Talk:obtuse angle

RFD 2010

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

obtuse angle

Sum of parts. Imprecise definition. SemperBlotto 21:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I do not think that sum of parts applies here because it is very widely used and is quantifiable. This is a specific mathematical term that all dictionaries should have because of how widely used it is. I don't see how obtuse + angle is sum of parts because obtuse does not accurately describe an obtuse angle. Razorflame 21:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking that this functions as one word, so it passes under line 1 "all words in all languages". We also have acute angle and reflex angle. Interesting to read our article on word, "a unit of language […] " Mglovesfun (talk) 21:54, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Really? Seriously?

Razorflame, have you read the respective definitions of obtuse angle and obtuse? How can “an angle that is greater than 90 degrees” really mean more than “of an angle: greater than 90 degrees” plus “angle?” Mglovesfun, what do you mean when you say these two words put together “functions as one word?” They function as two words, one referring to an “angle,” and the other describing it as “obtuse.”

(Really?) —Michael Z. 2010-04-10 00:37 z

• delete as SOP along with acute angle and reflex angle, well found by Gloves --Rising Sun talk? contributions 01:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
• Delete as SOP. The term reflex angle, mentioned above, might be worth keeping, but acute angle should not. --EncycloPetey 01:19, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• Keep. obtuse—Of an angle: greater than 90 degrees but less than 180 degrees. The apparent sum-of-part-ness is achieved by passing the angle-specific meaning of "obtuse" into the "obtuse" entry. See also Talk:free variable. --Dan Polansky 10:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

So is, e.g., barking dog only apparently sum-of-parts, because it passes the dog-specific meaning of “barking” and the barking-specific meaning of “dog?” What about obtuse edge, obtuse arc, obtuse form and other usages of this obtuse? OED has an old citation which reads “Into two obtuser angles bended.” There are book titles “Explore Acute to Obtuse: Step-by-Step Beginning Geometry...” and “Obtuse and acute cornice mitres.” —Michael Z. 2010-04-10 14:16 z

• • Michael, see word, definition one is a unit of language, it doesn't mention spacing. CFI doesn't make this distinction either, editor do, but it's not codified anywhere. It doesn't say "all word in all languages unless they have a space in them". Mglovesfun (talk) 10:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Then precisely which lexical words do you perceive in the phrase “angle is obtuse” (338 G.B. matches). It appears to me that obtuse behaves as a normal adjective, not only as a component of the phrase “obtuse angle.” —Michael Z. 2010-04-10 14:16 z

• Weak delete. I reject Mglovesfun's argument because it's not obviously correct and he's presented no evidence for it; I reject Dan Polansky's argument because [[obtuse]] has to have the angle-specific meaning anyway (in addition to Mzajac's examples, consider also google books:"obtuse and acute angles", which gets >1000 hits). That said, google books:"angle is an obtuse angle" gets more hits than one would expect — about half as many as google books:"angle is obtuse". Contrast, say, google books:"dog is a male dog" and google books:"dog is male". So that suggests that this might be a "set phrase. But it's not a very reliable test — google books:"cat is a male cat" does very well relative to google books:"cat is male", due mostly to a widespread footnote to Shakespeare's use of "gib cat" — so I'm not inclined to base a "keep" vote on it. —Ruakh_TALK 14:42, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

  I admit that we need the sense in both "obtuse" and "obtuse angle", just like we need a sense both in "complex" and "complex number". A list of cases, given in Talk:free variable: algebraic number, algebraic integer, bound variable, cardinal number, complex number, free variable, imaginary number, rational number, real number, transcendental number, free software, open set, closed set, complete graph, normal distribution. ---Dan Polansky 09:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

• My argument does indeed seem quite refutable. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:07, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Added 3 Citations:obtuse#Of_an_angle, showing how it is extended to things having such an angle. Note that obtuse has both a mathematical/geometric sense and a physical/topological sense, and perhaps a grey area between. Cf. citations in reflex —Michael Z. 2010-04-10 16:39 z

• Keep, a very common collocation. In the OED. In most translating dictionaries. In fact keep all of these. Ƿidsiþ 12:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

OED has a note “Freq. in obtuse angle” under the headword obtuse, adj., and three citations of this sense without that collocation. Maybe we need a spare “form-of” entry for “obtuse angle: common collocation of obtuse.” —Michael Z. 2010-04-11 15:06 z

If we keep this, then won't we also need entries for obtuser angle, obtusest angle, more obtuse angle, and less obtuse angle? —Michael Z. 2010-04-12 15:40 z

Also obtuse-angled, obtuse angled. See also Citations:obtuse. —Michael Z. 2010-04-12 15:57 z

• Keep all. Clearly set phrases. bd2412 T 18:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Strong delete obtuse angle, per arguments above. It's an angle that's obtuse.​—msh210℠ 22:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

deleted all -- Prince Kassad 16:11, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

acute angle

• Delete as SOP. --EncycloPetey 03:11, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
• Keep. acute—Of an angle, fewer than 90 degrees. See "obtuse angle". --Dan Polansky 10:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• Weak delete. (Same reason as for "obtuse angle".) —Ruakh_TALK 14:42, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

If we keep this, then won't we also need entries for acuter angle, acutest angle, more acute angle, and less acute angle? —Michael Z. 2010-04-12 15:40 z

Strong delete acute angle, like obtuse angle.​—msh210℠ 22:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

reflex angle

• 'Weak keep. The geometry definition added by Majac to (deprecated template usage) reflex begins "of an angle". If reflex in this sense is only ever used with angle, then this is a set phrase as should be kept. The usual, expected adjective in English would be reflexed, so this looks like a case for keeping, based on the available evidence. --EncycloPetey 03:11, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

It mainly refers to angles, but it is not found only in the phrase. —Michael Z. 2010-04-10 03:27 z

• 1878, James Maurice Wilso, Elementary Geometry, London: MacMillan, p 10:

  A polygon is said to be convex when no one of its angles is reflex.

If you have to go to 1878 for a quote, then reflex in that sense may be obsolete or archaic, which still argues for keeping the combination. See also WT:RFV#reflex. --EncycloPetey 03:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't have to. —Michael Z. 2010-04-10 05:54 z

• Keep. --Dan Polansky 10:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• Comment. This b.g.c. hit is a recent example of reflex, in this sense, outside the collocation reflex angle. But I'm not familiar enough with this term to say for sure whether such usage is normal idiomatic English. —Ruakh_TALK 14:42, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Added some citations to reflex. Its application seems to be extended to geometrical entities having such an angle. Note that reflex also means concave, and there may be a grey area between the mathematical/geometric sense and physical/topological sense. —Michael Z. 2010-04-10 16:39 z

Delete reflex angle per the cites added to reflex and the arguments presented above for obtuse angle.​—msh210℠ 22:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

RFD 2014

RFD passed. See Talk:acute angle#RFD 2014.