Talk:critically acclaimed

RFD discussion: November–December 2017

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

critically acclaimed

A common collocation, yes, but I'm not sure that warrants an entry. --Barytonesis (talk) 22:59, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

• Delete, purely SOP. bd2412 T 23:48, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Delete. "Critically" in this sense means "by critics", or "in terms of the criticism". Sth can be critically derided, applauded, etc. etc... Equinox ◑ 23:51, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Delete In cases like this where the collocation is very common (10% of current usage of acclaimed, 2.5% of critically [Google Books]), we really should follow the practice of making sure that one or both of the component terms has a usage example the includes the collocation. I have added one at [[acclaimed]]. DCDuring (talk) 00:06, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

• Delete, just a collocation. That said, it is sometimes spelled "critically-acclaimed" where it works as a single compound adjective - this should be in I guess -Sonofcawdrey (talk) 07:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

  Not really. Some people always hyphenate between an -ly adverb and an adjective (though style guides tell you not to); that doesn't make it any more idiomatic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:02, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

  Yep, those people are just weird. ("have a very-nice day!") Equinox ◑ 13:47, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

  You mean "just-weird". —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 03:49, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

  And what about critically-acclaimed? Deleting the space-version and keeping the hypen-version would be a bad idea (cp. WT:COALMINE: SOPs can stay if there is a non-SOP alternative single word spelling).
  Trying to RFD critically-acclaimed here too without even mentioning it and placing an RFD tag in that entry, would be devious. -84.161.5.196 03:33, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

• RFD failed. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 10:06, 11 December 2017 (UTC)