Talk:Watergate

Sense 2

Why not just define Watergate (sense 2) as "Any scandal, especially one involving public officials and a cover-up"? Then everyone could understand the definition! Dbfirs 21:52, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for verification

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

Any scandal

Is this used in the generic sense? I can only find references to the specific Watergate scandal, including indirect ones like “another Watergate”. —Michael Z. 2009-05-08 15:41 z

Any proper name can be used to refer to what it exemplifies (a Thatcher, a Kissinger, a Kennedy, a Vietnam). Only some become eponyms: solon/Solon. This one doesn't seem likely to get there, let alone be there. DCDuring TALK 16:12, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

RFV failed, section removed. —Ruakh_TALK 03:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Watergate salad

“I'll have a Watergate?” —Michael Z. 2009-05-08 15:41 z

RFV failed, section removed. —Ruakh_TALK 03:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Words suffixed with -gate

Should Watergate not be included in a list of words suffixed with -gate? The suffix is a back-formation from Watergate, and it originated the use of -gate to denote scandals, rather than being named that because of the suffix. ThighFish (talk) 06:23, 25 April 2021 (UTC)