Talk:of that ilk

Adjectival phrase? I think not. Adjectives precede the noun they modify. --Ptcamn 06:26, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

• Not always - see galore for example. SemperBlotto 07:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

• Adjectives that follow their nouns are called postpositive adjectives. I was thinking along the lines of Sergeant Major and beef Wellington - but there is a whole article on them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-positive_adjective 14:07, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

• I agree with the galore argument, plus this term *should* be on here, because non-Scottish people often don't know what it means. For what it's worth, Sergeant Major is a little different, because it is in fact a contraction of Sergeant Major General, so it is a rank of General, who is subordinate to a Lietenant General, who is then subordinate to a General.

• Will someone skilled in how to delete the comment about this entry being set for deletion please do that. I just used it and cannot for the life of me understand why it should be deleted 69.108.98.207 23:36, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Deletion discussion

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.

---

of that ilk

Was WOTD, but is SOP. Redirect to ilk.​—msh210℠ (talk) 22:31, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Definitely delete. Who woud keep this, unless they were a lazy reader of Walter Scott? Equinox ◑ 22:58, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

The Scottish sense is keepable, if we can cite it, surely? Smurrayinchester (talk) 17:58, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily; it's already a usage note at [[ilk]]. —Angr 18:13, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I would keep the Scottish sense and convert the other sense to {{&lit}}. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:28, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The usage note at ilk does seem to be admitting that "of its ilk" is not sum of parts, though. If it wasn't, we could just have a definition of "ilk" that took the Scottish sense into account. Smurrayinchester (talk) 20:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Are we going to have redirects from versions with all the other possible determiners and adjectives (my, your, our, his, her, their, this, such, like)? What about plural ilks (various, various, many, differing, different, many, all, those, these). Of that ilk just looks like the commonest collocation, well worth explicit inclusion in a usage example, but not an entry. If we keep it, make it a redirect to [[ilk]]. Before we do any deleting, we should make sure that [[ilk]] can really carries the load we would give it. DCDuring TALK 16:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Scottish sense kept; other sense converted to {{&lit}}. bd2412 T 16:27, 29 August 2013 (UTC)