Talk:-'d

Latest comment: 2 years ago by 70.172.194.25 in topic PO’d

poetic

edit

Isn't this more poetic than archaic? --Connel MacKenzie 04:02, 7 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yep, thus changed. --Keene 21:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

2017 deletion discussion

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.


-'d

edit

This entry overlaps significantly with the suffix section of 'd, though it adds usage notes, its own (lengthy) example use, and the annotation poetic. I propose these two entries be merged. Rriegs (talk) 18:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Should very likely be -'d as it's a suffix. Additionally there could be a ===See also===.
Btw: 's and -'s are inconsequent too: at -'s the head is 's (or properly |head=’s) but the lemma is -'s. -84.161.16.32 19:09, 11 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
I've moved/merged the past tense suffix to -'d. See also my post in the Tea Room about this. - -sche (discuss) 15:39, 27 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Resolved, IMO. - -sche (discuss) 19:58, 15 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Striking as resolved, per the above. bd2412 T 18:31, 20 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Discussions regarding hyphens

edit

Other talk pages where discussions can be found especially once two ongoing RFC and RFD threads are archived regarding whether or not things similar to this should include hyphens are Talk:-'re/Talk:'re and Talk:-'ve/Talk:'ve; other related entries include -'m/'m, -'s/'s, -'ll/'ll; see also -', '. - -sche (discuss) 09:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

PO’d

edit

what meaning is used in PO’d? --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:02, 30 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

piss off (PO) + -'d = PO'd. 70.172.194.25 04:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

-'ed

edit

Is there a variant -'ed too? --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:04, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Return to "-'d" page.