Talk:Salvavita

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Imetsia in topic RFD discussion: July 2022–May 2024
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RFD discussion: July 2022–May 2024

[edit]

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion (permalink).

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.


Italian. Trademarks are not dictionary definitions. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 17:47, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I am the author of said page :)
At least according to the traditional dictionary I've long used (the Zingarelli), a few trademarks are worthwile of inclusion (a concept which Wiktionary seems to follow, indeed the basis for my choice of adding it), with the criterion seemingly being "homograph of an 'ordinary' word"; the genericized version is a recognized if improper word in Italian and IMO benefits (especially for non-native speakers) from having its origin documented... --37.179.85.189 20:44, 18 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Category:English trademarks does not include entries that are only used as trademarks. If the generic sense is uncapitalized, the capitalized one shouldn't have an entry. We can document what the trademark is under the etymology section of the genericized term. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 06:13, 19 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Delete per Surjection. Ultimateria (talk) 17:33, 6 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
  • Keep: the above explanations are not in keeping with WT:BRAND, which says "A brand name for a product or service should be included if it has entered the lexicon. Apart from genericized trademarks, this is measured objectively by the brand name’s use in at least three independent durably archived citations spanning a period of at least three years. ...". BRANDS says "apart from genericized trademarks", making it clear not only genericized trademarks are included. The question remains whether there are attesting quotations meeting WT:BRAND, but that's for RFV to decide, not RFD. The definition would be changed from "Trademark of BTicino for residual-current devices" to "A residual-current device of a trademark of BTicino". Compare Fiat, "An automobile manufactured by the Italian firm Fiat S.p.A." or Lincoln, "A brand of American automobile." More are at Category:en:Automobiles. Gillette has "A brand of razor blade". The interpretation is further confirmed by existence of Category:English trademarks as opposed to Category:English genericized trademarks. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:22, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Keep per WT:BRAND. Imetsia (talk (more)) 23:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
RFD-kept by no consensus. Imetsia (talk (more)) 23:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)Reply