Talk:rob Peter to pay Paul

Do we do "citation needed" here on Wiktionary? Because the etymology in this article needs a giant one. I could easily believe that the expression "robbing Peter to pay Paul" was related to the London churches of St. Peter and St. Paul. Or that could just be a pat explanation that appealed to somebody and has been handed down ever since. Without a citation, there's no distinguishing the two. — This unsigned comment was added by 98.225.205.84 (talk).

You can add an {{rfe}} tag to the entry to request a (better?) etymology. Equinox ◑ 13:14, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

This un-cited etymology is quoted in its entirety as the top voted answer on this topic on English StackExchange here: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/39542/what-is-the-origin-of-robbing-peter-to-pay-paul despite the fact that the 2nd to the top answer shows evidence that the the phrase pre-dates this explanation: http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/rob-peter-to-pay-paul.html

This just-as-un-cited anecdote makes more sense than what's currently published here as it references a specific occurrence in history when funds that were supposed to be for St. Peter's in Westminster, not in Rome, were used to pay for St. Paul's in London: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Robbing+Peter+to+pay+Paul — This unsigned comment was added by 152.26.67.2 (talk).

Wiktionary has an {{rfv-etymology}} tag, which I have now added. See Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October#rob Peter to pay Paul. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:52, 10 October 2015 (UTC)