This is a Wiktionary policy, guideline or common practices page. It must not be modified without a VOTE. | |
Policies – Entries: CFI - EL - NORM - NPOV - QUOTE - REDIR - DELETE. Languages: LT - AXX. Others: BLOCK - BOTS - VOTES. |
These are examples of the criteria for inclusion as applied to brand names.
The fact that an individual drives a product is enough to indicate, pragmatically, a narrower type of the product being described than a vehicle, namely an “automobile” in the sense of a regular personal road vehicle, as opposed to a tractor or Formula 1 race car for instance. If the product is of this common type, and if no narrower purpose or presumed quality is necessary for an understanding of the text, then such wording would invalidate the citation.
This looks like a good citation since it doesn’t even indicate the type of product. However, the word Mazda is used a dozen times in the narrative before this page, establishing the meaning very clearly. Hence this quotation does not count toward the three necessary citations. In fact, it’s rather useless.
This quotation doesn’t indicate the type of product either. The apparent clues that it might be a vehicle can be easily countered. While outdoor cinemas are often drive-in, the seating context already establishes that this one is not. The reference to blocks does not distinguish other objects, even stationary ones. Indeed, knowing what a Mazda is, it says something about his character that the man wouldn’t have unloaded the contents closer. With two other legitimate citations of a three-year span, Mazda can be accepted.
In this example both the type of product and its expense are apparent. Since enough context is provided within the quotation to determine the meaning, this quotation would not count toward the citation requirement for Porsche. However, it may still be useful in supporting a definition that names that quality, and on other grounds it may still count for Accord.
Only one of the above quotations is real, although any would make sense. The first contrasts security with precariousness, the second ordinariness with pizazz, and the third momentum and focus with impulsive playfulness. If it is clear that the brand is an auto, nonetheless further information is necessary to understand the intent of the author. The quotation of what he actually wrote would count towards citation because the Ford brand can assume other qualities for contrast:
Toyotas are by no means uncommon, but they are not domestic, implying a different type of variety in partners.
In the case that a different or narrower type, such as a semi or motorcycle, is necessary to understand the text, if that type can be inferred by other contextual clues preceding or near its use, then that is sufficient to invalidate the citation.
Although identified as a truck, it has to be understood that this brand is specifically a semi-tractor trailer in order for the analogy to highlight size rather than make as the main factor in compatibility.
Even if it weren’t identified as a truck in this text, the type of vehicle is mostly irrelevant to the analogy.
The fact that a product can be taken may be sufficient indication that it is a type of medication. However, “take” has many meanings, so the correct meaning would be inferred by context, such as being taken with water or as a result of a headache. If no narrower purpose is necessary for an understanding of the text, then this plausible inference invalidates the citation.
No medication is prescribed in large doses, and this result of overdosing is not unusual for most types.
Since the narrator doesn’t have a headache, it is not apparent from this quotation that Advil is a pain reliever in contrast to, say, some drug that counteracts carbonation. Knowing that can greatly aid the understanding of the fantasy described.
The fact that a product can be eaten can indicate, pragmatically, a narrower type of the product being described than food. This may be a sweet, snack food, fast food meal, etc. depending on the circumstances under which it was bought, carried, consumed, etc. If the product is of a type that can be inferred, and if no narrower type is necessary for an understanding of the text, then such contextual clues would invalidate the citation.
In the setting of a car, on a road trip, one would guess that this is a snack food.
From the context, it is not apparent what kind of food Cheetos are if not a breakfast food. For all the reader knows, it could be gourmet.
The fact that a product can be worn or that it can be played is not enough to indicate what type of clothing, musical instrument, etc. is referred to, but other contextual clues, such as to where the product is worn or how it is played, may be sufficient to invalidate the citation.
Because of the name, this is probably a game rather than a musical instrument, but it isn’t clear what type. Board games are more commonly turn-based than video games.
Partly from its use but especially because of the name, this is clearly some sort of hand-held game. The fact that it’s an electronic device is not critical to the story (regardless of whether it can be inferred that it’s in color—and indeed, Color Gameboys are black and white).
Only knowing that the person is a musician is enough to guess that one would strum a guitar outside of any evidence to indicate some other instrument.
Because of the simile, it is not entirely clear that this is even a musical instrument.
Clearly these are some kind of shoes, in fact, ones that require and once had socks.
Without more detail, and for that matter even knowing that Adidas manufactures sports apparel, it is not clear that the authors meant shoes. To determine that takes a little more research.