guilt-ridden
- hagridden
- louse-ridden
- memory-ridden
- money-ridden
- obstacle-ridden
- passion-ridden
- plague-ridden
- priest-ridden
- rat-ridden
- scandal-ridden
- scum-ridden
- sex-ridden
- sin-ridden
- sleaze-ridden
- slum-ridden
- sorrow-ridden
- storm-ridden
- strife-ridden
- violence-ridden
- war-ridden
- waste-ridden
- wormridden
— This unsigned comment was added by Zumbacool (talk • contribs) at 19:50, 18 June 2022 (UTC).
- What about WT:COALMINE? --Lambiam 10:15, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Zumbacool Some of these feel more SOP than others, also the ones that are words without dashes auto-pass with WT:COALMINE, so it'd probably be better to go through and nominate the ones that actually should be nominated for RFD. Also so it makes it easier to archive them later, please. AG202 (talk) 11:54, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- I feel like many if not most of these can either be coalmined or thubbed. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 18:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all, as this RFD, as applied, applies to the whole page, and should be thrown out. In particular, bedridden is quite common. DonnanZ (talk) 08:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. at least some of these are genuine single words, and others will undoubtedly meet WT:COALMINE, and should have the hyphenless variant included. Unknowns can be sent to RfV on an individual basis. bd2412 T 06:58, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all: it is not realistic to check for the entire batch whether COALMINE or THUB applies with reasonable effort and document the results on a per-term basis in this request. This is not a meaningful way to delete these. wormridden is written solid so is a keeper anyway. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:16, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
- RFD-kept: no 2/3-majority for deletion and nothing to override the keeps (WT:VP): the points that COALMINE and THUB would apply to some are valid. This summary nomination is by Wonderfool. Also of note is that as long as -ridden is a suffix, these are single words and CFI protects single words from idiomaticity requirements by its general rule. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:07, 6 November 2022 (UTC)