Talk:love affair
Add topicLatest comment: 14 years ago by Dan Polansky in topic love affair
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.
Is this really a set phrase? Seems SoP to me; rephrasable as "romantic affair", "illict affair", etc. ---> Tooironic 13:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- It may not be a set phrase, but many lexicographic lemmings find it includable. See onelook. DCDuring TALK 13:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Needs a second definition, "had a love affair with tennis" doesn't mean an adulterous relationship with it. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- I think it is a set phrase, "romantic affair" and "illicit affair" aren't synonyms, also they're true adjectives (romantic, illicit) while this is love used attributively. But (in theory) we don't keep set phrases unless they're also idiomatic. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:56, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Needs a second definition, "had a love affair with tennis" doesn't mean an adulterous relationship with it. Mglovesfun (talk) 14:00, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep as a set phrase. Note that "set phrase" does not rule out "semantic sum of parts". Also, "set phrase" is an extra-CFI consideration. --Dan Polansky 12:01, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
- Striking as no consensus for deletion after more than 4 months. In terms of voting, only Tooironic seems to vote for deletion; DCDuring seems to abstain or weakly support keeping while leaving a comment as food for thought, with a useful link to OneLook. --Dan Polansky 12:01, 13 November 2010 (UTC)