Talk:riddle me that, Batman

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.

---

Doesn't make any sense. No formatting. Bad capitalisation. SemperBlotto (talk) 15:15, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

• Moved from Riddle me that, Batman to riddle me that, Batman DCDuring TALK 17:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Per https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Tea_room/2015/November#Riddle_me_that.2C_Batman. My keyboard broke yesterday, and I am using a virtual keyboard to type this key by key, hence the formatting issues. Batman is capitalised because it is a proper noun. Tharthan (talk) 15:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

• Keep and cleanup or RFV as necessary. No valid reason for deletion given. (The bad capitalization refers to the "Riddle", which should be "riddle".) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:05, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

  @User:Angr: After having read the rest of the discussion where something like deletion rationales have been provided, do you still want to keep? --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

  Yes, I do. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:51, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

• What Angr said, of course. Renard Migrant (talk) 17:24, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

  @User:Renard Migrant: After having read the rest of the discussion where something like deletion rationales have been provided, do you still want to keep? --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:46, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

• Move to riddle me that and reword as an alternative form of riddle me this. The "Batman" is irrelevant, and occurs in under 2% of uses of "riddle me that". bd2412 T 18:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

  It looks to be riddle#Verb + me + that/this, ie SoP, without the "Batman". DCDuring TALK 19:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

  But does that verb sense exist outside of this phrase? --WikiTiki89 20:13, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

  COHA has "They'll riddle it out quickly enough," {riddle = "figure, puzzle") and "Riddle me your riddle", as well as a greater number of riddle me this/that cites. DCDuring TALK 04:43, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

  Riddle me ree ≠ Riddle me that, Batman. Tharthan (talk) 15:26, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

  The difference seems to be the same as the difference between no shit and no shit, Sherlock, with the added fictional character name implying that the subject of the comment should have already thought about it. However, I don't know that "Batman" is necessary to make "riddle me that" have that connotation. bd2412 T 15:31, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

  Delete, in light of the foregoing discussion. bd2412 T 15:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

  Keep I don't think that the general use of this phrase is the same as the bare form (i.e. the non-"Batman" form.) I think that there is a bit of a different nuance to this phrase as well comparatively-speaking. Tharthan (talk) 20:56, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

• If it is now being kept, could someone edit the "definition" so that it makes some sort of sense? SemperBlotto (talk) 07:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

  How would that be done? "Said after something to emphasize a question about it that someone hasn't considered or hasn't wanted to consider." In other words: "This phrase is said after something to emphasise a question about that something that someone hasn't considered or hasn't been willing to consider". That's pretty clear-cut, is it not? Tharthan (talk) 15:26, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

• Delete. As demonstrated by the arguments above, this is not a fixed phrase, and we already have the relevant senses covered at riddle. ---> Tooironic (talk) 00:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Uh... no. The arguments above demonstrate the exact opposite. It is a fixed phrase. I don't know what hat you pulled that statement out of. There are also enough attestations of this phrase to warrant inclusion. Tharthan (talk) 17:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

• Delete. "Riddle me this" may be a fixed phrase, but it doesn't need to invoke Batman. People may be familiar with it because of Batman, but it's still a normal English phrase, the meaning of which is completely independent of whom it's addressed to, or whether the addressee is named at all. P Aculeius (talk) 00:10, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
• Delete per P Aculeius.​—msh210℠ (talk) 20:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
• Delete per P Aculeius. --WikiTiki89 15:51, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
• In that case it is at least an alternative form of the phrase. It is used enough with "Batman" following it that meets the criteria for inclusion. Tharthan (talk) 21:54, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
• Abstain: Not a sum of parts: The person addressed is not actually Batman. However, the phrase is not terribly common and I feel there is something about it which makes it less includable. The part before "Batman" will either be understood from riddle or will even be included on its own, alongside riddle me this. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:39, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

  May I quote you on that? That's an argument of very broad potential application. DCDuring TALK 14:11, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

• Weak keep, although riddle me this, Batman actually seems the more common form. (Incidentally, the this form is used to introduce the conundrum, while the that version acts as a postscript. Coming afterwards seems to give the latter a different emphasis, more on the supposed difficulty of the riddle. The "Batman" seems just to add a general emphasis, and a certain colloquialness, to the statement.)— Pingku^dimmi 07:58, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I wonder whether the this "forthcoming" - that "just passed" pattern is followed widely. DCDuring TALK 12:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I would regard it as a temporal reinterpretation of the use of this for something physically close and that for something distant. As such, it seems natural enough, but is basically a metaphorical usage.— Pingku^dimmi 07:44, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

• RFD kept as no consensus for deletion. Keep: Aɴɢʀ, Renard Migrant, Tharthan, 0.5 * Pingkudimmi; delete: SemperBlotto, bd2412, Tooironic, P Aculeius, msh210, WikiTiki89. Unclear or abstain: Dan Polansky, DCDuring. If more votes come soon, can be reopened, or else it gets archived. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:47, 9 April 2016 (UTC)