TL;DR - don't pointlessly wrap functions from the standard library in methods with non-standard names.
Yes. Please. Stop. Doing. That.
Yes. Please. Stop. Doing. That.
However, the author of the code may have started with a much more complex implementation but still feels like `is_foolike()` is better at describing the _intention_ of the method than the eventual implementation.
Replacing the descriptive method name with the actual implementation may mean the author now feels that they have to append a non-functional comment to explain that in order to test for foo-ness one only needs to do a simple string-prefix match.