Talk:M and M boys
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.
Not dictionary material. I have a sneaky feeling (with no concrete evidence behind it) that this is actually a protest entry by DCDuring (talk • contribs) in an attempt to show ridiculous our criteria for inclusion actually are. Mglovesfun (talk) 01:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- Keep; I think famous nicknames are includible, just not the actual people of their referents. — lexicógrafa | háblame — 02:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know this nickname, but it could be more acceptable than Mickey Mantle: a definition can be provided and help readers, while Mickey Mantle is any Mickey with Mantle as his surname. Note that Charlemagne, too, can be considered as a nickname. Lmaltier 06:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- Is your point about Mickey Mantle#Proper noun or Mickey Mantle#Noun or both? DCDuring TALK 11:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- the proper noun (and the common noun because I think that the figure of speech does not make it a common noun). Lmaltier 17:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- If DCDuring is sincerely in support of the entry, I am too. If not, I probably would be anyways in the absence of specific criteria, but I could support strict criteria that would not allow this as well. DAVilla 02:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- My sincerity is in believing that this low-quality entry is consistent with our current policies and practice, which I sincerely believe ought to be uniformly applied or modified in broad terms which can be uniformly applied. I think this entry is a typical consequence of our rules and practice. I also sincerely believe that we would be better served by rules and practices that were vastly more restrictive of the definitions of terms that are proper names, along the lines of our treatment of personal given names and surnames. DCDuring TALK 16:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
- Amen. Equinox ◑ 10:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- Delete per DCDuring. --Mglovesfun (talk) 09:28, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
- Keep under current rules. DCDuring TALK 14:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
- Amen. Equinox ◑ 10:50, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- My sincerity is in believing that this low-quality entry is consistent with our current policies and practice, which I sincerely believe ought to be uniformly applied or modified in broad terms which can be uniformly applied. I think this entry is a typical consequence of our rules and practice. I also sincerely believe that we would be better served by rules and practices that were vastly more restrictive of the definitions of terms that are proper names, along the lines of our treatment of personal given names and surnames. DCDuring TALK 16:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
I propose that the solution to such marginal cases is to have an appendix of famous nicknames for specific people or groups. We can define King of Pop and the like without having entries on them. bd2412 T 17:05, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
{{look}}
kept, no consensus -- Liliana • 04:20, 9 February 2012 (UTC)