Talk:pistols at dawn
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
RFD 2012[edit]
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
rfd-redundant, "A challenge to a duel", redundant to "a duel", though I don't think "a duel" is correct either. But we can correct that. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:50, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- With respect to the general meaning, perhaps a feud would be more accurate, or a disagreement strong enough to evoke a duel:
- 2009, Wendy Leigh, Patrick Swayze: One Last Dance, p. 149:
- By rights, the making of To Wong Foo should have been fun for Patrick, Wesley, and John, but from the first it was pistols at dawn.
- 2009, Wendy Leigh, Patrick Swayze: One Last Dance, p. 149:
- Certainly any definition omitting the duel should provide an etymology explaining that the expression derives from the dueling practice. bd2412 T 20:33, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Well, what I was actually thinking is that it would have to be a duel involving pistols or at least some sort of guns. A duel involving lances couldn't be pistols at dawn, right? Mglovesfun (talk) 20:52, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think the example above shows that the phrase can be used without there being any weapons involved at all. bd2412 T 00:34, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- We're talking a bit a cross-purposes; I don't disagree with that, in fact I agree, but I think we need two meanings; the literal pistols at dawn, which seriously, even the literal meaning isn't that easy to decode, but also the idiomatic "conflict" meaning. I'm only nominating for deletion the interjection sense, which unless I'm missing something, it just the noun used on its own without any accompanying explanation, a bit like "drink?" can be used on its own. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- I see your point. Yes, this is sort of like, "Drink!" bd2412 T 13:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- We're talking a bit a cross-purposes; I don't disagree with that, in fact I agree, but I think we need two meanings; the literal pistols at dawn, which seriously, even the literal meaning isn't that easy to decode, but also the idiomatic "conflict" meaning. I'm only nominating for deletion the interjection sense, which unless I'm missing something, it just the noun used on its own without any accompanying explanation, a bit like "drink?" can be used on its own. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- I think the example above shows that the phrase can be used without there being any weapons involved at all. bd2412 T 00:34, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
- Well, what I was actually thinking is that it would have to be a duel involving pistols or at least some sort of guns. A duel involving lances couldn't be pistols at dawn, right? Mglovesfun (talk) 20:52, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. — Ungoliant (Falai) 02:47, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. - -sche (discuss) 02:52, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- Deleted.--Jusjih (talk) 22:39, 13 November 2012 (UTC)