Talk:two-wheeled

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Deletion debate[edit]

The following information passed a request for deletion.

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.


NISOP. Equinox 23:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as pointless; one–sixteen-wheeled (as well as many greater even numbers) are all easily attestable viâ Google Book Search.  (u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 12:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's a word. Would you propose to delete understandable? It's easily understandable too: understand + -able. Never forget that the definition is not the only part in the pages (you seem to forget examples, translations, anagrams, etc.) Lmaltier 12:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, what we really need is to look again at wheeled and check that it is perfectly clear. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that two-wheeled = two + wheeled. It's more two wheels + -ed. But, anyway, it's a word (with, possibly, anagrams, translations, etc.). Lmaltier 16:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

asianlearnersNEEDsuch entrys+tr-hanger.NI=?--史凡>voice-MSN/skypeme!RSI>typin=hard! 02:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it means "having two wheels". There is no reason to have five-or-more-wheeled, but the common terms two-wheeled, three-wheeled and four-wheeled should be kept. —Stephen 20:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
but this word is considered as comparable in the page, which seems absurd to me. Lmaltier 20:59, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, two-wheeled is an absolute. It cannot be more two-wheeled. —Stephen 06:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

one-wheeled744 BGC hits;
two-wheeled3,300 BGC hits;
three-wheeled1,551 BGC hits;
four-wheeled3,140 BGC hits;
five-wheeled553 BGC hits;
six-wheeled1,089 BGC hits;
seven-wheeled419 BGC hits;
eight-wheeled926 BGC hits;
nine-wheeled68 BGC hits;
ten-wheeled687 BGC hits;
eleven-wheeled21 BGC hits;
twelve-wheeled624 BGC hits;
thirteen-wheeled10 BGC hits;
fourteen-wheeled146 BGC hits;
fifteen-wheeled26 BGC hits;
sixteen-wheeled162 BGC hits;
eighteen-wheeled198 BGC hits;
twenty-wheeled52 BGC hits;
twenty-one-wheeled2 BGC hits;
twenty-two-wheeled13 BGC hits;
twenty-three-wheeled4 BGC hits (though only one seems to be in the right sense);
twenty-four-wheeled125 BGC hits;
twenty-five-wheeled105 BGC hits (e.g., [1]);
twenty-six-wheeled8 BGC hits (e.g., [2]);
…and so on. All semantically transparent, all unidiomatic. I see no qualitative difference between (deprecated template usage) two-, (deprecated template usage) three-, or (deprecated template usage) four-wheeled and the other (deprecated template usage) n-wheeled. Delete them all or keep them all.  (u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 11:30, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the missing sense "(in combination) Having the specified number or type of wheels" to [[wheeled]], and say to delete this SOP.​—msh210 20:55, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I looked up one of your so-called transparent unidiomatic attestable examples, fifteen-wheeled26 BGC hits;
, and the ones I saw where about "fifteen ‘wheeled vehicles’" (fifteen vehicles with wheels). We only need one through four, and no need at all for five or more. —Stephen 03:09, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[3], [4].  (u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 16:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If we're going after these, the equivalently formed nouns two-wheeler, three-wheeler, four-wheeler, ..., eighteen-wheeler, ... would seem to be as deletable/keepable as these adjectives. That said, because of its common use to designate the standard tractor-trailer combo rather than any generic vehicle with eighteen wheels, entries for eighteen-wheeler and eighteen-wheeled are in my opinion warranted, but since the other combos aren't normally evocative of one particular combination, delete them. — Carolina wren discussió 16:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These entries may be a rich source of RfV candidates. But I don't see how we can delete any one of them that has a sense other than "having N wheels".
The "-wheeler" entries are more likely to have more meaningful definitions. I'd vouch for two-wheeler, three-wheeler, and four-wheeler and also bet on some truck "-wheelers": ten-wheeler, fourteen-wheeler. DCDuring TALK 16:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree on the "-wheeler" entries, but isn't "two-wheeled" just two words joined by a hyphen to make a two-word adjective? How does it differ from "red-coloured" (for example)? Dbfirs 23:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would be willing to argue that two-wheeled is a special case, since the wheels may be side-by-side and joined by an axle or one in front of the other with no axle. A "two-heeled vehicle" may be a chariot or a Vespa. Both are two-wheeled, but what that means is very different between the two vehicles. --EncycloPetey 02:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep everything up to four for absolutely no reason other than we keep low numbers like three hundred and three-dimensional. DAVilla 05:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Per Lmaltier, if you consider hyphenates as one word (or per CFI not an "expression") then it should be kept as words don't have to be idiomatic. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:12, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are we not raising a two-headed monster here? Dbfirs 22:54, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Kept per, at best, no consensus. --Rising Sun talk? 23:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]