Talk:Arnold Schwarzenegger

RFD

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.

---

A specific person, no citations, no secondary meaning. —Michael Z. 2009-09-21 05:31 z

As far as I can see proper nouns are always WT:RFV issues as they need attributive use. I think this one might pass, but then again it might not. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Cited in attributive use, IMO. Ergo, would meet CFI. DCDuring TALK 15:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

[From duplicate section created 21:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)]
Encyclopedic, unfit for a dictionary. Korodzik 14:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Already RfDed above #Arnold Schwarzenegger. Cited in attributive use IMO. DCDuring TALK 15:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Cited, so kept. Anyone disagree? Mglovesfun (talk) 17:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

RFV discussion: January–July 2014

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

Arnold Schwarzenegger

I don't think most of the quotations that are currently listed really confirm the use and sense of this term. All except the third are compounds, and they could just as easily be references to the person Arnold Schwarzenegger and not the noun. I don't think can really count for this term; they really count towards "Arnold Schwarzenegger voice" and so on. Only the third quotation unambiguously refers to this term as an independent noun. Can we find more citations that clearly show this to be a noun in its own right, and not just part of a compound that could refer to the person? —CodeCat 21:59, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Attributive use of a noun is use of a noun, at least in English. DCDuring TALK 23:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

I disagree, but even so, there's still my other point. None of those "attributive uses" as you call them clearly reflect the sense in the entry, and could easily (even more likely IMO) refer directly to the person instead. —CodeCat 23:52, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• See Talk:Arnold Schwarzenegger. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 00:40, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

IMO, "an Arnold Schwarzenegger physique" is a reference to the specific person, and "an Arnold Schwarzenegger voice" is likewise a reference to Ahhnuld's specific Austrian German accent, so neither of those citations supports a common noun meaning "a[ny] muscleman". OTOH, I think that "what an Arnold Schwarzenegger does" and "with an Arnold Schwarzenegger chest" support the noun POS. - -sche (discuss) 00:53, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't see an objective basis for the distinction. If you are reducing yourself to a datapoint based on linguistic 'feel', then there is no disputing the fact that you feel that way. DCDuring TALK 01:30, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Well then how else is RFV supposed to work? Aren't we supposed to determine whether words mean what we say they mean? —CodeCat 01:33, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Two more cites added. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 17:39, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Passed. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 04:24, 14 July 2014 (UTC)