Talk:Ioppi

RFV discussion: May 2011–February 2012
Tagged but not listed by the late Keene. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:53, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like it's attestable. Wonder why Wonderfool tagged it? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Most of the cites I can find refer to Vincenzo Ioppi, who's also known as Vincenzo Joppi. Searching Wikipedia returns other people with the same; Roberta, Cristina and Marciallo Ioppi, none of which appear in Google Books (presumably too recent). Luckily CFI doesn't care whether the three citations refer to the same person or not; just three durably archived uses in the language. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:37, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
 * There are 37 Ioppis in Italy (link added) and b.g.c. also gives a Selenio Ioppi. I strongly oppose the idea that three citations about the same person would do. Otherwise if you want your name to enter the lexicon, just make up any name and then shoot ten babies and you'll surely be mentioned three times in the media. And every silly invention a pop star gives to his/her child would meet the CFI. --Makaokalani 15:29, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, but CFI doesn't mention the matter. I wouldn't be so keen to change it just for given names and surnames. --Mglovesfun (talk) 15:38, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * To the extent that proper nouns generally can be said to have "entered the lexicon", different rules would seem to apply for many cases. Witness: taxonomic names and toponyms. Surnames would certainly be distinct. Are we saying that only surnames with famous holders should be included? Does the occurrence of a name as an author count? Doesn't this create a cultural bias? I don't see how we can avoid either more specific rules or much more casuistry on RfV and RfD. Or we could leave such matters to WP and Wikispecies. DCDuring TALK 16:24, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Meh, kept. - -sche (discuss) 19:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * At Google Books and Scholar it's now possible to find numerous people with this surname. - -sche (discuss) 08:50, 30 July 2015 (UTC)