Talk:free throw percentage

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 8 years ago by BD2412 in topic free throw percentage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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.


free throw percentage

[edit]

Both SOP of free throw/field goal + percentage. The fact that the abbreviations FT% and FG% exist does not make the terms themselves idiomatic. --WikiTiki89 00:16, 5 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

I await the start of your vote: add to CFI "automatically include anything PBP89 thinks is useful to readers". Equinox 20:53, 9 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Nah, I'd rather just repeal the "Equinox thinks every single reader can determine what every single two- and three-word entry means" policy. Purplebackpack89 21:41, 9 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
@Wikitiki, they do not have to. --DixtosaBOT (talk) 12:56, 5 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
COALMINE has nothing to do with abbreviations; it only applies to variants that differ only by spaces. --WikiTiki89 19:26, 5 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Delete per nom. - -sche (discuss) 02:53, 7 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
But, @-sche, the nom's rationale has already been disproved above. Purplebackpack89 14:04, 7 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
On the fence somewhat. There's a general US sports issue where 'percentages' are marked out of one, like on-base percentage .500 (surely that's 1 time in 200, not one in two) but let's set that aside because that's a common thing that you get used to pretty quickly. So a percentage is something divided by something times 100. Alright not times 100 in this case just a/b. How obvious is it what's being divided by what here? The actual verbatim CFI wording is "An expression is idiomatic if its full meaning cannot be easily derived from the meaning of its separate components". Is this really easily derived or just derivable (but not easily)? Renard Migrant (talk) 15:12, 8 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Delete per nom. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:42, 9 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

No consensus to delete. bd2412 T 16:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply