Talk:Louvre

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.

---

Louvre

Doesn't seem to be quite as defensible as Golden Gate Bridge. -- Liliana • 02:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Keep this single-word name of specific entity that can host an English pronunciation. --Dan Polansky 07:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't see the difference in defensibility? Fugyoo 10:33, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Keep --Anatoli 12:39, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Keep I would imagine one-word names are more defensible than three-word names. --Makaokalani 15:17, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

God, there would be so many specific objects that would be included based on your criteria. Think of stuff like Amalienborg, Alamo, and whatnot. Do you want to have all these in a dictionary? Pronunciation isn't a criteria, by the way, because Wikipedia can have pronunciations too. -- Liliana • 19:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

There is bound to be some overlap between Wiktionary and Wikipedia because the things Wikipedia describes are named using words - piano, excommunication, light bulb, etc. Wikipedia could include pronunciations and etymologies for all of these, and still not lift them out of the category of things appropriate for a dictionary of "all words in all languages". bd2412 T 20:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

I am generally anti-"specific named things" in Wiktionary but when they are old, enormously famous, cultural institutions (rather than films, toys, video games, actors, etc.) I don't particularly object, as long as the entry focuses on the lexicography rather than the encyclopaedic. Abstain, I suppose. Equinox ◑ 20:32, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Keep This is undoubtedly a word. And this word has a sense, a pronunication, an etymplogy, etc. What it means is irrelevant. Lmaltier 20:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

bah, I'm going to move this to RFV once this discussion is done -- Liliana • 22:44, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

• You are going to seek verification of the word Louvre? I would say this is a case of clearly widespread use. bd2412 T 00:51, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
  • In fact, let me save you the time:
• 2011, Tara Kingston, Claimed by the Spymaster, p. 68:

  God above, this man was as chiseled as the statues she'd spied in the Louvre.

• 2010, Don McCauley, Power Trip: A Guide to Weightlifting for Coaches, Athletes and Parents, p. 130:

  I don't care if your split, power or squat position looks like it should be in the Louvre, you won't jerk a thing.

• 2006, Ted Nelson Lundrigan, Bob White, A Bird in the Hand, p. 85:

  I preferred the Dutch apple pie, and my waitress for those few years had legs that belonged in the Louvre.

• 1985, Phil Elderkin, "Don Mattingly: A.L. Batting Champion, A Born Hitter", Baseball Digest, Vol. 44, No. 2, February 1985, p. 49:

  IF YOU ARE a young Joe DiMaggio or Mickey Mantle with a swing that belongs in the Louvre, somebody might get the idea you could win a batting title, even if it was only your second year with the New York Yankees.

• 1960, Thomas Felix Staton, How to Instruct Successfully: Modern Teaching Methods in Adult Education, p. 172:

  For purposes of illustrating a lecture on calisthenics, a stick figure is a better picture of a squatting man than something from the Louvre.

• 1889, Alexandre Dumas, Dame de Monsoreau: Volume 1, p. 319:

  They are cries which show that every one has his own place, and should stay in it, — M. de Guise in the streets, and you in the Louvre. Go to the Louvre, Sire; go to the Louvre.

  • Cheers! bd2412 T 01:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Keep - "All words in all languages" is pretty easy to understand. "Golden Gate Bridge" ,however, is not a word and could be deleted. SemperBlotto 07:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Striking as kept. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:56, 5 October 2011 (UTC)