Talk:Lockerbie

Deletion debate

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.

---

Lockerbie

Allusive common noun, having meaning by direct reference to a specific event, and only to readers who have knowledge of the event. It has no generic meaning in English. I don't know why I bother; I suppose someone will “verify” it by finding three quotations where the name is used this way. —Michael Z. 2010-05-24 16:27 z

Apart from the generic meaning given in the entry, you mean? NB WT:CFI line 1 "all words in all languages". Yes it contradicts other parts of CFI, but it is there. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I think MZ's point was that it doesn't mean "A terrorist bomb attack on an airplane" as we have it but rather "A specific terrorist bomb on an airplane in 1988".​—msh210℠ 18:28, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Delete. If the slogan governs, than we must have been wasting our time for lo these many months. A slogan is not a mission statement, a constitution, legislation, or rule. It serves mostly to rouse rabble. As rabble no longer have any influence here, its pointlessness should be obvious. Lockerbie might make it as a placename. It should have a lovely WP article for its association with the event. If some of us are jealous of WP's ability to cover some things that are beyond our purview, perhaps we should split from WMF.

If there should be some attributive use of the form "a Lockerbie X" or "Lockerbie Xs", then the sense thereby cited should be included. "The Lockerbie X" is clearly a solely reference to the specific event. There may be some determiners that would also collocate with "Lockerbie X" in attributive use. Non-attributive "another Lockerbie" or "a Lockerbie" are collocations that do not warrant inclusion under WT:CFI#Names of specific entities. If this kind of attributive-use citation is too hard for this page, then perhaps it should be assigned to WT:AEN. DCDuring TALK 18:54, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

At COCA, only 12 or the 79 hits for Lockerbie followed by a noun were not immediately preceded by "the". On closer examination all of the remaining 12 were clearly references to the event or to matters set in motion by the event. This does not exclude the possibility of citation, but suggests that the usage in question is certainly not common. DCDuring TALK 19:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I added another cite - it's not as good as it comes from a book about plane disasters. There's another waiting from The Sun. --Rising Sun talk? contributions 19:23, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Keep if attestable in the defined sense "A terrorist bomb attack on an airplane". --Dan Polansky 20:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Kept, should be at RFV if anything, but I suspect it would pass easily, so I won't nominate it. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:24, 23 June 2010 (UTC)