Talk:gussy

Tea room discussion

Note: the below discussion was moved from the Wiktionary:Tea room.

Should this be moved to gussy up, or should we have separate entries for each? --EncycloPetey 19:46, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Move it. At least among the first 200 results for "gussy" without "up", I see one use in this sense, and even that one is really just a misunderstanding (on the part of the character) of "gussy up" (see the previous page in the book). S.v. gussy we can have {{only in|But see gussy up.}}.—msh210℠ 19:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Done. --EncycloPetey 20:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

But it is an English word; it seems like we should have some sort of entry for it, even if it's just a stub. How about {{non-gloss definition|Used in the expression [[gussy up]].}} (Used in the expression gussy up.) or <span class="use-with-mention">Used in the expression <span class="mention">[[gussy up]]</span>.</span> (Used in the expression gussy up.)? —Ruakh_TALK 15:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Words that are only used as particles of a phrase should nonetheless have entries, in case someone looks up the particle. bd2412 T 20:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't gussy currently say in effect the same thing?—msh210℠ 04:52, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

todo

coordinate term of bussy Arlo Barnes (talk) 20:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)