Talk:Frankenstein

RFD discussion: April 2019–April 2020

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

Frankenstein

Rfd-sense: the novel. We are not Wikipedia. 2600:1000:B121:73E2:8DE5:B945:4762:BF79 10:48, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

I would delete (but mention it of course, e.g. in the etymology). We are inconsistent: e.g. Dracula does not have a sense line for the novel but Cinderella does have one for the fairy tale. Equinox ◑ 10:52, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

• I am okay with deleting the sense provided we keep the sense "The creator of Frankenstein's monster in Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus." I checked “Frankenstein”, in OneLook Dictionary Search., and especially M-W[1]. Governed by WT:NSE. However, the nomination does not provide any applicable rationale, from my standpoint; we do have multiple single-word names of literary works. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:20, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
• Yes, that is all fair enough. Should we also mention that the monster itself is a rather common error? SemperBlotto (talk) 08:23, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

  Definitely. I would say it's the main sense, and the one used in allusions like google books:"Frankenstein food", etc. (I see the sense has been added.) - -sche (discuss) 21:18, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

We do have some (usually single-word) titles of works, like the Iliad, the Havamal, the Bible, etc, but in my experience we (de facto) exclude modern works. Would we include, say, Divergent? Delete sense, IMO. - -sche (discuss) 21:16, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Is two hundred years ago (197, to be pedantic) really modern? If it is deleted, as Equinox says, it's just going to move around the page, into the etymology.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:17, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Deleted sense, if someone would like to create an etymology that remains to be done. - TheDaveRoss 13:17, 1 April 2020 (UTC)