Talk:affluent

please add

Affluent \Af"flu*ent\, n.
    A stream or river flowing into a larger river or into a lake;
    a tributary stream.
    [1913 Webster]

Jidanni 12:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion debate

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.

---

affluent

rfd-sense: Somebody who is wealthy. No more than any of other terms like this, the good, the bad, and the ugly. Many adjectives that modify "people" function as fused-head nominals. It is essentially grammatical, not lexical. If we kept track of which adjectives could modify people we could insert a usage note. Or we could have the content in Appendix:English adjectives or Appendix:English nominals or Appendix:English noun phrases. DCDuring TALK 00:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Keep. It's in several major American dictionaries (RHU, AHD, M-W), and its plural affluents is readily attestable in this sense (though it's nowhere near so common on b.g.c. as a “tributaries” sense that our entry currently lacks). It might warrant {{rare}} or {{context|really|_|weird-sounding}}, though. —Ruakh_TALK 02:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, so I forgot to check that. Rather than take this to TR, what about the definition? In the world of upscale marketing, a great deal is made of distinctions between those who are wealthy (wealthies?) and those who are merely affluent. Obviously our contributor didn't make the distinction so there might be more than one aspect to the underlying sense. In fact there might be more than one aspect dimension: income, wealth, discretionary income (?), lifestyle (?). DCDuring TALK 18:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

RFV or keep directly if there's no doubt that it would pass an RFV. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:38, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Kept. If you wish to RFV/TR/RFC it, by all means do so.​—msh210℠ (talk) 17:58, 31 August 2010 (UTC)