Talk:Craftsman

RFD
"A brand of tools" Equinox ◑ 22:13, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Isn't this an RfV matter? bd2412 T 00:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think so, but I am no longer certain what the appropriate venue for items is. In any event, it would seem that WT:CFI should apply to attestation. DCDuring TALK 00:59, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, no it's not really a simple question of attestation, it's more about interpretation of quotations rather than if such attestations exist. Nobody's saying this isn't attested in English texts, what we are saying is that it's not dictionary material. I'd rather all such candidates be posted here, as I don't see how an RFV can handle this sort of entry. --Mglovesfun (talk) 10:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There are no citations to interpret. If we had some then we examine the citations using the company and brand standards at WT:CFI. WT:BRAND is helpful in showing what it takes for a brand name to convey meaning. DCDuring TALK 12:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not wasting my time digging up quotations as long as Mglovesfun is saying that policy isn't policy. DAVilla 19:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Moved to RFV. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 15:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

RFV discussion: July 2011–March 2012
&#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 16:00, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Should meet WT:CFI. (See also WT:BRAND.) DCDuring TALK 16:14, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 03:17, 1 March 2012 (UTC)