Talk:couplezilla
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Nothing on Google books. Ƿidsiþ 11:29, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- The Livejournal cite is obviously inadmissible (otherwise I could just post it in my Livejournal and that would be a third cite). I don't know what Jukeboxx Media is. Probably also inadmissible, but what is it? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:12, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- It appears (from its website found via Google; I won't bother adding the linkspam) to be a Kansas City-based company that offers music, photography, and videos for weddings. Presumably it has its own blog at LiveJournal. I agree it's not admissible for RfV purposes. If I ever heard the term "couplezilla" I don't think I'd interpret it to mean a couple preparing for marriage; I'd interpret it to mean any couple who thrust their coupledom in the faces and down the throats of everyone they encounter. (You know the kind, always calling each other sickly sweet pet names in front of others, engaging in PDAs at every opportunity, pointedly always saying we rather than I, that sort of thing that drives their single friends up the wall.) —Angr 14:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Seems to me a simple case of analogy from bridezilla, along the lines of groomzilla, as a misguided attempt at thoroughly covering all the possible permutations of the concept. If there were single-word terms for "mother of the bride", etc., I'm sure -zilla entries for them would have been added at the same time. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- It appears (from its website found via Google; I won't bother adding the linkspam) to be a Kansas City-based company that offers music, photography, and videos for weddings. Presumably it has its own blog at LiveJournal. I agree it's not admissible for RfV purposes. If I ever heard the term "couplezilla" I don't think I'd interpret it to mean a couple preparing for marriage; I'd interpret it to mean any couple who thrust their coupledom in the faces and down the throats of everyone they encounter. (You know the kind, always calling each other sickly sweet pet names in front of others, engaging in PDAs at every opportunity, pointedly always saying we rather than I, that sort of thing that drives their single friends up the wall.) —Angr 14:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Found four cites on Usenet. See Citations:couplezilla. Astral (talk) 03:51, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
The reality of couples making a formal commitment through marriage has changed enormously since the sexual revolution. The bride and groom used to get married at a younger age, had not really had a career, and left their parents home to get married. The parents paid for the wedding. Nowadays, both the bride and groom have moved out of their parents homes, have their own place, have worked for years, have a career, have often lived together for many years. They are the ones planning the wedding, paying for the wedding, setting the rules and the schedules for the wedding party and the guests. The parents no longer have an influence on the event, they are simply guests. Weddings have become a flourishing industry, and people get really bazinga. Either the bride, either the groom, or both of them. Hence the words that have appeared. --Bouleau (talk) 11:30, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- RFV passed since we have 4 Usenet citations from User:Astral. Equinox ◑ 15:28, 15 April 2013 (UTC)