Talk:Jabberwocky

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.

I'm not sure what to do with Jabberwocky. (Abstain, I guess.) - -sche 22:18, 17 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Equinox voted to delete this, see his comment in the "Mona Lisa" section. note placed by - -sche (discuss) 19:50, 19 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Angr voted to "keep as translation targets all that have foreign names distinct from the English names (not counting mere transliterations into other writing systems). That appears to be all of these except Guerrillero Heroico." (see his comment in the Mona Lisa section) note placed by - -sche (discuss) 19:50, 19 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Keep as an attested single-word name of a specific entity. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:41, 22 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

• What in the world — do you want entries for every single-word book that title has been mentioned three times?! Equinox ◑ 18:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

  I admit that my rationale is incomplete. I would be hesitant with names of books that are a capitalized common noun that did not originate from the name of the book. For other single-word attested book names, I guess I would like to see them included, with exceptions that do not come to mind at this point. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

• Keep: it's a metaphor. It was written to be a metaphor, and still is Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 17:05, 2 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
• Convert to a redirect; although it's a metaphor, it's got a much better treatment at w:Jabberwocky.   — Jeff G. ツ 12:04, 8 September 2013 (UTC)Reply