Talk:anglecized
Latest comment: 5 years ago by -sche in topic RFD discussion: June–August 2018
The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).
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.
Seems to be an overly rare misspelling. Paging through to the end of the Google Books hits, I count 74 books using this spelling. ("Anglecize" and "anglecizing" also get a few hits, from as far back as the 1700s, so perhaps the argument could be made that this should rather be labelled an obsolete spelling, but its continued erroneous use seems to argue against that.) - -sche (discuss) 19:12, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- No hesitation, delete. A possible confusion with angle. DonnanZ (talk) 20:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
- 74 cites seems like a lot to me, I would keep. Ƿidsiþ 06:22, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- I would keep per Ƿidsiþ, especially considering that it appears as early as 1700. ----SanctMinimalicen (talk) 13:53, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
- I would also keep per the above Leasnam (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- OK, kept, but relabelled "(now obsolete or erroneous) Rare spelling of anglicized." - -sche (discuss) 21:41, 8 August 2018 (UTC)