Talk:Tonto
In this entry, Tonto's etymology is described as: 'From Spanish tonto (“fool, idiot”), the Spanish name for the tribe, a calque of Western Apache kounʼnde (“wild rough people”). The fictional character (described as Comanche or Potawatomi) either from Potawatomi or named after Tonto Basin, Arizona.'
- These grammatically monstrous sentences (or sentence fragments) make absolutely no sense. 1) If Tonto's etymology is the Spanish word for fool or idiot, how is it also a direct & literal translation of an Apache word meaning "wild rough people"??? This suggests its etymology is derived from words with 2 entirely different meanings from 2 entirely disparate languages. 2) 'The fictional character (described as Comanche or Potawatomi)...' is a definition, not an etymology. Better: 'As the name of the fictional character from the Lone Ranger (described as Comanche or Potawatomi), it derives from either Potawatomi [Potawatomi what???] or from Tonto Basin, Arizona.'
Also, why use an obscure word that everyone is going to have to look up instead of just saying 'a direct & literal translation' or something similar??? Niccast (talk) 06:13, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
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.
Defined solely as "Sidekick of the Lone Ranger". I didn't think we included entries like this? Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- I have reworked the entry and converted the rfd to an RfD sense. As a demonym it would stay, I think. I have added a probably attestable but debatable common noun sense: "sidekick". I am not sure that this really warrants inclusion, but it seems to me to warrant consideration for inclusion. Please tag it if you think it debatable. DCDuring TALK 17:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
- I've not tagged it as such, but the noun sense certainly merits verification. An admittedly quick look on bgc turned up a couple of mentions and no uses. Thryduulf (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- I found another sense. Take a look at the cites for both common noun senses. DCDuring TALK 01:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yes those all look good. Although you have what looks to be a typo in the final quote for the sidekick sense (s/nor/not/), but without a url to the book it's not immidately easily checkable. Thryduulf (talk) 11:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- I found another sense. Take a look at the cites for both common noun senses. DCDuring TALK 01:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- I've not tagged it as such, but the noun sense certainly merits verification. An admittedly quick look on bgc turned up a couple of mentions and no uses. Thryduulf (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- Given its figurative uses, I would also keep the marked definition as the at least once clearly well-understood origin. DAVilla 06:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
- But our current practice is simply to put the origin information in etymology, with a WP link, to provide the basic cultural information that people need to understand the connotations that come with the use of the proper noun. DCDuring TALK 14:54, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
kept, no consensus for deletion -- Liliana • 00:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)